| Summary: |
Some nalion-stales are slill lacing rebellion movements that
saying lhey walked in ihe ditlerent path ol hislory ol the
slate and/or disappoinled lo lhe regime's perlormance. For
this reason, am conflict, separalism, and other ellort to lorm
a new regime happened.
Giving a specilic autonomy to the rebellion movemenl to
govern rn a specilic region is a common alternalive to
reduce lhe wolse impacl. lt is a kind oi recognition that they
know well their needs. Sending lhe fomer rebellion movemenl
to power is an attempl to aggregate therr inleresls that
nol accommodaled lor a long trme lt is hope that it will
reduce the lension between lhe cenlral govemment and lhe
movemenl as well as the spread of violence to be a regional
or inlemational $sue ln some cases, however, il did
not work, even counler-productive. The new regime's
performance changed from a solid, tast movinq and Iesponsive
opponent to be a corrupl and full ol intrigues administration
This paper aims to study management panern of governance
led by lhe former rebellion movement aclivisls ll is
an anempl to do theory building in conllicl managemenl.
Comparing [4NLF in lhe Philrpprnes, HAI4AS in Palesline,
and GAM in lndonesia will be uselul lo ful{ill lhe need.
|