Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T00:31:32.591Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

State, Social Elites, and Government Capacity in Southeast Asia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2011

Donald K. Crone
Donald K. Crone
Affiliation:
Michigan State University's James Madison College
Get access

Abstract

The signal performances of Southeast Asian countries in attaining economic growth and political stability are frequently explained by cultural and policy factors. Recent research suggests, however, that the role of the state is extensive and central to economic and political goals. The present approach to the comparative evaluation of state capacities attempts to account for the variations and nuances of the performance of Southeast Asian states. The structure of political support and available means of social control provide relatively greater capacity to state elites in Singapore and Malaysia, and less capacity to state elites in the Philippines and Indonesia; Thailand is an intermediate case.

Type
Review Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 40 , Issue 2 , January 1988 , pp. 252 - 268
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See, for example, Belassa, Bela, The Newly Industrializing Countries of the World Economy (New York: Pergamon, 1981)Google Scholar; Hofheinz, Roy Jr., and Calder, Kent, The Eastasia Edge (New York: Basic Books, 1982)Google Scholar; Garnaut, Ross, ed., ASEAN in a Changing Pacific and World Economy (Canberra: Australian National University Press, 1980)Google Scholar; Olson, Mancur, The Rise and Decline of Nations (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982)Google Scholar, chap. 6. For a partial exception, see Wong, John, ASEAN Economies in Perspective (Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues, 1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Examples are Bradford, Colin Jr., “East Asian ‘Models’: Myths and Lessons,” in Lewis, John P. and Kallab, Valeriana, eds., Development Strategies Reconsidered (Washington: Overseas Development Council, 1986), 115–28Google Scholar; Amsden, Alice, “The State and Taiwan's Economic Development,” in Evans, Peter, Rueschemeyer, Dietrich, and Skocpol, Theda, eds., Bringing the State Back In (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985)Google Scholar; Cummings, Bruce, “The Origins and Development of the Northeast Asian Political Economy,” International Organization 38 (Spring 1984), 2–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Haggard, Stephan, “The Newly Industrializing Countries in the International System,” World Politics 38 (January 1986), 343–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar. More generally, see the analysis of the Bank, World, World Development Report, 1983 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Part II.

3 For discussions of the different usages of the term “state” and the recent focus of this literature, see Benjamin, Roger and Duvall, Raymond, “The Capitalist State in Context,” in Benjamin, Roger and Elkin, Stephen, eds., The Democratic State (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1985)Google Scholar; Theda Skocpol, “Bringing the State Back In: Strategies of Analysis in Current Research,” in Evans et al. (fn. 2), 3–43.

4 Among the many studies in this area, see the following major works and the literature cited therein: Poggi, Gianfranco, The Development of the Modern State (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1978)Google Scholar; Tilly, Charles, ed., The Formation of National States in Western (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975)Google Scholar; Evans et al. (fn. 2); Nordlinger, Eric, On the Autonomy of the Democratic State (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Stepan, Alfred, The State and Society: Peru in Comparative Perspective (Princeton: Princeton Press, 1978)Google Scholar; Carnoy, Martin, The State and Political Theory (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Miliband, Ralph, The State in Capitalist Society (New York: Basic Books, 1969)Google Scholar.

5 In economic management, these capacities include the process of capital formation and accumulation; business entrepreneurship; the setting of domestic prices; the control of labor; the distribution of welfare; the brokering of foreign financial flows; the regulation of foreign capital; and the structuring of patterns of trade and investment partners. See Rueschemeyer and Evans, “The State and Economic Transformation,” in Evans et al. (fn. 2); Haggard (fn. 2); Encarnation, Dennis and Wells, Louis Jr., “Sovereignty en garde: Negotiating with Foreign Investors,” International Organization 39 (Winter 1985), 47–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Caparoso, James, “The State's Role in Third World Economic Growth,” Annals of the American Academy of Political Science 459 (January 1982)Google Scholar; Katzenstein, Peter, ed., Between Power and Plenty: The Economic Policies of Advanced Industrial States (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1978)Google Scholar. In managing social conflict, the state's roles include fostering particular ideological and institutional bases of nationalism; shaping patterns of ethnic identity, communal conflict, and political mobilization; and building central political structures. See Brass, Paul, ed., Ethnic Groups and the State (London: Croom Helm, 1985)Google Scholar; David Laitin, “Hegemony and Religious Conflict,” in Evans et al. (fn. 2); Hector, Michael and Levi, Margaret, “The Comparative Analysis of Ethnoregional Movements,” Ethnic and Racial Studies 2 (July 1979), 260–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Young, Crawford, “The Temple of Ethnicity,” World Politics 35 (July 1983), 652–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Smith, Anthony, The Ethnic Revival (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Rothschild, Joseph, Ethno-politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Anderson, Benedict, Imagined Communities (London: Verso, 1983)Google Scholar.

