Like the postcolonial world more generally, Southeast Asia exhibits tremendous variation in state capacity and authoritarian durability. Ordering Power draws on theoretical insights dating back to Thomas Hobbes to develop a unified framework for explaining both of these political outcomes. States are especially strong and dictatorships especially durable when they have their origins in 'protection pacts': broad elite coalitions unified by shared support for heightened state power and tightened authoritarian controls as bulwarks against especially threatening and challenging types of contentious politics. These coalitions provide the elite collective action underpinning strong states, robust ruling parties, cohesive militaries, and durable authoritarian regimes - all at the same time. Comparative-historical analysis of seven Southeast Asian countries (Burma, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, South Vietnam, and Thailand) reveals that subtly divergent patterns of contentious politics after World War II provide the best explanation for the dramatic divergence in Southeast Asia's contemporary states and regimes.

Ordering Power: Contentious Politics and Authoritarian Leviathans in Southeast Asia

Dan Slater, Ordering power: Contentious politics and authoritarian

How did democracy became entrenched in the world's largest Muslim-majority country? After the fall of its authoritarian regime in 1998, Indonesia pursued an unusual course of democratization. It was insider-dominated and gradualist and it involved free elections before a lengthy process of constitutional reform. At the end of the process, Indonesia's amended constitution was essentially a new and thoroughly democratic document. By proceeding as they did, the Indonesians averted the conflict that would have arisen between adherents of the old constitution and proponents of radical, immediate reform. Donald L. Horowitz documents the decisions that gave rise to this distinctive constitutional process. He then traces the effects of the new institutions on Indonesian politics and discusses their shortcomings and their achievements in steering Indonesia away from the dangers of polarization and violence. He also examines the Indonesian story in the context of comparative experience with constitutional design and intergroup conflict.

/pdf/constitutional-change-and-democracy-in-indonesia-4bm2f914zs.pdf

Constitutional Change and Democracy in Indonesia

Securing Japan: Tokyo's Grand Strategy and the Future of East Asia. By Richard J. Samuels. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2007. 277 pages. $49.95 ($19.95 paper). The author, a scholar at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who has specialized in Japanese affairs for many years, identifies his thesis in the opening line: "Many Japanese analysts do not believe Japan now has a coherent grand strategy, and more than a few insist that it has never had one." This reviewer agrees with that judgment. Professor Samuels, however, strives mightily over the next 210 pages to show that Japan, indeed, has had a grand strategy since the Meiji Restoration of 1868 when it left its feudal age and leapt into the modern era. "Japanese security policy," Samuels asserts, "has traveled a consistent path since the nineteenth century." In that time, Japan entered the Anglo-Japanese Alliance of 1902 to ally itself with Britain, then a powerful empire whose navy ruled the waves. In 1940, Japan signed the Tripartite Pact to join the Axis of Nazi Germany and fascist Italy, which Samuels fails to mention. After that pact ended in utter defeat, Japan signed a mutual security treaty with the United States. Samuels sees all those alliances and relationships as crafting a grand strategy. They might be better labeled, in the kindest interpretation, as a series of pragmatic and expedient maneuvers to align Japan with the prevailing power of the time. Japan, a middle-sized, resource-poor island nation, is stuck in a rough neighborhood and needs outside friends to survive, not to mention prosper. The author makes much of the "Yoshida Doctrine," named for the late Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida, the towering figure who led Japan out of the valley of death following World War II. The Japanese, however, do not favor doctrines, preferring instead vague guidelines that permit freedom of action when circumstances change. Yoshida, ever the practical politician, is not known to have ever used the term. Nor did his "deshi" or followers such as Prime Ministers Hayato Ikeda, Eisaku Sato, Kakuei Tanaka, and on through Kiichi Miyazawa, a lineage lasting until 1993. Samuels says the first Japanese to cite the Yoshida Doctrine was Masataka Kosaka, who in 1963 was credited with first use of the term. It is interesting that the author only identifies him as an adviser of Yoshida's. In any event, most scholars agree that the concept of the Yoshida Doctrine rests on two principles: (1) Rely on America to ensure Japan's security while Japan does the minimum necessary to defend itself, and (2) Place maximum effort on economic development, largely through export of goods to pay for much-needed imports. Japan has put those two principles of security policy into practice for the last half century. The nation spends only one percent of its gross national product on defense, a limit endorsed by Japanese taxpayers. Its armed forces are about the 25th largest in the world and are circumscribed with constitutional, legal, and political restraints. …

