Indonesia's president reaches a trade deal with US while in Washington for Trump's Board of Peace

WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House announced a reciprocal trade agreement with Indonesia on Thursday while President Prabowo Subianto was in Washington to attend the first meeting of President Donald Trump's Board of Peace.

Under the agreement, Southeast Asia’s largest economy will eliminate tariffs for 99% of American goods while the U.S. will maintain tariffs on most Indonesian goods at 19%, the White House said. That is the same rate the U.S. has set for Cambodia and Malaysia. Indonesia also agreed to address non-tariff barriers to U.S. goods and to remove restrictions on exports to the U.S. for critical minerals and other industrial commodities, the White House said.

Indonesian and U.S. companies also reached 11 deals this week worth $38.4 billion, including purchases of U.S. soybeans, corn, cotton and wheat, cooperation in critical minerals and oil field recovery, and joint ventures in computer chips.

“We have negotiated very intensively over the last few months, and I think we have reached solid understandings on many issues," Prabowo told business executives Wednesday at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

A White House statement called it a “great deal" and said it “will help both countries to strengthen economic security, promote economic growth, and thereby continuously lead to global prosperity.”

The agreement was later signed by U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and his Indonesian counterpart.

The agreement was announced the same day that Prabowo, leader of the world’s most populous Muslim country, reiterated his pledge at the Board of Peace meeting to send 8,000 troops or “more if necessary” for an international stabilization force in Gaza.

Indonesia was among the first to make a firm commitment to a critical element of Trump’s postwar Gaza reconstruction plan.

“President Prabowo of Indonesia, thank you very much,” Trump said at the Board of Peace meeting. “It’s a big country you have, and you do a great job.”

Prabowo praised Trump in return. “We are very optimistic with the leadership of President Trump, this vision of real peace will be achieved,” Prabowo said. “There will be problems, but we will prevail.”

Cambodia and Vietnam are the two other Southeast Asian countries that joined the board, which was originally envisioned as overseeing the Gaza ceasefire but has taken shape with wider ambitions to broker other global conflicts.

Their leaders also came to Washington for the inaugural meeting. Cambodia has already inked a trade deal with the U.S., while Vietnam has reached a framework agreement.

Indonesian companies agreed this week to buy 1 million tons of soybeans, 1.6 million tons of corn and 93,000 tons of cotton from the U.S. They also pledged to buy up to 5 million tons of U.S. wheat by 2030.

The countries agreed to cooperate on critical minerals, though details were not immediately available.

Washington is seeking Indonesia’s agreement to lift restrictions on critical mineral exports, which the Trump administration argues could safeguard U.S. manufacturers from supply‑chain disruptions. The administration has sought to defend against China’s stranglehold on the key elements needed for everything from fighter jets to smartphones.

At the Chamber of Commerce event, Prabowo said Indonesia can serve as a “bridge” and “honest broker” between great powers, apparently referring to the U.S.-China competition.

At the Board of Peace meeting, Trump called Vietnam “incredible as a country and as a force” and told leader To Lam that it was “a really great honor to have you."

Lam's visit to the U.S. is his first since he was reelected as the head of Vietnam's ruling Communist Party last month. Typically, China is an initial stop in a nod to the countries' ideological ties and Beijing’s status as Vietnam’s largest trading partner. Lam did visit China in August 2024 before traveling to the U.S. during his first term.

Analysts say Lam's visit to the U.S. before traveling to Beijing this time around is a notable shift in sequencing. Hanoi describes its foreign policy as independent and balanced among major powers.

Trade negotiations between Vietnam and the United States are ongoing following the Trump administration levying 20% tariffs on Vietnamese exports. The latest, sixth round of talks concluded in early February.

Karmini reported from Jakarta, Indonesia, and Ghosal from Hanoi, Vietnam.

This story has been corrected to reflect that the presidents announced the deal but did not sign it. It was later signed by their representatives.

Vietnam's Communist Party General Secretary To Lam, left and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, during a Board of Peace meeting at the U.S. Institute of Peace, Thursday, Feb. 19, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio meets with Vietnamese Foreign Minister Le Hoai Trung at the U.S. Department of State on Thursday, Feb. 19, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Tom Brenner)

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio meets with Indonesia's Foreign Minister Sugiono at the U.S. Department of State Thursday, Feb. 19, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Tom Brenner)

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio meets with Indonesia's Foreign Minister Sugiono at the U.S. Department of State Thursday, Feb. 19, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Tom Brenner)

President Donald Trump stands with other World leaders before a Board of Peace meeting at the U.S. Institute of Peace, Thursday, Feb. 19, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)

For years, social media companies have disputed allegations that they harm children’s mental health through deliberate design choices that addict kids to their platforms and fail to protect them from sexual predators and dangerous content. Now, these tech giants are getting a chance to make their case in courtrooms around the country, including before a jury for the first time.

Some of the biggest players from Meta to TikTok are facing federal and state trials that seek to hold them responsible for harming children's mental health. The lawsuits have come from school districts, local, state and the federal government as well as thousands of families.

Two trials are now underway in Los Angeles and in New Mexico, with more to come. The courtroom showdowns are the culmination of years of scrutiny of the platforms over child safety, and whether deliberate design choices make them addictive and serve up content that leads to depression, eating disorders or suicide.

Experts see the reckoning as reminiscent of cases against tobacco and opioid markets, and the plaintiffs hope that social media platforms will see similar outcomes as cigarette makers and drug companies, pharmacies and distributors.

