从长远来看:反恐战争如何影响国际合法性的政治以及印尼在亚齐的军事行动

IF 1.6 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Megan Price
{"title":"从长远来看:反恐战争如何影响国际合法性的政治以及印尼在亚齐的军事行动","authors":"Megan Price","doi":"10.1080/17539153.2022.2089398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article explores how the war on terror influenced the politics of international legitimacy and domestic military action in the case of Indonesia’s armed conflict with separatist group, Gerakan Aceh Merdeka (GAM, 2003–05). It does so by examining how the Indonesian government justified their military operation to Australian and US audiences. I offer two findings on the role of the war on terror in the politics of international legitimacy. First, context mediated how Indonesian leaders used the language of terror to legitimise their conflict to foreign audiences. Indonesian leaders were not able to hail GAM into the role of “terrorist”, but they were able to invoke the spectre of terrorist hotspots by portraying GAM as a threat to regional stability. Second, Indonesia’s justifications show that they perceived an obligation to other rules and norms. While the war on terror was influential, it did not monopolise the politics of international legitimacy. The article adopts a constructivist approach to legitimacy to provide a theoretically informed account of these dynamics.","PeriodicalId":46483,"journal":{"name":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","volume":"28 1","pages":"846 - 866"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The long way round: how the war on terror influenced the politics of international legitimacy and Indonesia’s military action in Aceh\",\"authors\":\"Megan Price\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17539153.2022.2089398\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article explores how the war on terror influenced the politics of international legitimacy and domestic military action in the case of Indonesia’s armed conflict with separatist group, Gerakan Aceh Merdeka (GAM, 2003–05). It does so by examining how the Indonesian government justified their military operation to Australian and US audiences. I offer two findings on the role of the war on terror in the politics of international legitimacy. First, context mediated how Indonesian leaders used the language of terror to legitimise their conflict to foreign audiences. Indonesian leaders were not able to hail GAM into the role of “terrorist”, but they were able to invoke the spectre of terrorist hotspots by portraying GAM as a threat to regional stability. Second, Indonesia’s justifications show that they perceived an obligation to other rules and norms. While the war on terror was influential, it did not monopolise the politics of international legitimacy. The article adopts a constructivist approach to legitimacy to provide a theoretically informed account of these dynamics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46483,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Studies on Terrorism\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"846 - 866\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Studies on Terrorism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2089398\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Studies on Terrorism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2022.2089398","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文探讨了反恐战争如何影响印尼与分离主义组织“民政党亚齐独立”(GAM, 2003-05)武装冲突中的国际合法性政治和国内军事行动。它通过研究印尼政府如何向澳大利亚和美国观众证明他们的军事行动是合理的来做到这一点。关于反恐战争在国际合法性政治中的作用,我提出了两个结论。首先,背景决定了印尼领导人如何使用恐怖语言向外国观众证明他们的冲突是合法的。印尼领导人没能把GAM吹捧成“恐怖分子”,但他们却能把GAM描绘成地区稳定的威胁,从而引发恐怖主义热点的幽灵。其次,印度尼西亚的理由表明,他们认为有义务遵守其他规则和规范。尽管反恐战争具有影响力,但它并没有垄断国际合法性政治。本文采用了一种建构主义的合法性方法,从理论上为这些动态提供了一个知情的解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The long way round: how the war on terror influenced the politics of international legitimacy and Indonesia’s military action in Aceh
ABSTRACT This article explores how the war on terror influenced the politics of international legitimacy and domestic military action in the case of Indonesia’s armed conflict with separatist group, Gerakan Aceh Merdeka (GAM, 2003–05). It does so by examining how the Indonesian government justified their military operation to Australian and US audiences. I offer two findings on the role of the war on terror in the politics of international legitimacy. First, context mediated how Indonesian leaders used the language of terror to legitimise their conflict to foreign audiences. Indonesian leaders were not able to hail GAM into the role of “terrorist”, but they were able to invoke the spectre of terrorist hotspots by portraying GAM as a threat to regional stability. Second, Indonesia’s justifications show that they perceived an obligation to other rules and norms. While the war on terror was influential, it did not monopolise the politics of international legitimacy. The article adopts a constructivist approach to legitimacy to provide a theoretically informed account of these dynamics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Studies on Terrorism
Critical Studies on Terrorism POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
41.70%
发文量
62
×
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