BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Uyuşmazlıktan Çözüme Giden Yol: Endonezya'nın Açe Eyaletindeki Barış Süreci

Yıl 2020, Sayı: 44, 209 - 221, 01.08.2020

Öz

İki kutuplu dünya sisteminin sona ermesi bağlamında ortaya çıkan Soğuk Savaş sonrası dönemde, iç silahlı çatışmaların niceliksel olarak artış eğilimine girdiği görülmektedir. Günümüz dünyasında ise farklı coğrafyalarda devam eden iç silahlı çatışmalar ekseninde çatışma analizi ve çatışan taraflar arasında işbirliği ve kapsayıcı çözüm odaklı olup, sert güç politikalarını içinde barındırmayan çatışma çözümü disiplini öncelikli bir konuma yükselmektedir. Bu bağlamda çatışma analizi, çatışma çözümü ve barış araştırmalarına yönelik ilgi her geçen gün artmaktadır.Teorik ve pratik boyutun birlikte yansıdığı çatışma analizi ve çözümü disiplini çerçevesinde bu çalışmanın temel odak noktasını, Endonezya’nın 33 eyaletinden biri olan olan Açe’de Endonezya hükümeti ve Özgür Açe Hareketi Free Aceh Movement- Gerekan Aceh Merdeka-GAM [1] arasında yaşanan iç silahlı çatışmanın ve çözüm sürecinin analiz edilmesi oluşturmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın nihai amacı ise Açe’deki çatışmanın analizi ve çözümü konusunda Türkçe yazındaki eksikliği gidermek ve alana katkı sağlamaktır. Öyle ki devletlerarası çatışmalardan uluslararası çatışmalara, iç silahlı çatışmalardan bireysel çatışmalara kadar geniş bir skalada uygulanabilen ve multi-disipliner özelliğe haiz olan çatışma analizi ve çözümü disiplininin, Türkiye’de yeni bir alanı teşkil ettiği ve Açe örnek olayı üzerine yapılan çalışmaların kısır kaldığı görülmektedir.Çatışma çözümünün mümkün olduğunu gösteren Açe örnek olayı çerçevesinde, barış sürecine gidilmesinde başarılı örneklerin özümsenmesi önem arz eden bir hususu teşkil etmektedir. Her ne kadar çatışmaların dinamikleri birbirinden farklılık arz etse de çözüme kavuşan Açe örneğinin dünya genelinde devam eden iç silahlı çatışmalara emsal teşkil edeceği düşüncesinden yola çıkılarak, bu yönde bir çalışma oluşturma amacı söz konusu olmuştur. Bu bağlamda çalışmada çatışmanın tarihsel arka planını oluşturan ve çatışmanın tırmanma evresine geçmesindeki temel faktörler nelerdir?, Çatışma çözümü aşamasına hangi şartlar altında geçilmiştir?, Çatışma çözümünün beş aşamasından biri olan barış müzakerelerinin başlamasında etkili olan hususlar nelerdir? karşılıklı zarar görülen açmaz noktasına ulaşılması, etkili arabulucunun süreç içerisindeki rolü, dış aktörlerin barış sürecini desteklemesi vb. nelerdir?, Çatışmanın başarılı bir şekilde çözüme kavuşmasında etkili olan değişkenler nelerdir? sorularına cevap aranmaktadır.[1] Çalışmada, Özgür Açe Hareketi için kısaca GAM kullanılmaktadır.

