Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

Dominant Power and Its Bandwagoning Effect on Justice in the Middle East Radiatie, Novalita; Iskandar, Winda Nurlaily Rafikalia; Dasadwiastaning, Valentia Nadya; Morley, Peter John
Islamic Research Vol 8 No 1 (2025): Islamic Research
Publisher : Perhimpunan Intelektual Muslim Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47076/jkpis.v8i1.320

Abstract

This research contributes to complementing the study of realism in international relations through bandwagoning by analyzing interdependence in the alliance of Muslim countries in the Middle East. The United States, as a dominant power, always takes part in the political map in the Middle East, which is considered strategic, by offering political, military, and economic assistance. The response of countries in the Middle East varies, depending on their national agendas and diplomatic relations. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, several Muslim countries in the Middle East lost the value of impartial justice and depended on the interests of allies with the United States. The principle of independent justice has become blurred, leading to bias in the actions of Muslim countries that tend to support the United States. This research uses the concept of bandwagoning popularized by Kenneth Waltz in Theory of International Politics. This alliance contributes to the value of justice to follow the dominant power rather than uphold justice in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The method used in this research is qualitative, with a descriptive approach based on secondary data collection. The analysis in this research compares several specific phenomena in the Middle East region, focusing on Muslim countries, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Qatar, and Bahrain. This study uses national interest mapping to show that the interdependence of Muslim countries choosing to ally with the United States influences political actions and decisions without regard to the principle of impartial justice.
Dominant Power and Its Bandwagoning Effect on Justice in the Middle East Radiatie, Novalita; Iskandar, Winda Nurlaily Rafikalia; Dasadwiastaning, Valentia Nadya; Morley, Peter John
Islamic Research Vol 8 No 1 (2025): Islamic Research
Publisher : Perhimpunan Intelektual Muslim Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47076/jkpis.v8i1.320

Abstract

This research contributes to complementing the study of realism in international relations through bandwagoning by analyzing interdependence in the alliance of Muslim countries in the Middle East. The United States, as a dominant power, always takes part in the political map in the Middle East, which is considered strategic, by offering political, military, and economic assistance. The response of countries in the Middle East varies, depending on their national agendas and diplomatic relations. In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, several Muslim countries in the Middle East lost the value of impartial justice and depended on the interests of allies with the United States. The principle of independent justice has become blurred, leading to bias in the actions of Muslim countries that tend to support the United States. This research uses the concept of bandwagoning popularized by Kenneth Waltz in Theory of International Politics. This alliance contributes to the value of justice to follow the dominant power rather than uphold justice in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The method used in this research is qualitative, with a descriptive approach based on secondary data collection. The analysis in this research compares several specific phenomena in the Middle East region, focusing on Muslim countries, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Qatar, and Bahrain. This study uses national interest mapping to show that the interdependence of Muslim countries choosing to ally with the United States influences political actions and decisions without regard to the principle of impartial justice.
Triadic Reciprocal Determinism and Rational Choice Theory: A Case Study of Rohingya Refugee Dasadwiastaning, Valentia Nadya
Interdisciplinary Social Studies Vol. 2 No. 2 (2022): Regular Issue
Publisher : International Journal Labs

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55324/iss.v2i2.318

Abstract

Background: The similarities among the refugee looks like a phenomenon that needs further research. Those theories are a part of behaviorism and the decision-making approach. It can be used to predict alternatives choice and also which alternatives the actor or agent will determine. Aim: This study tries to analyze the behavior of Rohingya refugees with triadic reciprocal determinism and rational choice theory. It also profoundly concerns how the decision to act adopted by refugees is almost similar, whether in steps or goals. Method: This research uses a qualitative approach and sources from journals, articles, and interviews from online news. All the data sources will be analyzed with the theory already mentioned above. Findings: While Rohingya get safe and are placed in a temporary camp, some flee and do not want to wait for status determination. They have similar goals and behaviors that guide them to choose better alternatives. Being smuggled by a third party is one of the rational choices they make. That choice is determined based on behavior that constructs their rationale. Factors in triadic reciprocal determinism are also related to alternatives choice that they make, which is part of the social cognitive process.