Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Selama 1933 – 1938, keamanan nasional serta status superpower yang dimiliki Prancis dan Inggris mengalami ancaman besar akibat serangkaian aksi militer yang dilakukan Nazi Jerman. Aksi Nazi Jerman pun telah melanggar Perjanjian Versailles. Akan tetapi, kedua negara tersebut tidak merespon dengan konfrontatif. Alih-alih sanksi, mereka memberi keleluasaan kepada Nazi Jerman dengan melakukan serangkaian konsesi— sikap yang kemudian dikenal sebagai appeasement. Untuk menjelaskan fenomena ini, digunakan metode kualitatif dengan menganalisa tiga faktor. Pertama, potensi negara dari Inggris dan Prancis. Kedua, stimuli sistemik dalam bentuk operasi militer Jerman. Ketiga, persepsi dan kapasitas agen geopolitik di Inggris dan Prancis terhadap kedua faktor yang telah disebutkan. Ketiga faktor tersebut akan dianalisa menggunakan teori neoclassical geopolitics yang diterapkan dalam empat peristiwa: pengunduran diri Jerman dari International Disarmament Conference (1933), perjanjian militer Inggris-Jerman (1935), okupasi Rhineland (1936), serta aneksasi Sudetenland dan Perjanjian Munich (1938). Temuan penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pada 1933 – 1935 ketiadaan sanksi kepada Jerman disebabkan oleh kekeliruan persepsi ancaman dan fokus yang besar pada urusan domestik. Selanjutnya, sejak 1935 terjadi kecenderungan appeasement oleh Inggris dan Prancis karena tiga faktor: ketidakpastian diplomatik, inferioritas kekuatan beserta kekeliruan persepsi terhadap Nazi Jerman.

---

During 1933-1938, France and Britain faced a threat of their national security and superpower status due to a series of military actions taken by Nazi Germany. These actions by Nazi Germany also violated the Treaty of Versailles. However, both countries did not respond confrontationally. Instead of imposing sanctions, they make a series of concessions that later known as appeasement. Using qualitative methods, this research will examine this situation by analyzing series of factors. First, the state potential of Britain and France. Second, systemic stimuli in the form of Germany's military operations. Third, the perceptions and capacities of geopolitical agents in Britain and France regarding the aforementioned factors. These factors will be analyzed using the theory of neoclassical geopolitics that will be applied to four events: Germany's withdrawal from International Disarmament Conference (1933), Anglo-German Naval Agreement (1935), occupation of Rhineland (1936), and annexation of Sudetenland and the Munich Agreement (1938). Research finding shows that in 1933 – 1935, the absence of sanctions against Germany was due to a misperception of the threat and a significant focus on domestic affairs. After that, from 1935 onwards, there was a tendency of appeasement by Britain and France due to three factors: diplomatic uncertainty, power inferiority, and misperception of Nazi Germany."

"This book underscores the complexity of forecasting international politics and proceeds cautiously to investigate the questions of change and continuity, examining several actors with respect to multiple issues and across different levels of analysis. Taken as a whole, this collection of essays offers a series of snapshots of different aspects, and from varying angles, of an international system in motion."

"Isu politik dan keamanan internasional yang terjadi pada 4 negara Kawasan Eropa Tenggara (Turki, Yunani, Siprus, dan Malta) telah menjadi perhatian sejak dulu bahkan beberapa tahun terakhir. Kemunculan isu keamanan dan politik internasional di Kawasan mendorong adanya kebijakan maupun strategi keamanan yang diterapkan masing-masing negara. Dalam penelitian ini, peneliti menggunakan metode penelitian kualitatif dengan pendekatan geospasial dan kajian literatur yang kemudian dianalisis dengan menggunakan Teori Kompleks Keamanan Regional dari Barry Buzan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa 4 negara Kawasan Eropa Tenggara menghadapi beberapa isu keamanan dan politik internasional yang kompleks dan rumit, seperti cybercrime, Imigran, terorisme bahkan sengketa wilayah. Dari isu keamanan yang terjadi, isu sengketa territorial merupakan isu yang paling utama di Kawasan bahkan isu tersebut mendorong penerapan kebijakan keamanan yang berkaitan dengan penggunaan kekuatan militer. Lebih lanjut, diketahui bahwa isu keamanan dan politik internasional yang terjadi di Kawasan dilatarbelakangi oleh beberapa faktor, seperti Faktor Ekonomi, Faktor Politik dan Keamanan, Faktor Sejarah, Faktor Geografis serta Faktor Sosial Ekonomi dan Sosial Budaya.