Kaynakça

  • Asia Foundation (2017), The State of Conflict and Violence in Asia – Indonesia, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 12. 02. 2020].
  • Asia Peacebuilding Initiatives (2013), 10 Years Since the Aceh Peace Agreement: Internal Strife Continues, [Online] Mevcut: , (Erişim tarihi: 31. 05. 2020].
  • Asia Watch (1990), Indonesia: Human Rights Abuses in Aceh, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 10. 03. 2020].
  • Aspinall, E. (2005). The Helsinki Agreement: A More Promising Basis for Peace in Aceh?, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 03 Nisan 2020].
  • Aspinall, E. (2008). Peace without Justice? The Helsinki Peace Process in Aceh, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 08. 05. 2020].
  • Aspinall, E. (2018). Elite Bargains and Political Deals Project: Indonesia (Aceh) Case Study, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 27. 03. 2020].
  • Aspinall, Edward ve Crouch, Harold. The Aceh Peace Process: Why It Failed?, Washington, East West Center, 2003.
  • CIA (2019), The World Fact Book- Indonesia, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 04. 02. 2020].
  • Cunliffe, S., Riyadi, E., Arwalembun, R. ve Tobi, H. (2009). Negotiating Peace in Indonesia: Prospects for Building Peace and Upholding Justice in Maluku and Aceh, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 05. 04. 2020].
  • Coleman, T. P. (2003). “Characteristics of Protracted, Intractable Conflict: Towards the Development of a Metaframework”, Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 9 (1): 1-37.
  • Coleman, T. P. (2006). “Intractable Conflict”, Morton Deustch ve Peter Coleman (Edt.), The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, ss. 533-558.
  • Crocker, A. C., Hampson, O. F. ve Aall, P. (2005). “Introduction: Mapping the Nettle Field”, Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson ve Pamela Aall (Edt.), Grasping the Nettle: Analyzing Cases of Intractable Conflict, Washington, The United States Institute of Peace Press, ss. 3-32.
  • Çiftçioğlu K. ve Balıktaş B. (2018). Endonezya Barış Müzakeresi ve Kilit Mekanizmaları, [Online] Mevcut: , [Erişim tarihi: 12. 02. 2020].
  • Dawood, D. ve S. (1989). “Aceh: The LNG Boom and Enclave Development”, Hal Hill (Edt.), Unity in Diversity: Regional Economic Development in Indonesia since 1970, UK, Oxford University Press, ss. 107-123.
  • Diehl, F. P. (1998). “Introduction: An Overview and Some Theoretical Guidelines”, Paul F. Diehl (Edt.), The dynamics of Enduring Rivalries, Urbana, University of Illinois Press, ss. 1-25.
  • Diehl, F. Paul ve Goertz, Garry. War and Peace in International Rivalry, Michigan, University of Michigan Press, 2000.
  • Feith, Pieter, The Aceh Peace Process Nothing Less Than Success, United States Institute of Peace Special Report 184, 2007.
  • Gray, B., Coleman, T. P. ve Putnam, L. (2007). “Intractable Conflict: New Perspectives on the Causes and Conditions for Change”, American Behavioral Scientist, 50 (11): 1415-1429.
  • Hamsici, M. (2013). Barışa Giden Yol: Endonezya’da Müslümanların Barışı, [Online] Mevcut: , [Erişim tarihi: 15. 05. 2020].
  • Human Right Watch (2001), Indonesia: The War in Aceh, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 17. 03. 2020].
  • ICG (2005), Aceh: A New Chance for Peace, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 12. 02. 2020].
  • International Crisis Group (2003), Aceh: How not to Win the Hearts and Minds, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 17. 04. 2020].
  • İncesoy, S. (2016). Dünyadan Müzakere Süreci Örnekleri, [Online] Mevcut: , [Erişim tarihi: 15. 05. 2020].
  • Kell, Tim, The Root of Acehnese Rebellion 1989–1992, New York, Cornell Modern Indonesia Project, 1995.
  • Kriesberg, L. (1998). “Intractable Conflict”, Eugene Weiner (Edt.), The Handbook of Interethnic Coexistence, New York, Continuum, ss. 332-342.
  • Kriesberg, Louis, Thorson, Stuart ve Northrup, A. Terrell, Intractable Conflicts and Their Transformation, NewYork, Syracuse University Press, 1989.
  • Kural, B. (2016). Barış Sürecinin Canlanması için Her Zaman Tsunami’ye Gerek Yok, [Online] Mevcut: , [Erişim tarihi: 10. 02. 2020].
  • Lehr, Peter, Violence at Sea: Piracy in the Age of Global Terrorism, New York, London, Routledge, 2006.
  • Lingga, M. (2007). “ The Aceh Peace Process and Lessons for Mindanao”, Autonomy and Peace Monograph, ss. 1-17.
  • Miller, A. Michelle, Rebellion and Reform in Indonesia: Jakarta’s Security and Autonomy Policies in Aceh , New York, Taylor and Francis, 2009.
