Analyze and examine ONE of the key areas of ethnic conflict, religious bloodshed

This mini assignment of two to three pages will be due on May 18th on Canvas. Please provide a works cited page and standard formatting.

For this assignment, analyze and examine ONE of the key areas of ethnic conflict, religious bloodshed, and secessionist violence in the immediate post-Suharto era), and update the situation about that conflict/ethnic group/region since 2011. As part of this analysis, examine the ways in which democratic institutions and state institutions have organized, shaped, and managed ethnic relations during this period (2011-2021) and connect to the main points raised in class the reading regarding ethnic conflict with respect to institutions and ethnic identity.

Here are the topics:

Aceh (Sumatra)

Ambon and the Moluccas (Maluku)

Chinese

West Papua

Sulawesi

Kalimantan (Dayaks-Malay-Madurese)

East Timor/Lesser Sunda

Islamists and Jihadists (Java)

Updating the situation with respect to your ethnic group/conflict

Each student will need to collect at least one to two unique and substantive articles (more than a page and can be either academic or journalistic) on the situation with that ethnic group since 2011. You will need to answer these questions based on your research and the course readings.

In your write-up, analyze the following issues and answer these questions. Try to spend about at least a couple paragraphs on each section.

• Ethnic Conflict and Violence —Does tension and/or violence still exist with this ethnic group, region, or community? Why or why not? If tension and conflict is still present, what factors are contributing to these tensions? If there is no conflict or, more importantly no violence, what is preventing or alleviating these tensions from breaking out into open hostilities?

• Political Institutions and Policy Solutions — How have institutions made a difference in the way that ethnic relations have unfolded after the fall of Suharto? What, if any, policy solutions have been implemented or proposed to deal with ethnic conflict? How effective have they been? Why are or aren’t they working?

• Democracy — In what ways has democracy dealt with or managed the conflicts? Has it made it worse or made it better? Provide examples.

• Nationalism – How has nationalism changed under the shift to democracy? What has reflected that shift?

This mini assignment of two to three pages will be due on May 18th on Canvas. Please provide a works cited page and standard formatting.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/25660277

article that I found discusses the topic about “The Road to Autonomy in Aceh”, in the article the author brings up The Free Aceh Movement which was basically a way for legal and historical independence in Indonesia that was created in 1976. The Memorandum of Understanding was a signed agreement between GAM and Indonesia, and because of that agreement military conflict stopped. The article also talks about human rights abuse , economic disparities, corruption, and exploitation. This article states the conflicts and the resolutions.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2056898?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

Has specifically to do with the goal of Islamizing java and the process of achieving that, whether it means through making the entire foundation of Indonesia to focus around Islamic beliefs or just Java. It explains the different sects of Muslims in Indonesia whether orthodox or Java orientated Muslims. Comes to relate and understanding of political infrastructure through the eyes of Islam.