Ethnic Conflict Regulation Through Territorial Autonomy – A Configurational Analysis of Success and Failure

Abstract

Territorial autonomies (TA) are increasingly implemented as tools forregulating ethnic conflicts. Since there are successful as well as failed cases,the ongoing debate about a general conflict-solving potential is not a veryfruitful one. The article turns towards the analysis of various factors affectingthe success and failure of conflict regulating autonomies. It is argued thatautonomy consolidation requires specific conditions which support theprocess of mutual recognition between ethnic groups. Two causal models aredeveloped and tested on a global data set on all conflict regulatingautonomies using a two-step Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA). It isfound that a combination of low horizontal inequalities, a high scope ofautonomy, inclusive institutions and international support lead to autonomysuccess whereas persistent inequalities, a low scope of transferredcompetencies and exclusive institutions result in a return to violent strategies.One important implication of these findings is that favorable conditions forpost-conflict institutional engineering can, at least to some extent, be created.

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

“…In the end, this study confirms some statements of Schulte (2018) and Barter & Wangge (2022) that the success of self-government implementation in a post-conflict region requires; that the content and process of negotiations must be reaffirmed clearly and broadly in the law, self-government negotiations must be inclusive, involving various national political elites who control the government, international supports to negotiations and implementation.…”

“…The findings confirm some statements of Schulte (2018) and Barter & Wangge (2022) that the content and process of negotiations must be reaffirmed clearly and broadly in the law, self-government negotiations must be inclusive, involving various national political elites, international support to negotiations and implementation is needed. However, this study requires several other things for the successful implementation of self-government, namely; (1) the positions of the conflicting parties are balanced; (2) The concept of self-government is clearly stated and written in the agreement and new law; (3) Negotiators of conflict parties represent various elements and political structures, but not extends beyond the main actors of the conflict; and (4) Sanctions are required for the violator of agreements from international third parties.…”

“…The fingdings are relevant to (Schulte 2018) reveals that agreements on territorial autonomy are at the foundation of ethnic conflict resolutions that seek independence. It can protect state sovereignty and geographical integrity, and it also ensures self-government and minority rights.…”

“…In addition (Schulte 2018), The determinants of the success of selfgovernment in post-conflict regions include low levels of horizontal inequality, wide scope of autonomy, inclusive institutions, and international support. Meanwhile, Failure is caused by persistent inequalities, low transfer of competence, and institutional exclusivity.…”