Helsinki Memorandum of Understanding as a sluggish policy: A critical discourse analysis with process types

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Mustafa A. Rahman
{"title":"Helsinki Memorandum of Understanding as a sluggish policy: A critical discourse analysis with process types","authors":"Mustafa A. Rahman","doi":"10.24815/siele.v10i3.28985","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Helsinki Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the government of Indonesia (GoI) and the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) celebrated its 18th anniversary in 2023. However, its discursive aspect and efficacy are still under-researched. This article aims to analyze the process types in the Helsinki MoU text and explore the policy implementation of the agreement on the social changes in Aceh. The MoU document was retrieved from the United Nations peacemakers’ website. Mixed methods with descriptive statistics were used to identify, interpret, and explain the data. Hallidayan systemic linguistics was employed to identify the process types and the transitivity patterns. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) as an explanatory critique was applied to critical social analysis. The findings show that the material processes dominated the Helsinki MoU text (73%), followed by the relational processes (18%), and verbal processes (4%). The actors were generally in the form of concepts and sometimes obfuscated. Meanwhile, the goals were also mostly realized by concepts. Explanatory critique reveals that there was a vagueness and hidden power relation between the GoI and GAM in the peace deal. The GoI has also been inconsistent with some of the agendas. The Helsinki MoU has yet to produce comprehensive outcomes for Aceh’s development and has seemingly served as a bureaucratic means of control. The current study has limited itself to the single MoU text. Therefore, for deeper inquiries further research should focus on multiple similar texts and use a different research design, including intertextuality, questionnaires, and interviews.","PeriodicalId":36412,"journal":{"name":"Studies in English Language and Education","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in English Language and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v10i3.28985","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Helsinki Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the government of Indonesia (GoI) and the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) celebrated its 18th anniversary in 2023. However, its discursive aspect and efficacy are still under-researched. This article aims to analyze the process types in the Helsinki MoU text and explore the policy implementation of the agreement on the social changes in Aceh. The MoU document was retrieved from the United Nations peacemakers’ website. Mixed methods with descriptive statistics were used to identify, interpret, and explain the data. Hallidayan systemic linguistics was employed to identify the process types and the transitivity patterns. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) as an explanatory critique was applied to critical social analysis. The findings show that the material processes dominated the Helsinki MoU text (73%), followed by the relational processes (18%), and verbal processes (4%). The actors were generally in the form of concepts and sometimes obfuscated. Meanwhile, the goals were also mostly realized by concepts. Explanatory critique reveals that there was a vagueness and hidden power relation between the GoI and GAM in the peace deal. The GoI has also been inconsistent with some of the agendas. The Helsinki MoU has yet to produce comprehensive outcomes for Aceh’s development and has seemingly served as a bureaucratic means of control. The current study has limited itself to the single MoU text. Therefore, for deeper inquiries further research should focus on multiple similar texts and use a different research design, including intertextuality, questionnaires, and interviews.
作为迟缓政策的赫尔辛基谅解备忘录:具有过程类型的批判性话语分析
2023年,印度尼西亚政府与自由亚齐运动(GAM)签署了赫尔辛基谅解备忘录(MoU) 18周年。然而,对其话语方面和功效的研究仍然不足。本文旨在分析赫尔辛基谅解备忘录文本中的进程类型,并探讨亚齐社会变革协议的政策实施。谅解备忘录文件可从联合国维和人员的网站上找到。使用描述性统计的混合方法来识别、解释和解释数据。运用哈利达扬系统语言学对过程类型和及物性模式进行了识别。批评性话语分析作为一种解释性批评被应用于批评性社会分析。研究结果表明,在赫尔辛基谅解备忘录文本中,材料过程占主导地位(73%),其次是关系过程(18%)和言语过程(4%)。行动者通常以概念的形式存在,有时是模糊的。同时,目标也大多是通过概念来实现的。解释性批判揭示了印度政府和GAM在和平协议中存在着一种模糊和隐藏的权力关系。印度政府也与一些议程不一致。赫尔辛基谅解备忘录还没有为亚齐的发展产生全面的成果,而且似乎成为了一种官僚主义的控制手段。目前的研究仅限于单一的谅解备忘录文本。因此,为了更深入的探究,进一步的研究应该关注多个相似的文本,并使用不同的研究设计,包括互文性、问卷调查和访谈。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Studies in English Language and Education
Studies in English Language and Education Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信