Why Was “Self-Government” Not Achieved in Aceh? The Challenges of Implementing a Peace Agreement

IF 0.5 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
S. Zainal, Kamarulzaman Askandar, M. B. Abubakar
{"title":"Why Was “Self-Government” Not Achieved in Aceh? The Challenges of Implementing a Peace Agreement","authors":"S. Zainal, Kamarulzaman Askandar, M. B. Abubakar","doi":"10.26811/peuradeun.v10i3.789","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The \"self-government\" was proposed as an alternative solution to independence and special autonomy to end the protracted conflict in Aceh. Based on the contents of the peace agreement signed in 2005, Aceh is given the right to self-government. However, this is not realized fully. This study aimed to explain the imagined self-government and the causes challenging it to be implemented. The study used a qualitative library research method in which data was sourced from online text documents. The data were analyzed using critical discourse analysis. The study found that the issue of \"self-government\" was initially at the center of the negotiation. The Free Aceh Movement - GAM envisioned it like Olan Island in Finland and Sarawak in Malaysia. Still, it has not been realized because it was not declared explicitly in the agreement, and the term \"self-government\" was used as a strategy to persuade GAM negotiators to continue in the negotiation. Further, the Government of Indonesia (GoI) offered Aceh special autonomy instead of self-government through the Law on Governing Aceh by ignoring the limitations on the authority of GoI over Aceh that was agreed. This was caused by five reasons that lay in the negotiation process and the realization of the agreement interconnected. Amongst; GAM was unbalanced to GoI during the negotiations and powerless to force GoI to obey the deal, and there was no punishment mechanism for the violator of the agreement. Finally, the study revealed that an inclusive process in drafting new laws for a post-conflict region does not always result in full outcomes by the agreement.","PeriodicalId":56152,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26811/peuradeun.v10i3.789","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The "self-government" was proposed as an alternative solution to independence and special autonomy to end the protracted conflict in Aceh. Based on the contents of the peace agreement signed in 2005, Aceh is given the right to self-government. However, this is not realized fully. This study aimed to explain the imagined self-government and the causes challenging it to be implemented. The study used a qualitative library research method in which data was sourced from online text documents. The data were analyzed using critical discourse analysis. The study found that the issue of "self-government" was initially at the center of the negotiation. The Free Aceh Movement - GAM envisioned it like Olan Island in Finland and Sarawak in Malaysia. Still, it has not been realized because it was not declared explicitly in the agreement, and the term "self-government" was used as a strategy to persuade GAM negotiators to continue in the negotiation. Further, the Government of Indonesia (GoI) offered Aceh special autonomy instead of self-government through the Law on Governing Aceh by ignoring the limitations on the authority of GoI over Aceh that was agreed. This was caused by five reasons that lay in the negotiation process and the realization of the agreement interconnected. Amongst; GAM was unbalanced to GoI during the negotiations and powerless to force GoI to obey the deal, and there was no punishment mechanism for the violator of the agreement. Finally, the study revealed that an inclusive process in drafting new laws for a post-conflict region does not always result in full outcomes by the agreement.
为什么亚齐没有实现“自治”?执行和平协定的挑战
“自治”被提议作为独立和特别自治的替代解决方案,以结束亚齐旷日持久的冲突。根据2005年签署的和平协议的内容,亚齐被赋予自治权。然而,这并没有完全实现。本研究旨在解释想象中的自治及其难以实施的原因。该研究采用了定性图书馆研究方法,数据来源于在线文本文档。使用批判性话语分析对数据进行分析。研究发现,“自治”问题最初是谈判的核心。自由亚齐运动-GAM设想它就像芬兰的奥兰岛和马来西亚的砂拉越。尽管如此,这一点尚未实现,因为协议中没有明确宣布,“自治”一词被用作说服GAM谈判代表继续谈判的策略。此外,印度尼西亚政府无视商定的政府对亚齐权力的限制,通过《亚齐管理法》给予亚齐特别自治,而不是自治。这是由五个原因造成的,这五个原因存在于谈判过程和协议的实现之间。在GAM在谈判期间对GoI不平衡,无力迫使GoI遵守协议,也没有对违反协议者的惩罚机制。最后,研究表明,为冲突后地区起草新法律的包容性进程并不总是能使协议取得全面成果。
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
Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun
Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
80.00%
发文量
50
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信