  • Momerandum between Indonesia Goverment and GAM (2005), [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 29. 05. 2020].
  • Multistakeholder Review (2009), Multistakeholder Review of Post-Conflict Programming in Aceh, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 18. 05. 2020].
  • Muzwardi, A. (2016). “ Aceh Conflict Resoolution by the Goverment of Indonesia”, Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan : Kajian Ilmu Pemerintahan dan Politik Daerah, 1 (1): 158-167.
  • Mücek, A. (2015). Aceh Bölgesinde Sorun Neydi? Nasıl Çözüldü?, [Online] Mevcut: , [Erişim tarihi: 05. 04. 2020].
  • Mor, D. Ben ve Maoz, Zeev, Bound by Struggle: The strategic Evolution of Enduring International Rivalries, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 2002.
  • Pan, E. (2005). Indonesia: The Aceh Peace Aggrement, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 27. 04. 2020].
  • Powell, Jonathan, Teröristlerle Konuşmak: Silahlı Çatışmalar Nasıl Sona Erdirilir?, Nuray Önoğlu (Çev.), İstanbul, Aykırı Yayıncılık, 2015.
  • Putranto, P. (2009). “Aceh conflict resolution lessons learned and the future of aceh”, Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, California, Naval Postgraduate School.
  • Pruitt, G. D. (1997). “ Ripeness Theory and the Oslo Talks”, International Negotiation, 2: 237-250.
  • Pruitt, G. D. (2005). Whitter Ripeness Theory, Working Paper No. 25, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 03. 05. 2020].
  • Pruitt, G. D. (2007). “Readiness Theory and the Northern Ireland Conflict”, American Behavioral Scientist, 50 (11): 1520-1541.
  • Rabasa, A. ve Chalk, P. (2001). Indonesia’s Transformation and the Stability of Southeast Asia, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 29. 03. 2020].
  • Ross, L. M. (2004). “How Do Natural Resources Influence Civil War? Evidence from Thirteen Cases”, International Organization, 58 (1): 35-67.
  • Ross, L. M. (2004). “What do We Know about Natural Resources and Civil War?” Journal of Peace Research, 41 (3): 337-356.
  • Schiff, A. (2014). “Reaching a Mutual Agreement: Readiness Theory and Coalition Building in the Aceh Peace Process”, Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 7 (1): 57-82.
  • Schulze, E. K. (2006). “Insurgency and Counter-Insurgency: Strategy and the Aceh Conflict October 1976 - May 2004”, Anthony Reid (Edt.), Verandah of Violence, Singapore: Singapore University Press, ss. 225-271.
  • Schulze, E. K. (2007). “GAM: Gerakan Aceh Merdeka” Marianne Heiberg, Brendan O’Leary ve John Tirman (Edt.), Terror, Insurgency, and the State: Ending Protracted Conflicts, Philadelphia,University of Pennsylvania Press, ss. 83-122.
  • Sebastian, Leonard, Realpolitik Ideology: Indonesia’s Use of Military Force, Singapore, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2006.
  • Siver, S. (2005). A Process Oriented View of Conflict Resolution, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 12. 02. 2020].
  • Sukma, Rizal, Security Operations in Aceh: Goals, Consequences, and Lessons, Washington, East-West Center, 2004.
  • T24 (2015), 6 Ülkede Silahsızlanma Hangi Aşamaya Geldi?, [Online] Mevcut: , [Erişim tarihi: 05. 04. 2020].
  • The Danish Immigration Service (2019), Indonesia: Aceh Province, Brief Report, ss. 1-12.
  • Tse-Tung, M. (1970). “Basic Tactics,” Nathan Leites and Charles Wolf (Edt.), Rebellion and Authority: An Analytic Essay on Insurgent Conflicts, Chicago, Markham Publishing Company, ss. 56-71.
  • Wallensteen, Peter, Understanding Conflict Resolution: War, Peace and the Global System, London, Sage Publications, 2002.
  • Yenigün, C. ve Duran, S. (2010). “Endonezya: Çatışmadan Demokrasiye”, Dünya Çatışmaları, ss. 463-486.
  • Zartman, W. I. (1995). “ Dynamics and Constraints in Negotiations in Internal Conflicts”, I. William Zartman (Edt.), Elusive Peace: Negotiating an End to Civil Wars, Washington DC: Brookings Institution, ss. 3-29.
  • Zartman, W. I. (2001). “The Timing of Peace Initiatives: Hurting Stalemates and Ripe Moments”, The Global Review of Ethnopolitics, 1 (1): 8-18.
  • Zartman, W. I. (2009). “ Conflict Resolution and Negotiation”, Jacob Bercovitch, Victor Kremneyuk ve I. William Zartman (Edt.), The Sage Handbook of Conflict Resolution, CA: Sage Publishers, ss. 322-339.
  • Zartman, W. I. (2013). Ripeness, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 18. 01. 2020].
  • Zartman, W. I. ve Rubin, J. Z. (2002). “ The Study of Power and the Practice of Negotiation”, I. William Zartman ve Jeffrey Z. Rubin (Edt.), Power and Negotiation, USA: The University of Michigan Press, ss. 3-29.