The outcomes could challenge the companies’ First Amendment shield and Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which protects tech companies from liability for material posted on their platforms. They could also be costly in the form of legal fees and settlements. And they could force the companies to change how they operate, potentially losing users and advertising dollars.

Here's a look at the major social media harms cases in the United States.

Jurors in a landmark social media case that seeks to hold tech companies responsible for harms to children got their first glimpse into what will be a lengthy trial characterized by dueling narratives from the plaintiffs and the two remaining defendants, Meta and YouTube.

At the core of the Los Angeles case is a 20-year-old identified only by the initials “KGM,” whose case could determine how thousands of similar lawsuits will play out. KGM and the cases of two other plaintiffs have been selected to be bellwether trials — essentially test cases for both sides to see how their arguments play out before a jury.

“This is a monumental inflection point in social media,” said Matthew Bergman of the Seattle-based Social Media Victims Law Center, which represents more than 1,000 plaintiffs in lawsuits against social media companies. “When we started doing this four years ago no one said we'd ever get to trial. And here we are trying our case in front of a fair and impartial jury.”

On Wednesday Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified, mostly sticking to past talking points, including a lengthy back-and-forth about age verification where he said "“I don’t see why this is so complicated,” reiterating that the company’s policy restricts users under the age of 13 and that it works to detect users who have lied about their ages to bypass restrictions..

At one point, the plaintiff’s attorney, Mark Lanier, asked Zuckerberg if people tend to use something more if it’s addictive.

“I’m not sure what to say to that,” Zuckerberg said. “I don’t think that applies here.”

A team led by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez, who sued Meta in 2023, built their case by posing as children on social media, then documenting sexual solicitations they received as well as Meta’s response.

Torrez wants Meta to implement more effective age verification and do more to remove bad actors from its platform.

He also is seeking changes to algorithms that can serve up harmful material, and has criticized the end-to-end encryption that can prevent the monitoring of communications with children for safety. Meta has noted that encrypted messaging is encouraged in general as a privacy and security measure by some state and federal authorities.

The trial kicked off in early February. In his opening statement, prosecuting attorney Donald Migliori said Meta has misrepresented the safety of its platforms, choosing to engineer its algorithms to keep young people online while knowing that children are at risk of sexual exploitation.

“Meta clearly knew that youth safety was not its corporate priority ... that youth safety was less important than growth and engagement,” Migliori told the jury.

Meta attorney Kevin Huff pushed back on those assertions in his opening statement, highlighting an array of efforts by the company to weed out harmful content from its platforms while warning users that some dangerous content still gets past its safety net.

A trial scheduled for this summer pits school districts against social media companies before U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in Oakland, California. Called a multidistrict litigation, it names six public school districts from around the country as the bellwethers.

Jayne Conroy, a lawyer on plaintiffs’ trial team, was also an attorney for plaintiffs seeking to hold pharmaceutical companies responsible for the opioid epidemic. She said the cornerstone of both cases is the same: addiction.

“With the social media case, we're focused primarily on children and their developing brains and how addiction is such a threat to their wellbeing and ... the harms that are caused to children — how much they're watching and what kind of targeting is being done,” she said.

The medical science, she added, “is not really all that different, surprisingly, from an opioid or a heroin addiction. We are all talking about the dopamine reaction.”

Both the social media and the opioid cases claim negligence on the part of the defendants.

“What we were able to prove in the opioid cases is the manufacturers, the distributors, the pharmacies, they knew about the risks, they downplayed them, they oversupplied, and people died,” Conroy said. “Here, it is very much the same thing. These companies knew about the risks, they have disregarded the risks, they doubled down to get profits from advertisers over the safety of kids. And kids were harmed and kids died.”

Social media companies have disputed that their products are addictive. During questioning Wednesday by the plaintiff’s lawyer during the Los Angeles trial, Zuckerberg said he still agrees with a previous statement he made that the existing body of scientific work has not proven that social media causes mental health harms.

Some researchers do indeed question whether addiction is the appropriate term to describe heavy use of social media. Social media addiction is not recognized as an official disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the authority within the psychiatric community.

But the companies face increasing pushback on the issue of social media's effects on children's mental health, not only among academics but also parents, schools and lawmakers.

“While Meta has doubled down in this area to address mounting concerns by rolling out safety features, several recent reports suggest that the company continues to aggressively prioritize teens as a user base and doesn’t always adhere to its own rules,” said Emarketer analyst Minda Smiley.

With appeals and any settlement discussions, the cases against social media companies could take years to resolve. And unlike in Europe and Australia, tech regulation in the U.S. is moving at a glacial pace.

“Parents, education, and other stakeholders are increasingly hoping lawmakers will do more," Smiley said. "While there is momentum at the state and federal level, Big Tech lobbying, enforcement challenges, and lawmaker disagreements over how to best regular social media have slowed meaningful progress.”

—

AP Technology Writer Kaitlyn Huamani contributed to this story.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg leaves after testifying in a landmark trial over whether social media platforms deliberately addict and harm children, Wednesday, Feb. 18, 2026, in Los Angeles. (AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes)

Lennon Flowers, right, Project Director of The Parents' Network hugs Lori Schott, mother of Annalee Schott, outside a landmark trial over whether social media platforms deliberately addict and harm children, Wednesday, Feb. 18, 2026, in Los Angeles. (AP Photo/Ryan Sun)