6 The volume covers Asia generally; only the Southeast Asia portion is considered here.

7 Compare Feith, Herbert, “Repressive-Developmentalist Regimes in Asia,” Alternatives 7 (Spring 1982), 491–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

8 For a discussion of the characteristics of the statist literature, see Krasner, Stephen, “Approaches to the State,” Comparative Politics 16 (January 1984), 223–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 See Peter Evans, “Transnational Linkages and the Role of the State,” in Evans et al. (fn. 2), Evans, and, Dependent Development (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979)Google Scholar; Cardoso, Fernando and Faletto, Enzo, Dependency and Development in Latin America (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979)Google Scholar; Warren, Bill, Imperialism (London: New Left Books, 1980)Google Scholar; Carnoy (fn. 4), chap. 7; Nordlinger (fn. 4); Krasner, Stephen, Defending the National Interest (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978)Google Scholar.

10 Frederic Deyo, in “Social Bases of Development Strategy,” paper presented at the conference on The Contemporary State in Southeast Asia (Ann Arbor, MI, April 1986), views crisis as a key to a state's “strategic capacity.”

11 Skocpol in Evans et al. (fn. 2), 14–19.

12 Poulantzas, Nicos, in State, Power, Socialism (London: New Left Books, 1980), 127Google Scholar, refers to a “power bloc.”

13 Marx recognized the potential for independent state action that extends beyond the limits generally posited as the “executive committee of the bourgeoisie,” especially where the process of class development was historically incomplete and the social base therefore more diverse. See “The German Ideology,” in Tucker, Robert C., ed., The Marx-Engels Reader, 2d ed. (New York: Norton, 1978), 187Google Scholar. Rueschemeyer and Evans (fn. 5), 63, discuss class alliances with the state. Nordlinger (fn. 4), chaps. 3, 4, 5, examines a wide array of conditions under which democratic states attain a degree of autonomy from societal actors, and the variety of tactics used. Krasner (fn. 9), posits conditions for “insulation” of democratic states from social pressures. Collier, David, ed., The New Authoritarianism in Latin America (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979)Google Scholar, covers aspects of coercion.

14 Nordlinger (fn. 4), discusses different “types” of state autonomy, but these are all the same form, gained under different assumptions about the congruence of state and social preferences.

15 Skocpol (fn. 3), 16.

16 Myrdal, Gunnar, Asian Drama (New York: Pantheon, 1968)Google Scholar.

17 Wriggins, W. Howard, The Ruler's Imperative (New York: Columbia University Press, 1969), 4Google Scholar.

18 See Ibid., 91 ff.; Nordlinger (fn. 4), 92–94, 111–12, 130–32.

19 In Gramsci's distinction between consensus and coercion as means of state domination, “hegemony” relies primarily on consensual means (chiefly ideology), with coercion in the background. I use tbe term collaboration to include a state's alliance tactics with other forms of consensus. See Gramsci, Antonio, Selections from Prison Notebooks (New York: International Publishers, 1971)Google Scholar; Martin Carnoy (fn. 4), 65–88.

20 Charles Tilly has emphasized the coercive roles of police, armies, and tax collection in the growth of strong European states: see his “War Making and State Making as Organized Crime,” in Evans et al. (fn. 2); and Tilly (fn. 4). Other authors posit superior performance to more democratic, collaborative states: see Atul Kohli, “Democracy and Development,” in Lewis and Kallab (fn. 2); Jackman, Robert, Politics and Social Equality (New York: John Wiley, 1975)Google Scholar.

