What this lesson teaches
I can judge how Southeast Asian governments held on to power and what this led to.
Syllabus 9174, Paper 2, Theme I, Learning Outcomes. evaluate the outcomes of Southeast Asian governments in consolidating power in different contexts and over time
Make a guess
Even authoritarian rulers in Southeast Asia held elections. Why do you think they bothered?
- Elections gave legitimacy, and they shaped the rules to win.
- Because the UN required elections from its member states.
- Because they expected and accepted that they might lose.
Show the answer
Elections gave legitimacy, and they shaped the rules to win.
Ruling parties drew boundaries, set rules and limited opponents so that elections confirmed their rule.
Elections gave governments legitimacy, so even authoritarian rulers held them. Ruling parties shaped the rules to make sure they won.
In Malaysia and Singapore, regular elections were the main source of legitimacy. Opposition parties could compete, and they sometimes won seats or states.
Ruling parties shaped the rules in their favour. In Malaysia, rural Malay seats had fewer voters than urban ones, which helped UMNO. In Singapore, Group Representation Constituencies, introduced in 1988, made it harder for small opposition parties to win.
Authoritarian rulers held elections too. Suharto's Golkar won every election from 1971 to 1997. In 1973 the other parties were forced to merge into just two, and the government screened their candidates.
Leaders changed constitutions to stay in power. Marcos used martial law to bring in a new constitution in 1973 that gave him wide powers. Mahathir changed Malaysia's constitution in 1983 and 1993 to reduce the powers of the Malay rulers.
Elections could also bring governments down. Marcos's attempt to steal the snap election of February 1986 triggered People Power. Burma's generals called an election in 1990 and then ignored its result, which destroyed their remaining legitimacy.
- Golkar
- Won every election from 1971 to 1997.
- Group Representation Constituencies
- Singapore, 1988.
- Marcos's constitution
- 1973.
Real examples to use
Golkar's managed wins, 1971 to 1997
Golkar took about 63 per cent of the vote in 1971 and about 75 per cent in 1997. In 1973 the other parties were forced to merge into just two, the PPP and the PDI.
Group Representation Constituencies, 1988
Singapore made some seats team contests that had to include a minority candidate, which made it harder for small opposition parties to field a full slate.
Burma's ignored election, 27 May 1990
The National League for Democracy won 392 of the seats, but the generals refused to hand over power and arrested opposition leaders.
Worked example: Judging elections as a source of legitimacy
Why did rulers bother to hold elections?
- At home: elections showed public support.
- Abroad: they reassured allies and investors.
- Control: rules and screening limited the risk.
- Danger: a stolen election could spark revolt, as in 1986.
Watch out for this
Holding elections made a government democratic.
Elections only show democracy when they are free and fair. Golkar's victories in managed elections gave Suharto a show of legitimacy, not real competition.
Check your understanding
What did Suharto's government do to political parties in 1973?
- It forced them to merge into two parties and screened candidates.
- It banned elections and ruled by decree from then on.
- It allowed new parties to form freely to divide the opposition.
Show the answer
It forced them to merge into two parties and screened candidates.
Right. This made Golkar's victories certain.