The Way from Dispute to Solution: The Peace Process in the Aceh Province of Indonesia

Yıl 2020, Sayı: 44, 209 - 221, 01.08.2020

Öz

It is observed that internal armed conflicts quantitatively increased in the post-cold war era when emerged in the context of the end of the bipolar world system. Conflict analysis and conflict resolution discipline which focuses cooperation between the conflict parties and inclusive solution and also does not contain hard power policies have become a priority in today's world, in the axis of ongoing armed conflicts in different geographies. In this context, relevancy to conflict analysis, conflict resolution and peace research has increased day by day. The main focus of this study was the analysis of the internal armed conflict and the solution process between the Indonesian government and the Free Aceh Movement in Aceh that is one of the 33 provinces of Indonesia within the framework of conflict analysis and resolution discipline where theoretical and practical dimensions are reflected together. The ultimate aim of this study was to fill the deficiency of Turkish literature on the analysis and resolution of the conflict in Aceh and also contribute to the field. Conflict analysis and resolution discipline which have multi-disciplinary characteristics and can be applied by a wide-scale from internal armed conflicts to individual conflicts and also from interstate conflicts to international conflictsconstitute a new area in Turkey. Moreover, it is seen that studies related to the Aceh case in Turkey remain barren as well. Such a sudy was prepared to contribute to Turkish literature and analyze what sort of steps can be followed for ongoing conflict processes by reviewing this case study that was seen in the Aceh region and succeeded finally. It is an important issue to assimilate successful examples in the peace process within the framework of Aceh, which shows that the conflict resolution is possible.In this context, even though the dynamics of the conflicts differ from each other, the aim of creating a study in this direction is based on the idea of the example of Aceh, which has been resolved, will be a precedent for the ongoing armed conflicts in the world. In this context, this paper seeks answers to following questions: What are the main factors that constitute the historical background of the conflict and affect the conflict to hit to top? What conditions were valid for passing to the conflict resolution phase? What are the issues that are effective in starting peace negotiations that are one of the five stages of conflict resolution? reaching to mutually hurting stalemate, the role of the effective mediator in the process, support of external actors in the peace process, etc. . What are the effective variables in accomplishedly resolving the conflict?

