Suchergebnisse

The purpose of this study is to explain how ASEAN solved problems in stabilizing their territory. As we know the formation of ASEAN as a regional organization of Southeast Asia is to liberate countries in Southeast Asia from the influence of The Great Powers. This is in line with the realism that deeply bound within ASEAN. Ahead of the 15th anniversary of the formation of ASEAN, there was a major conflict between Vietnam and Cambodia, precisely in the 1970s. This is one of the catalysts that destabilize the ASEAN's stances to avoid various types of multilateral relations. The method used in this research is qualitative with historical analysis from various literatures. After successfully resolving the conflict, in 1994 ASEAN established ARF as a workplace to discuss security in Asia, in order to facilitate such conflicts to occur again. ARF members are not only ASEAN countries but also superpowers. This is contrary to the foundation of ASEAN itself. In essence it shows that realism is willing to subdue with liberalism.

This article is a theoretical review based on idea comparisons in exploring various perspectives on food insecurity. Overall, the authors focus on the discussion of food insecurity, in the form of hunger which is considered to have several limitations. The narrative or discursive of food security and food sovereignty contradicts one another. Even so, the two are not as oppositional concepts, but as interrelated concepts, especially covering efforts to overcome hunger which includes access, distribution, security and equality. Meanwhile, the approach to national security based on realism and human security based on the Copenhagen School has significant differences. However, both have problems in positioning hunger as a security issue. Realism that relies on the state-centric places dealing with hunger is the concentration of government activities in ensuring national interests, so that the existing policies are on how the food availability can be fulfilled or surplus. Subsequently, the human security perspective looks at the hunger issue faced by humans so that a securitization process is needed that is carried out by securitization agency. It can be seen here that actions to overcome fundamental problems are only the responsibility of the elite governments, while the voices of the interests of individuals experiencing hunger are neglected. Thus, a critical security approach appears to mediate the above limitations. This perspective offers that the issue of hunger should be reframed as this security problem is a structural problem. Furthermore, this approach proposes the definition of food security in vulnerable populations from the structural violence of hunger.

Interfaith dialogue has not gained a strategic place in the context of the study of international relations yet, even though its existence has practically provided new dynamics in the constellation of contemporary international relations. Not only that, interfaith dialogue also has sufficient theoretical urgency as a academics study that needs to be continuously developed. The debate between realism and idealism continues to develop in contemporary international relations studies. This development is influenced by the expansion of the meaning of actors who not only talk about state actors but also non-state actors, the expansion of the issues was originally focused on hard political issues but also focus to the discussion on low political issues, as well as how the interaction between actors with the religious discussion of these issues has created varied patterns of relations between actors in the study of international relations. This study attempts to place the phenomenon of interfaith dialogue theoretically in the study of international relations through a rational perspective, by seeking a middle ground between the realism and idealism debates. The English School approach, foreign policy, and diplomacy will try to be presented so that the theoretical position of inter-religious dialogue will become clear as a phenomenon that continues to develop in the study of international relations. The importance of this research is to provide the possibility of a wider variety of studies in the context of international relations, so that the existence of international relations as a scientific discipline can be optimized for its contribution to analyzing social phenomena across national borders that occur and growing.

This article explores the development of international relations (IR) in Indonesia with special focus on the changing trends in its theoretical perspectives. It argues that the academic works examined reflect the ways in which Indonesia's IR scholars perceive and theorize the nature of the dynamics of external political environments and their connections to the state's foreign relations. The argument is elaborated in two related parts. The first section discusses the theoretical perspectives that developed during the Cold War period, which focuses on the propensity toward historical realism and regionalism. The second part of the discussion examines recent developments in which Cold War perspectives have been reconsidered, and in many respects modified into three new categories of theoretical thinking, namely reform, resistance, and eclecticism. The changing theoretical trends reveal that Indonesia's IR scholarship is open and innovative. The conclusion comments on the development of the Indonesia's IR.

Realism has been the dominant conceptual approach to studying Indonesian foreign policy. This article, however, considers realist analyses to be insucient since their emphasis on the struggle for power and security in the system of states has led to the neglect of the importance of perspectives which focus on order. To ll the gap it then intends to apply the English School perspective which focuses on the concept of international society to trace the nature and function of Indonesian foreign policy. Two cases are examined, including the Asian African Conference and Association of South East Asian Nations, to demonstrate the relevance of international society for policy ideas and action. The central argument is that the Indonesian elite worldview indicates that the creation and maintenance of order in international societies are ones which are prominent objectives legitimizing the conduct of Indonesia's external relations.

The global war on terror has raised debates between liberals and realists on the position of ethics in intelligence operations. On the one hand, liberal ethicists insist that the conduct of intelligence gathering to counter terrorism must not violate the security rights of citizens. On the other hand, proponents of realism consider national security to be of greater importance than ethical principles governing individual freedom. This article tries to present an alternative point of view by examining the consequence of ethical criticisms of intelligence activities on the Indonesian government's counterterrorism measures. It proposes two approaches to understanding the connection between ethics and intelligence: examining the nature of the terror threat, and looking at the sociopolitical situations which affect the role of the state's security agencies. Arguably, securitizing intelligence by enforcing an ethical reconceptualization of intelligence roles increases the challenges facing Indonesia's intelligence operatives and damages the effectiveness of the government's counterterrorism policy.

After the Soviet break-up and the Marxist regime collapsed, many of alternative notions emerged in the academic community in Russia, including alternative ideas in the field of International Relations (IR). A number of Russian IR scholars attempted to reconstruct the theories of IR, not just the IR theories that developed in Russia during the era of Marxism, but also against Western IR theories. Although the post-Cold War aspirations to create a distinct national school of International Relations in Russia, but these efforts are not free from the ideology and political goal that directing and guiding Russian foreign policy. Even, IR scholars in Russia have come to shared with the Russian government in terms of building the IR theories with the Russian characteristics, especially in challenging Western hegemony in the social sciences and international relations. This article tries to elaborate three intellectual traditions of international relations that developed in Russia, namely Westernism, Statism, and Civilizationism. Westernizer IR heavily influenced by Western liberalism, Statism more inspired by the realism, while Civilizationism is more of a hybrid between the constructivism and Russian essentialism.