Secessionism in Aceh and West Papua (Essay Sample)

Secessionism in Aceh and West Papua
Name
University
Professor
Date
Secessionism in Aceh and West Papua
Secessionism law for the provinces of Aceh and Papua to be implemented. It placed the border of the Indonesian government brought in succession challenges between the two regions. The performance of this law needs proper consideration before passing the law. To make this law effective, policymakers and academic professionals had to sit down and lay down conditions to resolve the issue. The main challenge to be considered was granting anatomy to address separate conflicts. In this essay, topics addressed requirements for the law's blessing, the government response to the set-out condition, and how democracy is affected by the law.
How did the government respond to these demands from the Acehnese and the West Papuans?
The government has provided a special autonomy law to divert separatists' demands. Indeed, Aceh and Papua were given significant and unique concessions in this asymmetric autonomy offer. Special autonomy arose during Indonesia's democratic transition when crises set the government and the central authorities were weakened. As pressure from the independence movement mounted on Jakarta, the administration was compelled to make enormous concessions to prevent a crisis and bring the country together.
The administration shunted the political parties for independence between leaders and their supporters while dealing with other pressing national issues. The obligations that caused the decision to offer special autonomy began to fade as the government recovered central authority. The government committed to the deterioration of remarkable independence, which resorted to a harsher response to the separatists' obligations.
The government enacted Indonesia. The law's main aim was to solve long issues arising from the two provinces ( Jacques and André, 2010, 72). The government enacted customary laws to solve land issues, promote self-determination and enhance respect for human rights, reform democracy rules, and develop revenues in the two provinces.
How those responses change after democracy returned in 1998, and what did were the responses of Indonesia's leaders during this post-1998 period?
Following the fall of the Suharto dictatorship in May 1998, B. J. Habibie's new government set out on an ambitious program of democratic reform, including the easing of media prohibitions and other political constraints. These activities triggered a chain reaction of requests from the local community.
Protesters in the state’s urban poor and central class, led by the movement of the students, extension to local areas faster, resulting in a plethora of longer-reaching reform demands. Local leaders in Aceh and Papua emerged, extolling the accumulated hatred caused by Jakarta's failing development and security policies while basking in their newly found freedoms. In both provinces, civil disobedience movements proliferated.
The referendum in Banda Aceh seemed unstoppable, with hundreds of thousands of people attending the most significant demonstration in Aceh's history. Following Suharto's demise, local leaders in Papua rapidly acknowledged Jakarta's flaws and called for a nationwide and global debate to raise the discontent of Papua. The most apparent manifestation of public support for independence was the expression was the flag-raising ceremony throughout Papua.
In the new Indonesian, they promised to provide democratic rules that aimed to reduce wriggling in the country (Tiarma, 2005, 110). Due to this issue, the adoption of a new electoral law on parliamentary and presidential elections complicated the issue of promoting free, fair, and credible elections as outlined. It was due to the election of parliamentary seats in June and the presidential elections held in November. Leaders formed many political parties, but they never agreed.
What has been the impact of democracy upon these secessionist conflicts?
The impact of democracy led to more civil war in the two provinces. It is mentioned that Papua organized peaceful protests. At the same time, Aceh, it is due to this that by 2006 violence was witnessed in Indonesia as the two championed the violation of rights done by military services and instances taking part in the country. It claims that the presence of local parties in Aceh has had a mixed effect on the party system's institutionalization. Regional parties in Indonesia, like national parties, have poor societal roots and party organizations that hinder PSI in Aceh. Despite this, local parties in post-conflict Aceh have contributed to the consolidation of the party system by increasing the legitimacy of parties and elections and reducing fragmentation. Aceh's long fighting history, as well as its post-conflict status, have a considerable influence on this hybrid effect.
The MPR's status as the central government was undermined by constitutional revisions and changes to its standing orders. As part of a constitutional revision that restored a more traditional presidential style of administration, In 2004, the MPR's status as Indonesia's primary legislative body was to be phased out. The legislative balance favored the. The MPR order on Papua was only a recommendation and hence not legally obligatory on the government. Secessionist challenges were reflected in the shifting in the balance of power. Surprisingly, the decree had little impact and had little effect on Jakarta's Papua strategy.
What has been the outcome in both cases of secessionism?
Secessionism later led to the rise of a civilizing movement that advocated for the mobilization with the aim of a referendum and to put more pressure on self-determination. Previously, no agreement was formed because no strategy reduced nor increased violence until the movement was formed, which helped reach an agreement. Aceh and Papua received far-reaching concessions under the special autonomy legislation, centered on recognizing exceptional privileges between the two provinces. These concessions looked to be a change from Jakarta's approach to regional concerns, which had bee