---

Political and international security issues that occurred in 4 countries in the Southeast European Region (Turkey, Greece, Cyprus and Malta) have been a concern for a long time, even in the last few years. The emergence of international security issues in the region encourage security policies and strategies implemented by each country. In this study, researchers used qualitative research methods with a geospatial approach and a literature review which was analyzed using the Complex Theory of Regional Security from Barry Buzan. The results of the study show that 4 countries in the Southeastern European Region face several complex and complicated international security and political issues, such as cybercrime, immigrants, terrorism and even territorial disputes. From the security issues that occur, the issue of territorial disputes is the most important issue in the Region and even this issue encourages the application of security policies related to the use of military force. Furthermore, it is known that international security and political issues that occur in the Region are motivated by several factors, such as Economic Factors, Political and Security Factors, Historical Factors, Geographical Factors and Socio-Economic and Socio-Cultural Factors."

"Salah satu fokus utama Studi Hubungan Internasional adalah perang dan damai yang cenderung ditempatkan secara dikotomis. Namun, pada era pasca-Perang Dingin, terdapat tindakan-tindakan agresi yang umum disebut grey zone karena tidak menunjukkan karakteristik damai, tetapi tidak terkualifikasi sebagai perang sehingga meningkatkan urgensi negara-negara di dunia untuk meresponsnya. Penelitian ini menemukan empat tema inti yang mewarnai perkembangan grey zone di dalam studi Hubungan Internasional, yakni konseptualisasi grey zone, taktik yang ada di dalamnya, aktor yang terlibat di dalam grey zone beserta perilakunya, dan kritik terhadap grey zone itu sendiri. Kajian terhadap 45 literatur dengan metode taksonomi menemukan bahwa grey zone merupakan ruang kompetisi negara di antara perang dan damai dan di bawah ambang batas kekerasan bersenjata langsung; memiliki taktik yang belum mampu meredam eskalasi konflik, tetapi menegaskan karakternya; melihat aktor dan perilakunya sebagai salah satu faktor terpenting dari perkembangan topik grey zone; serta memiliki kritik yang makin relevan jika melihat inkonsistensi, unsur politik, dan bias yang menyelimutinya. Konsep grey zone ini, sayangnya, masih memiliki kekurangan dalam kajian dari sudut pandang revisionis sehingga kajian ini perlu dikembangkan lebih objektif dan efektif ke depannya.

---

One of the main focuses of the study of International Relations is war and peace, which tend to be placed in a dichotomous manner. However, in the post-Cold War era, there were acts of aggression which were commonly called the grey zone because they neither show peaceful characteristics, nor qualify as war. This research finds four core themes that characterize the development of the grey zone in the study of International Relations, namely the conceptualization, the tactics within it, the actors involved and their behavior, and criticism of the grey zone itself. A review of 45 literatures using taxonomic methods found that the grey zone represents the space of state competition between war and peace and below the threshold of direct armed violence; has tactics that still not able to de-escalate the conflict, but affirms its character; see actors and their behavior as one of the most important factors in the development of grey zone  topics; and has criticism that is increasingly relevant due to its inconsistencies, political elements, and biases that surround it. This gray zone concept still has shortcomings so that this study needs to be developed more objectively and effectively in the future."