IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v12y2021i2p204-213.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Settling with Autonomy after Civil Wars: Lessons from Aceh, Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Kentaro Fujikawa

Abstract

Autonomy arrangements short of secession have been popular among international actors as a solution to deadly self‐determination conflicts. However, the number of peace agreements incorporating autonomy, while clearly eliminating the possibility of secession, is limited in practice. According to the literature, this is because: (1) ethnic rebels are too weak militarily to extract substantial concessions from national governments; and (2) because the governmental offer of autonomy is not credible to rebels. Drawing upon the single case study of Aceh, this research examines how warring parties overcome these two obstacles and successfully settle ethnonational conflicts through autonomy. First, although ethnonational conflicts do not tend to be costly over a single year, they often last for decades, and the accumulation of this cost over years can be substantial. In light of this long‐term cost, national governments have incentives to offer substantial concessions to stop the conflict from persisting indefinitely. Second, rebels could sign the agreement if they perceive that their autonomy is internationally guaranteed in the long term. It is imperative for international policy makers to consider these points when they try to help resolve ethnonational conflicts through autonomy.

Suggested Citation

  • Kentaro Fujikawa, 2021. "Settling with Autonomy after Civil Wars: Lessons from Aceh, Indonesia," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(2), pages 204-213, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:12:y:2021:i:2:p:204-213
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.12949
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12949
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.12949?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cederman, Lars-Erik & Hug, Simon & Schã„Del, Andreas & Wucherpfennig, Julian, 2015. "Territorial Autonomy in the Shadow of Conflict: Too Little, Too Late?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 109(2), pages 354-370, May.
    2. Fearon, James D., 1995. "Rationalist explanations for war," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(3), pages 379-414, July.
    3. Cederman, Lars-Erik & Hug, Simon & Schã„Del, Andreas & Wucherpfennig, Julian, 2015. "Territorial Autonomy in the Shadow of Conflict: Too Little, Too Late?—ERRATUM," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 109(3), pages 635-635, August.
    4. James D. Fearon, 2004. "Why Do Some Civil Wars Last So Much Longer than Others?," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 41(3), pages 275-301, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Morelli, Massimo & Esteban, Joan & Flamand, Sabine & Rohner, Dominic, 2020. "A Dynamic Theory of Secessionist vs Centrist Conflict," CEPR Discussion Papers 14635, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Dominic Rohner, 2018. "Success Factors for Peace Treaties: A Review of Theory and Evidence," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 18.08, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.
    3. Stefan Wolff & Simona Ross & Asbjorn Wee, 2020. "Subnational Governance and Conflict," World Bank Publications - Reports 34436, The World Bank Group.
    4. Martijn Huysmans & Christophe Crombez, 2020. "Making exit costly but efficient: the political economy of exit clauses and secession," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 89-110, March.
    5. Zsuzsa Csergő & Philippe Roseberry & Stefan Wolff, 2017. "Institutional Outcomes of Territorial Contestation: Lessons from Post-Communist Europe, 1989–2012," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 47(4), pages 491-521.
    6. Lars-Erik Cederman & Manuel Vogt, 2017. "Dynamics and Logics of Civil War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(9), pages 1992-2016, October.
    7. Dani Nedal & Megan Stewart & Michael Weintraub, 2020. "Urban Concentration and Civil War," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 64(6), pages 1146-1171, July.
    8. Maekawa Wakako, 2021. "Strategic Territorial Power-Sharing and Multi-Party Bargaining in Civil Wars," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 27(1), pages 91-117, February.
    9. Maxime Menuet & Petros G. Sekeris, 2021. "Overconfidence and conflict," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(4), pages 1483-1499, October.
    10. Christopher Blattman, 2009. "Civil War: A Review of Fifty Years of Research," Working Papers id:2231, eSocialSciences.
    11. Tommy Andersson & Conan Mukherjee, 2021. "Seeking No War, Achieving No Peace: The Conflict over the Siachen Glacier," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(3), pages 253-270, April.
    12. Vincenzo Galasso, 2020. "Market Reactions to Quest for Decentralization and Independence: Evidence from Catalonia," CESifo Working Paper Series 8254, CESifo.
    13. Magnus Lundgren, 2017. "Which type of international organizations can settle civil wars?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 613-641, December.
    14. Colin Jennings, 2012. "Rationalising ‘'Irrational'' Support for Political Violence," Working Papers 1212, University of Strathclyde Business School, Department of Economics.
    15. Martin Ottmann, 2020. "Peace for our time? Examining the effect of power-sharing on postwar rebellions," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 57(5), pages 617-631, September.
    16. Anesi, Vincent, 2012. "Secessionism and minority protection in an uncertain world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 53-61.
    17. Anesi, Vincent, 2012. "Secessionism and minority protection in an uncertain world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 53-61.
    18. Morelli, Massimo & Rohner, Dominic, 2015. "Resource concentration and civil wars," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 32-47.
    19. Tranchant Jean-Pierre, 2016. "Is Regional Autonomy a Solution to Ethnic Conflict? Some Lessons from a Dynamic Analysis," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 22(4), pages 449-460, December.
    20. Nicholas Sambanis & Micha Germann & Andreas Schädel, 2018. "SDM: A New Data Set on Self-determination Movements with an Application to the Reputational Theory of Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(3), pages 656-686, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:12:y:2021:i:2:p:204-213. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.