21 Scott, James and Kerkvliet, Benedict, eds., Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance in Southeast Asia (London: Frank Cass, 1986)Google Scholar.

22 Katzenstein (fn. 5), 19, also links policy implementation to organized social support.

23 For overviews of economic performance, see Wawn, Brian, The Economies of the ASEAN Countries (New York: St. Martin's, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hirono, Ryokici, “Asian and Pacific Developing Economies: Performance and Issues,” Asian Development Review 4 (No. 1, 1986), 1–26Google Scholar.

24 For a survey, see Donald Crone, “The Growth and Equity Experience of Southeast Asia,” Occasional Paper No. 8 (East Lansing, MI: Center for the Advanced Study of International Development, 1985), and the references cited there.

25 See Hauser, Philip et al. , eds., Urbanization and Migration in ASEAN Development (Tokyo: National Institute for Research Advancement, 1985)Google Scholar; Carol Warren, “Class and Change in Rural Southeast Asia” (Higgott and Robison, 128–45).

26 See Lim, Joo-Jock and Vani, S., eds., Armed Communist Movements in Southeast Asia (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1984)Google Scholar.

27 See Lim, Joo-Jock and Vani, S., eds., Armed Separatism in Southeast Asia (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1984)Google Scholar.

28 Shee, Poon Kim, “Political Leadership and Succession in Singapore,” in Chen, Peter, ed., Singapore Development Policies and Trends (Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1983), 173–96Google Scholar; Pang, Eng Fong, “Growth, Inequality and Race in Singapore,” International Labor Review 111 (January 1975), 15–28Google Scholar.

29 See Bellows, Thomas, The People's Action Party of Singapore: Emergence of a Dominant Party System (New Haven: Yale University South-East Asian Studies Monographs, 1970)Google Scholar; Chan, Heng Chee, The Dynamics of One Party Dominance: The PAP at the Grassroots (Singapore: Singapore University Press, 1976)Google Scholar.

30 Deyo, Frederic, Dependent Development and Industrial Older (New York: Praeger, 1981)Google Scholar.

31 Noeleen Heyzer, “International Production and Social Change: An Analysis of the State, Employment and Trade Unions in Singapore,” in Chen (fn. 28), 105–28.

32 Mirza, Hafiz, Multinationals and the Growth of the Singapore Economy (London: Croom Helm, 1986), 104–9Google Scholar; Yoshihara, Kunio, Foreign Investment and Domestic Response (Singapore: Eastern Universities Press, 1976)Google Scholar.

33 Crone, Donald, The ASEAN States: Coping with Dependence (New York: Praeger, 1983), 110–12Google Scholar.

34 For a class analysis, see Jomo, Kwame Sundaram, A Question of Class: Capital, the State, and Uneven Development in Malaya (Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1986)Google Scholar.

35 Also see Nagata, Judith, Malaysian Mosaic (Vancouver: University of British Columbia, 1979)Google Scholar; Milne, R. S., Politics in Ethnically Bipolar States (Vancouver: University of British Columbia, 1981)Google Scholar; Ongkili, James, Nation-building in Malaysia, 1946–19J4 (Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1985)Google Scholar.

36 Milne, R. S. and Mauzy, Diane K., Politics and Government in Malaysia (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1978), 222 ffGoogle Scholar.

37 John Lent, “Human Rights in Malaysia: A 1986 Update,” unpub., Association for Asian Studies, March 1986.

38 See Milne and Mauzy (fn. 36), 177–91.

39 Barraclough, Simon, “Political Participation and Its Regulation in Malaysia: Opposition to the Societies (Amendment) Act of 1981,” Pacific Affairs 57 (Fall 1984), 450–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mauzy, Diane and Milne, R. S., “The Mahathir Administration in Malaysia: Discipline through Islam,” Pacific Affairs 56 (Winter 1983–1984), 617–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

40 Mirza (fn. 32), 49.

41 Chan, Heng Chee, “Politics in an Administrative State: Where Has the Politics Gone?” in Seah, Chee Meow, ed., Trends in Singapore (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1975), 51–68Google Scholar.

