Item Details
Skip Navigation Links
   ActiveUsers:762Hits:18943338Skip Navigation Links
Show My Basket
Contact Us
IDSA Web Site
Ask Us
Today's News
HelpExpand Help
Advanced search

In Basket
  Journal Article   Journal Article
 

ID131988
Title ProperAutonomy and stability
Other Title Informationthe perils of implementation and "divide-and-rule" tactics in Papua, Indonesia
LanguageENG
AuthorBertrand, Jacques
Publication2014.
Summary / Abstract (Note)Autonomy is often seen as an institutional instrument to manage substate nationalist conflict. Its implementation is key in determining its impact on conflict. While the central state might be satisfied with the absence of violence and stability as a measure of success, an aggrieved group will view success as gaining new powers and new resources. Autonomy often unravels when different goals are being pursued during implementation. "Special autonomy" in Papua failed because, first, the law was not the product of negotiation but of a solution that the central government imposed; second, Papuans remained divided on its utility and, ultimately, failed to seize the opportunity provided; third, the central government undermined the law in its attempts to curb secessionism, ultimately failing to make it credible.
`In' analytical NoteNationalism and Ethnic Politics vol.20, No.2; April-June 2014: p.174-199
Journal SourceNationalism and Ethnic Politics vol.20, No.2; April-June 2014: p.174-199
Key WordsPolitical Autonomy ;  Conflicts ;  Internal Security ;  Political Solutions ;  Emerging Powers ;  Special Autonomy ;  National Identities ;  Nationalist Conflict ;  Negotiation ;  Papua ;  Indonesia ;  Geopolitics ;  Political Rules ;  Diplomacy


 
 
Media / Other Links  Full Text