Introduction: Guaranteeing Territorial Self-Government as a Conflict Management Tool

Walsh, Dawn

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-77234-9_1

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Most consociationalists support the idea of asymmetric autonomy to allow for regional identities and address self‐determination demands (Cordell & Wolff, 2009: 114; McGarry, 2007). To safeguard the recognition of group identities, consociationalists usually prefer ‘pluralist federations’, where central and sub‐state powers are clearly defined, decision‐making is consensual, and self‐determined identities protected (O'Leary, 2005; Walsh, 2018: 11). Self‐rule may function as an institutional bargaining arena that limits the ability of majority groups to misuse their power against the interests of minority groups and that lowers the stakes of political contestation (Lapidoth, 1994; Nordquist, 1998).…”

Section: Concepts and Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self‐Rule and Intrastate Conflict Risk in Divided Societies: A Configurational Analysis of Consociational Institutions

Schulte

Trinn

2022

Swiss Political Sci Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars debate whether self-rule is conducive to intrastate violence or peace. We argue that to resolve this problem the entire institutional setup of the state must be taken into account. Whereas the centripetalist view deemphasizes self-rule as a vehicle of interethnic competition, consociationalism holds that it is the interplay of accommodative institutions, with segmental autonomy among them, that promotes intrastate peace. We test these rivaling expectations on a set of 556 subnational cases in 21 culturally fractionalized post-war anocracies. We conduct a configurational risk analysis, which allows us to study self-rule and conflict risk under various institutional arrangements. We find that the full consociational 'package' is indeed associated with a reduction of intrastate conflict risk. However, majoritarian configurations are equally associated with a risk reduction. In contrast, models that include self-rule alone, or in combination with few other consociational elements, are consistently associated with an increase of conflict risk. ZusammenfassungEs bleibt umstritten, ob territoriale Autonomie das Risiko innerstaatlicher Gewalt reduziert. Während der Zentripetalismus diesbezüglich eine kritische Position

show abstract

Section: Concepts and Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self‐Rule and Intrastate Conflict Risk in Divided Societies: A Configurational Analysis of Consociational Institutions

Schulte

Trinn

2022

Swiss Political Sci Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this case, the Indonesian government as the ruling party was freer to ignore the deal. In such conditions, international guarantees are vital to designing and implementing self-government (Neudorfer, Theuerkauf, and Wolff 2022;Soloninka 2019;Walsh and Finotello 2018).…”

Section: }mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Zainal¹,

Askandar²,

Abubakar³

2022

jip

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

“…(Other examples include Lebanon and Bosnia-Hercegovina. For comparisons between these cases, see Kerr, 2006; McEvoy, 2014; Russell, 2008; Walsh, 2018.). In the case of Northern Ireland, this means that the main unionist and nationalist parties have been required to form governments together since 1998.…”

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Explosive aftermaths: Reassembling transnational memory- and policyscapes of victims and terrorism in the United Kingdom

McQuaid

2022

Memory Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article discusses how multilevel ‘policyscapes’ and complex temporalities of ‘memoryscapes’ are assembled to reshape the categories and dynamics of terrorism and victimhood in the context of the United Kingdom. It specifically examines a case where unionist politicians from Northern Ireland are seeking to realign memory – and policyscapes through integrating diverging transnational policy narratives on victims and terrorism in debates on the Libyan Asset Freeze Bill in the UK Houses of Parliament. It is argued that these particular parliamentary interventions work to transcend the parameters of a peace process which otherwise prevent unionists from asserting a particular interpretation of conflict in Northern Ireland. Repositioning Northern Ireland in relation to the contemporary ‘War on Terror’ allows them to reassemble a bounded British mnemonic community. Theoretically, the article sets out a framework for an empirical study of memory – and policyscapes that conceptualizes dimensions of transnationalism as both intra-state and interstate dynamics.

show abstract

Introduction: Guaranteeing Territorial Self-Government as a Conflict Management Tool

Cited by 8 publications

References 29 publications

Self‐Rule and Intrastate Conflict Risk in Divided Societies: A Configurational Analysis of Consociational Institutions

Self‐Rule and Intrastate Conflict Risk in Divided Societies: A Configurational Analysis of Consociational Institutions

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

Explosive aftermaths: Reassembling transnational memory- and policyscapes of victims and terrorism in the United Kingdom

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About