42 Mirza (fn. 32), 110, cites figures estimating the contribution of state enterprise at one-third of Singapore's GNP; also see Linda Seah, “Public Enterprise and Economic Development,” and Jon Quah, “Public Bureaucracy, Social Change and National Development,” in Chen (fn. 28).

43 Lee, Sheng Yi, “Income Distribution, Taxation, and Social Benefits in Singapore,” Journal of the Developing Areas 14 (October 1979), 71–98Google Scholar; Rao, V. V. and Ramakrishnan, M. K., “Economic Growth, Structural Change and Income Inequality, Singapore, 1966–1975,” Malayan Economic Review 22 (April 1977), 92–122Google Scholar.

44 Seen Kong Chiew, “Ethnicity and National Integration: The Evolution of a Multiethnic Society,” in Chen (fn. 28), 29–64.

45 See Gale, Bruce, Politics and Public Enterprize in Malaysia (Singapore: Eastern Universities Press, 1981)Google Scholar; Loong-Tan, Hoe, The State and Economic Distribution in Malaysia (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Milne and Mauzy (fn. 36), 321–52.

46 Snodgrass, Donald, Inequality and Economic Development in Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1980)Google Scholar; Young, Kevin et al. , eds., Malaysia: Growth and Equity in a Multiracial Society (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980)Google Scholar.

47 Esman, Milton, Administration and Development in Malaysia (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1972), 62Google Scholar. Milne and Mauzy (fn. 36), 276, maintain that political institutions predominate over bureaucratic ones.

48 Riggs, Fred, Thailand: The Modernization of a Bureaucratic Polity (Honolulu: East-West Center, 1966)Google Scholar.

49 Ayal, Eliezer, “Thailand,” in Golay, Frank et al. , Underdevelopment and Economic Nationalism in Southeast Asia (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1969)Google Scholar.

50 See Girling, John, Thailand: Society and Politics (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1981), 76–81Google Scholar; Skinner, William, Leadership and Power in the Chinese Community of Thailand (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1958)Google Scholar.

51 See Chai-Anan, Samudavanija and Suchit, Bunbongkarn, “Thailand,” in Zakaria, Haji Ahmad and Crouch, Harold, eds., Military-Civilian Relations in South-East Asia (Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1985)Google Scholar; Chai-Anan, Samudavanija, The Thai Young Turks (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1982)Google Scholar.

52 Also see Hewison, Kevin, “The Financial Bourgeoisie in Thailand,” Journal of Contemporary Asia 11 (No. 4, 1981), 395–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53 Jackson, Karl, “Bureaucratic Polity: A Theoretical Framework for the Analysis of Power and Communications in Indonesia,” in Jackson, Karl and Pye, Lucian, eds., Political Power and Communications in Indonesia (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978)Google Scholar.

54 See also Robison, Richard, “Toward a Class Analysis of the Indonesian Military Bureaucratic State,” Indonesia 25 (April 1978), 17–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55 Anderson, Benedict, “Old State, New Society: Indonesia's New Order in Comparative Historical Perspective,” Journal of Asian Studies 43 (May 1983), 477–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56 See King, Dwight, Interest Groups and Political Linkage in Indonesia, 1800–1965 (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Center for Southeast Asian Studies, 1982)Google Scholar.

57 Rudner, Martin, “The Indonesian Military and Economic Policy,” Modern Asian Studies 10 (April 1976), 249–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

58 For the diversity of the actual experience, however, see Kahin, Audrey, ed., Regional Dynamics of the Indonesian Revolution (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1985)Google Scholar.

59 For political analyses of the Indonesian military, see Sundhaussen, Ulf, The Road to Power: Indonesian Military Politics, 1945–1967 (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1982)Google Scholar, and Crouch, Harold, The Army and Politics in Indonesia (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1978)Google Scholar.

60 Bourchier, David, Dynamics of Dissent in Indonesia: Sawito and the Phantom Coup (Ithaca, NY: Cornell Modern Indonesia Project, 1984)Google Scholar.

61 Robison (Higgot and Robison, 324) argues that major business groups are becoming less dependent on military partnership for success as they accumulate capital; on the army's economic interests, see also Crouch (fn. 59), 273–303.

