{"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}
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.