Kaynakça

  • Asia Foundation (2017), The State of Conflict and Violence in Asia – Indonesia, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 12. 02. 2020].
  • Asia Peacebuilding Initiatives (2013), 10 Years Since the Aceh Peace Agreement: Internal Strife Continues, [Online] Mevcut: , (Erişim tarihi: 31. 05. 2020].
  • Asia Watch (1990), Indonesia: Human Rights Abuses in Aceh, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 10. 03. 2020].
  • Aspinall, E. (2005). The Helsinki Agreement: A More Promising Basis for Peace in Aceh?, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 03 Nisan 2020].
  • Aspinall, E. (2008). Peace without Justice? The Helsinki Peace Process in Aceh, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 08. 05. 2020].
  • Aspinall, E. (2018). Elite Bargains and Political Deals Project: Indonesia (Aceh) Case Study, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 27. 03. 2020].
  • Aspinall, Edward ve Crouch, Harold. The Aceh Peace Process: Why It Failed?, Washington, East West Center, 2003.
  • CIA (2019), The World Fact Book- Indonesia, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 04. 02. 2020].
  • Cunliffe, S., Riyadi, E., Arwalembun, R. ve Tobi, H. (2009). Negotiating Peace in Indonesia: Prospects for Building Peace and Upholding Justice in Maluku and Aceh, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 05. 04. 2020].
  • Coleman, T. P. (2003). “Characteristics of Protracted, Intractable Conflict: Towards the Development of a Metaframework”, Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 9 (1): 1-37.
  • Coleman, T. P. (2006). “Intractable Conflict”, Morton Deustch ve Peter Coleman (Edt.), The Handbook of Conflict Resolution: Theory and Practice, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, ss. 533-558.
  • Crocker, A. C., Hampson, O. F. ve Aall, P. (2005). “Introduction: Mapping the Nettle Field”, Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson ve Pamela Aall (Edt.), Grasping the Nettle: Analyzing Cases of Intractable Conflict, Washington, The United States Institute of Peace Press, ss. 3-32.
  • Çiftçioğlu K. ve Balıktaş B. (2018). Endonezya Barış Müzakeresi ve Kilit Mekanizmaları, [Online] Mevcut: , [Erişim tarihi: 12. 02. 2020].
  • Dawood, D. ve S. (1989). “Aceh: The LNG Boom and Enclave Development”, Hal Hill (Edt.), Unity in Diversity: Regional Economic Development in Indonesia since 1970, UK, Oxford University Press, ss. 107-123.
  • Diehl, F. P. (1998). “Introduction: An Overview and Some Theoretical Guidelines”, Paul F. Diehl (Edt.), The dynamics of Enduring Rivalries, Urbana, University of Illinois Press, ss. 1-25.
  • Diehl, F. Paul ve Goertz, Garry. War and Peace in International Rivalry, Michigan, University of Michigan Press, 2000.
  • Feith, Pieter, The Aceh Peace Process Nothing Less Than Success, United States Institute of Peace Special Report 184, 2007.
  • Gray, B., Coleman, T. P. ve Putnam, L. (2007). “Intractable Conflict: New Perspectives on the Causes and Conditions for Change”, American Behavioral Scientist, 50 (11): 1415-1429.
  • Hamsici, M. (2013). Barışa Giden Yol: Endonezya’da Müslümanların Barışı, [Online] Mevcut: , [Erişim tarihi: 15. 05. 2020].
  • Human Right Watch (2001), Indonesia: The War in Aceh, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 17. 03. 2020].
  • ICG (2005), Aceh: A New Chance for Peace, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 12. 02. 2020].
  • International Crisis Group (2003), Aceh: How not to Win the Hearts and Minds, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 17. 04. 2020].
  • İncesoy, S. (2016). Dünyadan Müzakere Süreci Örnekleri, [Online] Mevcut: , [Erişim tarihi: 15. 05. 2020].
  • Kell, Tim, The Root of Acehnese Rebellion 1989–1992, New York, Cornell Modern Indonesia Project, 1995.
  • Kriesberg, L. (1998). “Intractable Conflict”, Eugene Weiner (Edt.), The Handbook of Interethnic Coexistence, New York, Continuum, ss. 332-342.
  • Kriesberg, Louis, Thorson, Stuart ve Northrup, A. Terrell, Intractable Conflicts and Their Transformation, NewYork, Syracuse University Press, 1989.
  • Kural, B. (2016). Barış Sürecinin Canlanması için Her Zaman Tsunami’ye Gerek Yok, [Online] Mevcut: , [Erişim tarihi: 10. 02. 2020].
  • Lehr, Peter, Violence at Sea: Piracy in the Age of Global Terrorism, New York, London, Routledge, 2006.
  • Lingga, M. (2007). “ The Aceh Peace Process and Lessons for Mindanao”, Autonomy and Peace Monograph, ss. 1-17.
  • Miller, A. Michelle, Rebellion and Reform in Indonesia: Jakarta’s Security and Autonomy Policies in Aceh , New York, Taylor and Francis, 2009.
  • Momerandum between Indonesia Goverment and GAM (2005), [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 29. 05. 2020].
  • Multistakeholder Review (2009), Multistakeholder Review of Post-Conflict Programming in Aceh, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 18. 05. 2020].