62 Harold Crouch, “Indonesia,” in Zakaria and Crouch (fn. 51), 60.

63 Donald Emmerson, “The Bureaucracy in Political Context: Weakness in Strength,” in Jackson and Pye (fn. 53), 82–136; see also Dwight King, “Human Rights Practices in Indonesia,” paper presented to Association for Asian Studies, Chicago, 1986.

64 Liddle, R. William, in “Suharto's Indonesia: Personal Rule and Political Institutions,” Pacific Affairs 58 (Spring 1985), 68–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar, calls it a “political desert”; see also Crouch, in Zakaria and Crouch (fn. 51), 65ff.

65 Girling (fn. 50), 129ff.

66 Girling, John, “Thailand in Gramscian Perspective,” Pacific Affairs 57 (Fall 1984), 399CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67 See Oon, Khong Cho, The Politics of Oil in Indonesia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986)Google Scholar, for a recent review of that agency. Bruce Glassburner, “Indonesia's New Economic Policy and Its Sociopolitical Implications,” in Jackson and Pye (fn. 53), 137–70, offers a wider review of implementation problems.

68 Stoler, Ann Laura, Capitalism and Confrontation in Sumatra's Plantation Belt, 1870–1979 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1985)Google Scholar.

69 Jackson, in Jackson and Pye (fn. 53), 8.

70 Suryadinata, Leo, “Ethnicity and National Integration in Indonesia: An Analysis,” Asia Quarterly 3 (1976), 209–34Google Scholar; Lim and Vani (fn. 27).

71 Liddle (fn. 64).

72 For a survey of events prior to the “revolution,” focusing on the role of the United States, see Hawes, Gary, “United States Support for the Marcos Administration and the Pressures that Made for Change,” Contemporary Southeast Asia 8 (June 1986), 18–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

73 Machado, Kit, “From Traditional Faction to Machine: Changing Patterns of Political Leadership and Organization in the Rural Philippines,” Journal of Asian Studies 33 (August 1974). 523–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

74 See Wurfel, David, “Elites of Wealth and Elites of Power,” Southeast Asian Affairs 1979 (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1979)Google Scholar.

75 See Yoshihara, Kunio, Philippine Industrialization (Singapore: Oxford University Press, 1985)Google Scholar; also Stauffer, in Higgott and Robison, 241–65.

76 See also Snow, Robert, “Export-Oriented Industrialization, the International Division of Labor, and the Rise of the Subcontract Bourgeoisie in the Philippines,” in Owen, Norman, ed., The Philippine Economy and the United States: Studies in Past and Present Interactions (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies, 1983), 77–108Google Scholar.

77 See also Villacorta, Wilfrido, “Contending Political Forces in the Philippines Today,” Contemporary Southeast Asia 5 (September 1983), 185–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

78 Carolina Hernandez, “The Philippines,” in Zakaria and Crouch (fn. 51), 157–96.

79 For a recent review, see “Salvaging” Democracy: Human Rights in the Philippines (New York: Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, 1985)Google Scholar.

80 See Robert Stauffer, “Philippine Corporatism: A Note on the New Society,” Asian Survey (April 1977), 393–407. Milne, R. S., “Corporatism in the ASEAN Countries,” Contemporary Southeast Asia 5 (September 1983), 172–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar, disputes the applicability of the term “corporatism” to these structures.

81 Richter, Linda, Land Reform and Tourism Development: Policy-Making in the Philippines (Cambridge, MA: Schenkman, 1982)Google Scholar; Anderson, James, “Rapid Rural ’Development’: Performance and Consequences in the Philippines,” in MacAndrews, Colin and Sien, Chia Lin, eds., Too Rapid Rural Development (Athens: Ohio University Press, 1982)Google Scholar.

82 Bello, Waldon, Kinley, David, and Elinson, Elaine, Development Debacle: The World Bank in the Philippines (San Francisco: Institute for Food and Development Policy, 1982)Google Scholar; Villegas, Edberto, Studies in Philippine Political Economy (Manila: Silangan, 1983)Google Scholar.

83 See Mediansky, F. A., “The New People's Army: A Nation-Wide Insurgency in the Philippines,” Contemporary Southeast Asia 8 (June 1986), 1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

84 See Crone (fn. 33).