-
Recent Posts
-
Recent Comments
- nintendost on Teori-teori Hubungan Internasional
- lisa on Komunikasi Politik Orde Reformasi
- yhewilyh on Seeds of Terror: An Eyewitness Account of Al-Qaeda’s Newest Center of Operations in Southeast Asia
- ardi on Teori-teori Hubungan Internasional
- editor on Perspektif-perspektif dalam Hubungan Internasional
Categories
Archives
-
-
Tags
Amerika Serikat Asia asia selatan Cold War demokrasi doktrin english school foerign policy fundamentalist GCC Government hubungan internasional indonesia International relations International Relations Theory irak Iran Islam israel kerangka konseptual konseptual kuwait mideast MNC mujahidin khalq negara berkembang pendekatan Perang Dingin Persia politics politik politik luar negeri propaganda revolusi Social Sciences Strategic Studies strategis Suharto Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono Teluk teori Theory Timur Tengah transisi United States-
Centers
Global Defense
Global Politics
Globalization
Indonesian Bloggers
Journals
Library
smart power
-
RSS Links
-
Meta

Indonesia’s foreign policy after Soeharto
Indonesian politics opened a new phase of democratization after Soeharto stepped down from his 32 years of authoritarian rule.
In this paper, Indonesia’s foreign policy changes after Soeharto are systematically examined through an ‘international pressure–political legitimacy’ model derived from neoclassical realism.
This model specifies that Indonesia’s foreign policy during democratization is mainly influenced by two factors: international pressure and the political legitimacy of the new democratic government.
Four cases of foreign policy decision-making from three post-Soeharto presidencies are examined: (i) Indonesia’s East Timor policy under Habibie; (ii) Indonesia’s ‘silence response’ toward China’s protest on the anti-Chinese riots under Habibie; (iii) Wahid’s ‘looking towards Asia’ proposal; and (iv) Megawati’s anti-terrorism and Aceh military operation. The results show that political legitimacy shapes the nature of state behavior, i.e. balancing or compromising, whereas international pressure determines the pattern of state behavior, i.e. external/internal balancing or compromising in words/in deeds.
Source: Oxford Journal
Popularity: 7% [?]