  • Muzwardi, A. (2016). “ Aceh Conflict Resoolution by the Goverment of Indonesia”, Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan : Kajian Ilmu Pemerintahan dan Politik Daerah, 1 (1): 158-167.
  • Mücek, A. (2015). Aceh Bölgesinde Sorun Neydi? Nasıl Çözüldü?, [Online] Mevcut: , [Erişim tarihi: 05. 04. 2020].
  • Mor, D. Ben ve Maoz, Zeev, Bound by Struggle: The strategic Evolution of Enduring International Rivalries, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 2002.
  • Pan, E. (2005). Indonesia: The Aceh Peace Aggrement, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 27. 04. 2020].
  • Powell, Jonathan, Teröristlerle Konuşmak: Silahlı Çatışmalar Nasıl Sona Erdirilir?, Nuray Önoğlu (Çev.), İstanbul, Aykırı Yayıncılık, 2015.
  • Putranto, P. (2009). “Aceh conflict resolution lessons learned and the future of aceh”, Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, California, Naval Postgraduate School.
  • Pruitt, G. D. (1997). “ Ripeness Theory and the Oslo Talks”, International Negotiation, 2: 237-250.
  • Pruitt, G. D. (2005). Whitter Ripeness Theory, Working Paper No. 25, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 03. 05. 2020].
  • Pruitt, G. D. (2007). “Readiness Theory and the Northern Ireland Conflict”, American Behavioral Scientist, 50 (11): 1520-1541.
  • Rabasa, A. ve Chalk, P. (2001). Indonesia’s Transformation and the Stability of Southeast Asia, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 29. 03. 2020].
  • Ross, L. M. (2004). “How Do Natural Resources Influence Civil War? Evidence from Thirteen Cases”, International Organization, 58 (1): 35-67.
  • Ross, L. M. (2004). “What do We Know about Natural Resources and Civil War?” Journal of Peace Research, 41 (3): 337-356.
  • Schiff, A. (2014). “Reaching a Mutual Agreement: Readiness Theory and Coalition Building in the Aceh Peace Process”, Negotiation and Conflict Management Research, 7 (1): 57-82.
  • Schulze, E. K. (2006). “Insurgency and Counter-Insurgency: Strategy and the Aceh Conflict October 1976 - May 2004”, Anthony Reid (Edt.), Verandah of Violence, Singapore: Singapore University Press, ss. 225-271.
  • Schulze, E. K. (2007). “GAM: Gerakan Aceh Merdeka” Marianne Heiberg, Brendan O’Leary ve John Tirman (Edt.), Terror, Insurgency, and the State: Ending Protracted Conflicts, Philadelphia,University of Pennsylvania Press, ss. 83-122.
  • Sebastian, Leonard, Realpolitik Ideology: Indonesia’s Use of Military Force, Singapore, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2006.
  • Siver, S. (2005). A Process Oriented View of Conflict Resolution, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 12. 02. 2020].
  • Sukma, Rizal, Security Operations in Aceh: Goals, Consequences, and Lessons, Washington, East-West Center, 2004.
  • T24 (2015), 6 Ülkede Silahsızlanma Hangi Aşamaya Geldi?, [Online] Mevcut: , [Erişim tarihi: 05. 04. 2020].
  • The Danish Immigration Service (2019), Indonesia: Aceh Province, Brief Report, ss. 1-12.
  • Tse-Tung, M. (1970). “Basic Tactics,” Nathan Leites and Charles Wolf (Edt.), Rebellion and Authority: An Analytic Essay on Insurgent Conflicts, Chicago, Markham Publishing Company, ss. 56-71.
  • Wallensteen, Peter, Understanding Conflict Resolution: War, Peace and the Global System, London, Sage Publications, 2002.
  • Yenigün, C. ve Duran, S. (2010). “Endonezya: Çatışmadan Demokrasiye”, Dünya Çatışmaları, ss. 463-486.
  • Zartman, W. I. (1995). “ Dynamics and Constraints in Negotiations in Internal Conflicts”, I. William Zartman (Edt.), Elusive Peace: Negotiating an End to Civil Wars, Washington DC: Brookings Institution, ss. 3-29.
  • Zartman, W. I. (2001). “The Timing of Peace Initiatives: Hurting Stalemates and Ripe Moments”, The Global Review of Ethnopolitics, 1 (1): 8-18.
  • Zartman, W. I. (2009). “ Conflict Resolution and Negotiation”, Jacob Bercovitch, Victor Kremneyuk ve I. William Zartman (Edt.), The Sage Handbook of Conflict Resolution, CA: Sage Publishers, ss. 322-339.
  • Zartman, W. I. (2013). Ripeness, [Online] Available at: , [Erişim tarihi: 18. 01. 2020].
  • Zartman, W. I. ve Rubin, J. Z. (2002). “ The Study of Power and the Practice of Negotiation”, I. William Zartman ve Jeffrey Z. Rubin (Edt.), Power and Negotiation, USA: The University of Michigan Press, ss. 3-29.
Toplam 60 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Research Article
Yazarlar

Fulya Köksoy Bu kişi benim

Yayımlanma Tarihi 1 Ağustos 2020
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2020 Sayı: 44

Kaynak Göster

APA Köksoy, F. (2020). Uyuşmazlıktan Çözüme Giden Yol: Endonezya’nın Açe Eyaletindeki Barış Süreci. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi(44), 209-221.


24108  28027

Bu eser Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.