Securing Japan: Tokyo's Grand Strategy and the Future of East Asia

List of AcronymsABRI Angkatan Bersenjata Republik Indonesia [Indonesian Armed Forces]Babinsa Bintara Pembina Desa [Soldier for Village Supervision]DPR Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat [People's Representative Council; Indonesia's national parliament]FKPPI Forum Komunikasi Putra-Putri Purnawirawan Indonesia [Communication Forum of Sons and Daughters of Indonesian Veterans]FPI Front Pembela Islam [Front of the Defenders of Islam]GAM Gerakan Aceh Merdeka [Free Aceh Movement]HDC Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue [previously, the Henry Dunant Centre]IMF International Monetary FundKodam Komando Daerah Militer [Regional Military Command]Kodim Komando Distrik Militer [District Military Command]Kora mil Komando Rayon Militer [Subdistrict Military Command)Ko rem Komando Resort Militer [Resort Military Command)Kostrad Komando Cadangan Strategis Angkatan Darat [Army Strategic Reserve Command)MPR Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat [People's Consultative Assembly)NGO nongovernmental organizationNKRI Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia [Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia)NU Nahdlatul Ulama [Revival of the Islamic Scholars)PAN Partai Amanat Nasional [National Mandate Party)PDI-P Partai Demokrasi Indonesia Perjuangan [Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle)PKB Partai Kebangkitan Bangsa [National Awakening Party)PPP Partai Persatuan Pembangunan [United Development Party)TNI Tentara Nasional Indonesia [Indonesian National Military)Executive SummarySince the fall of Suharto's New Order regime in 1998, Indonesia has launched a number of initiatives to reform its previously omnipotent armed forces. The extent to which these reforms have resulted in real political change, however, has been subject to heated debate in Indonesia and in capitals of Western donor countries. The two camps have often advanced highly antagonistic accounts of the military reform process. Human rights groups and political activists, on the one hand, have contended that despite formal reforms, there has been almost no change in the way the armed forces operate. They maintain that the military continues to influence, and even dominate, political and economic affairs. The opposing view, which is frequently argued by foreign proponents of restoring full military-to-military ties with Indonesia, states that the armed forces are now fully subordinated to civilian democratic control, and that substantial progress has been made in imposing international human rights standards on the troops.This study presents an evaluation of military reform efforts in Indonesia eight years after Suharto's resignation. Applying the two-generation model of military reform developed by Cottey, Edmunds, and Forster, its proposes that Indonesia has made remarkable progress in advancing first-generation military reforms, which include extensive changes to the country's institutional framework, judicial system, electoral mechanisms, composition of representative bodies, and the responsibilities of security agencies. In combination, these reforms have successfully extracted the armed forces from formal politics, have undermined many of their institutional privileges, and have produced a polity in which the military arguably no longer holds "veto power" to overturn decisions made by the civilian government. The compliance of the armed forces with the government's most recent peace plan for Aceh, despite extensive skepticism within the ranks, is a persuasive example of change.These successes, however, have been counterbalanced by serious omissions and failures. Most important, policymakers did not proceed with initiatives to reform the territorial command structure. These reforms were aborted shortly after they were launched in 2000 amid increasing political tensions. Thus the territorial system was maintained as the power base of the armed forces in the regions, allowing them to tap into economic resources at the grassroots and defend their role as a significant player in local politics. …

/pdf/the-politics-of-military-reform-in-post-suharto-indonesia-3z0h69q58c.pdf

The politics of military reform in post-Suharto Indonesia : elite conflict, nationalism, and institutional resistance

The military have had a key role to play in Indonesia's recent history and may well have a decisive role to play in her future. This book looks at the role of the military in the downfall of Suharto and their ongoing influence on the succeeding governments of B.J. Habibie and Abdurrahman Wahid. The author also examines such key features as human rights, reconciliation, civic-military discourse and ongoing security dilemmas. The book is unique in providing the best overview of the role of the military in the world's fourth most populous nation.

