Tutorial 5: Search for political stability / Approaches to Governance

 What were the reasons for the rise of military governments?

 Which reason was the most significant for the rise of military governments?

What are some factors that led to the rise of maximum governments in Southeast Asia? Explain with
examples. (First example has been modelled for you)

 Maximum government was able to improve the economy

o Able to improve economy through tough measures which may not be supported by the
people
o Able to quell citizens who disagree easily
o Singapore banned work strikes and demonstrations, controlled trade unions under NTUC
o Indonesia under Suharto concentrated on improving the economy because of the large amount of
power centralized under him

 Communism was popular and maximum government took power on its back
o Communism used to unite the people, provide a method, provide organisation, role of
Vietminh in fighting for independence
o Attractiveness of Communism to rural masses
o Ho Chi Minh and the Vietminh in Vietnam
 Very much only applies to Vietnam

 US supporting maximum government against communism

o Support from US due to Cold War politics preferring maximum governments to unstable
democratic experiments
o US giving diplomatic support, military aid, economic assistance
o US support of Thai military governments
o US propping up governments in South Vietnam which were unpopular but anti-communist

 Ambitions of individual leaders

o Grabbed opportunity to overthrow democratic system and gain power
o Once in power destroyed rivals to maintain control
o Ne Win in Burma restricted power of the Buddhist Sangha, removed hereditary leaders in the
minority communities, later created the SLORC
o Marcos destroyed rival families under martial law, Benigno Aquino was arrested exiled assassinated
o Suharto banned rival publications, created Golkar, harassed political rivals, bribed the military for
support with appointments into administration, judiciary and business

 Maximum government was able to achieve political consensus

o Democracies were unable to achieve political unity in the country
o Led to inefficient governments
o Maximum governments had strong state control and was able to force through their view
o Created strong political apparatus to ensure unity
o Burma under U Nu was chaotic, Ne Win created SLORC and Burmese Way to Socialism
o Indonesia lacking unity at the 1955 elections, Suharto created Golkar and suppressed rivals
o Thailand during its democratic experiment until King commented against the disunity and the army
and security forces stepped in

 Maximum government was able to maintain social/territorial stability

o Strong state control ensured they can respond effectively to ethnic tensions, communist
threats, regional uprisings
o Due to their close relations with the military
o Indonesia using the army to suppress regional, religious, communist uprisings

1
 o Burmese army able to crush regional warlords to restore centralise rule

* May be tough for students to come up with their own points. Thus in tutorial could possibly list down the points for
them before splitting into groups to discuss and elaborate on the points.

What are some things to consider before we write the essay?

 What is the difference between maximum governments and military governments?

Why is it that we cannot have a point such as “military government rose up as democracy failed to created
political stability in the country”?
 The failure of democracy does not = to the success of military government. There are many systems
these are just two. If democracy fails some other system beside military government can also rise up.

Higher order thinking question!

Which factor was the most significant for the rise of military governments in Southeast Asia?

Firstly, of course main factor cannot be popularity of communism since it only happened in one country out
of the entire region. Thus it is not reflective of the entire region and does not address the question accurately.

Mainly military governments rose up because of their inherent strength through force. Their popularity due
to their role during the Japanese Occupation and decolonisation was largely due to their fighting
capabilities. Ability to impose political consensus, maintain territorial integrity and destroy alternative
political structures, are also because of the force that the military can bring to bear on groups causing
problems. Even when the US provided economic and military assistance that led to the rise of military
governments during the Cold War, it was largely due to the strength of the military at maintaining stability
in the country that attracted American friendship in the first place. In the end no other political group can
challenge the military through force and indeed the military often uses this overwhelming force to take over
and consolidate power over the country.

The failure of democratic structures did provide the opportunity for military governments to take over. Almost
all Southeast Asian states attempted democracy at independence but many did not succeed at the first try
due to a variety of problems. (Indonesia had the 1955 elections which resulted in a factionalised political
situation, Burma attempted democracy but U Nu was unable to create consensus, Malaysia was also
democratic but trying to cater to everyone’s views eventually led to the race riots of 1969, the Philippines
was democratic until Ferdinand Marcos took over and used martial law to consolidate his power.) This
created the opportunity for military governments to come in and show their strengths before finally taking
control over the country.