The limits of civil society in militarised regimes: evidence from the Asia-Pacific

Abstract

The nature of civil society is transformed by a strong military presence, which occurs in the Asia-Pacific region. While modern civil society survives under military rule through co-optation, veiled resistance or geography, traditional organisations may continue to threaten the state's dominance of political society. This article examines the nature of civil society in two countries in the Asia-Pacific that have recently emerged from direct military rule—Burma and Fiji. It considers the independence of civil society under military rule, how militaries take steps to safeguard their roles in political society, and how democratic postures change during transitions away from military rule. Understanding how militaries preserve their influence provides a better perspective of authoritarian resilience in the region and the limits to democratic reforms.

Keywords:

• Asia-Pacific
• Burma
• civil society
• Fiji
• military rule

Notes

1 For a survey of the literature on military rule and how it cannot last, see Geddes, Frantz, and Wright (2014). Note that most comparative studies of military regimes (including theirs) do not include detailed accounts of the Asia-Pacific region, focusing instead on Africa or South America.

2 Lipset (1959, 91), for example, singled out Thailand as a case where the social stability of the nation, even with its occasional coups, stood out in sharp contrast to the situation in the neighbouring former colonial nations of South-East Asia.

3 The State Law and Order Restoration Council changed its name to the State Peace and Development Council in 1997.

4 For a similar account of the limitations of state control and degrees of independence of upland peoples in South-East Asia, see Scott (2009).

5 This would not preclude the NLD from taking a majority of the seats in parliament at a future election, nor Suu Kyi from becoming the Speaker in parliament and passing other laws through constitutional means.

6 The Ministry of Information's censorship board, the Press Scrutiny and Registration Division, continued to issue guidelines to journalists and monitor publications that were critical of the state. The Division retained substantial powers under the media laws, including the right to suspend publications or revoke publishing licences.

7 For a good account of the background to anti-Muslim violence and the rise of Buddhist nationalism in Burma, see Walton and Hayward (2014).

8 Under military rule, U Wirathu was sentenced in 2003 to 25 years in prison for inciting anti-Muslim violence. Released in early 2012, he organized protests in October 2012 against the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation's plan to open an office in Rakhine State.