Military Politics and Democratization in Indonesia

For over a decade, observers have witnessed the development of military reform in Indonesia. This reform is a significant part of the country’s political transformation, one that was precipitated by the end of Suharto’s long dictatorship (1966–1998). The evaluation of military reform is, however, mixed. There is a consensus that the military elite has contributed significantly to the dismantling of the authoritarian political system by accepting the public demand for military withdrawal from politics and supporting a peaceful transition to democratically-elected civilian governments during the post-Suharto period. Unlike in Thailand and the Philippines, where civilian political elites use the military in everyday power struggles, and generals intimidate and pressure civilian governments, the Indonesian military (Tentara Nasional Indonesia, or TNI) has succeeded in maintaining a degree of institutional autonomy vis-a-vis political elites. This perception fuels opinion that TNI is seriously committed to institutional self-reform with a goal of professionalizing the organizational orientation.

Security Challenges and Military Reform in Post-authoritarian Indonesia: The Impact of Separatism, Terrorism, and Communal Violence

As the second largest contributor to the UN budget, Japan is expected to play a role in implementing the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). Why has Japan been unenthusiastic about actively engaging in the R2P discourse? What is the impact, both domestic and international, of incorporating R2P in its diplomatic agenda? In examining these questions, we first identify different perceptions about R2P among policy-makers and civil society in Japan. We then analyze the post-Cold War politics of diplomatic initiatives concerning Japan's human security doctrine. Third, we assess opportunities (and limitations) of synchronizing R2P with Japanese diplomatic agendas. Throughout the article, we argue that rather than distancing itself from R2P, as typically seen in official statements, actively embracing R2P may provide greater benefits for Japan both in terms of enhancing its diplomatic influence and mobilizing domestic political support.

Japan and the Responsibility to Protect: coping with human security diplomacy

This article examines the development of the Democrat Party (Partai Demokrat, PD), which won the 2009 legislative elections in Indonesia. PD has received little scrutiny from observers of Indonesia...

Inside the Democrat Party: power, politics and conflict in Indonesia's Presidential Party

Assessing the political role of the military in the post-authoritarian Indonesia
is an important inquiry into the country’s evolution of democratic polity.
Since the fall of President Suharto in May 1998, the military has been
pressured by both society and the international community to withdraw
from politics, professionalize its institutional orientation, subordinate to the
principle of civilian control and return to the barracks. Yet, a decade after
Suharto’s downfall the process of military disengagement from politics is
still incomplete, resulting in the formation of ‘defective democracy’ in which
civilian and military elites share political power in the democratic system.
Military leaders have preserved considerable powers under the civilian governments and they have inﬂuenced, albeit not dominated, political decisions
and policies of civilian leaders during the post-Suharto era. Why it is that
civilian political elites are incapable of navigating the military into the barracks? How can the military yield power under the democratic political
environment? The scholarship of Indonesian politics has attempted to answer
these questions by analysing the problems of military reform, civilian politics
and weak civil society in the newly democratizing polity.1

Jun Honna

Papers

Military Politics and Democratization in Indonesia

Security Challenges and Military Reform in Post-authoritarian Indonesia: The Impact of Separatism, Terrorism, and Communal Violence

Japan and the Responsibility to Protect: coping with human security diplomacy

Inside the Democrat Party: power, politics and conflict in Indonesia's Presidential Party

From dwifungsi to NKRI: Regime change and political activism of the Indonesian military