[ Panels by World Area Main Menu ]
[ View the Timetable of Panels ]
Individual Papers: Parties, Protest and the State in South and Southeast Asia
Organizer and Chair: Amrita Basu, Amherst College
Engendering Indian “Secularism”: the Legal and Political Revival of the Uniform Civil Code and Prospects for Future Debate
Jennifer R. Coleman, University of Pennsylvania
This paper examines the recent evolution of secularism in modern India as it relates to the contested values of national identity, individual rights, religious freedom, cultural difference, and gender equality. As the institution of a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) has been central to discussions of these issues, its renewed presence in political and legal debates is significant. Even in light of the politicization of the Shah Bano case in 1986, since 1952 the higher courts have typically tried to wash their hands of adjudging Acts concerning personal law. While reasserting that personal laws do not qualify as ‘laws in force’ in the 1997 Ahmedabad decision, the judiciary called upon Parliament to institute a UCC. This judicial initiative has been amplified by recent reforms concerning the Hindu Code, marriage registration, divorce laws, and mandatory HIV-testing before marriage, as well as the Supreme Court’s increasingly public criticism of Islamic courts—not to mention the introduction of anti-conversion bills in the Hindi Belt—all key issues in the UCC-personal law debate. I propose that the resurgence of UCC-related debates represent a decisively positive development in legal and political fields regarding gender justice and secularism. Drawing broadly upon the multidisciplinary work of theorists such as Sunder Rajan (2003) and Yuval-Davis (1997), I evaluate recent legal decisions and publications produced by political parties, cultural organizations, and women’s advocacy groups key to this changing debate. Ultimately, I aim to provide a more thorough and up-to-date understanding of the meaning and substance of ‘secularism’ and India’s efforts to ‘engender’ democratic consolidation.
The Secret Life of the One-Party State - Understanding Singaporean Political Culture in the Lee Hsien Loong Era
David Yang, Stanford University
This paper reports findings from the first-ever nation-wide survey of political attitudes and behavior in Singapore, conducted over the summer of 2006 after the historic General Elections of 2006 which provided the popular endorsement for the inauguration of the Lee Hsien Loong era. As such, it would provide the academic community with the first and most comprehensive data of its kind from that country. With its unique combination of a first-world level of development, an established tradition of electoral competition but an entrenched authoritarian regime, Singapore confounds the expectations of scholars and pundits alike. While boosters of the “Singapore Way” attribute the city-state’s apparent stability to its “Asian values”, critics of the government castigate the Singaporean middle class for its timidity and apathy. Are Singaporeans in fact committed to the current system? Or are they simply apathetic? Or are they in fact liberal democrats at heart who merely lack the channel and opportunity to express their desires? As Singapore is widely viewed as a success story worthy of emulation by governments and peoples around Southeast Asia and China, understanding the true nature of Singaporean society will provide us with a powerful prism for understanding the future political trajectories of other societies in that region. This survey offers a singular opportunity to enhance our understanding of the political evolution of the authoritarian developmental State. The wealth of empirical data from this survey 3 years in the planning affords us a unique opportunity to cross-examine several paradigmatic explanations for the sources of value shifts and regime changes. In this paper, I will assess the Singaporean public’s support for democratic norms of governance, their evaluation of current regime norms and policy performance, value orientations and patterns of political participation. In addition, since the survey was conducted as part of the larger East Asian Barometer (EAB) Project currently covering eight other East Asian societies as well as the overarching Global Barometer Project, all of which produce a common output, cross-cultural and cross-regional comparative analysis shall be conducted situating Singapore within the broader regional and global context. As a unique outlier in democratization studies, the findings from Singapore will make an invaluable addition to the sparse pool of data on political culture in authoritarian societies.
Why Don’t They Just Use Words? Accounting for Indian Political Protest on the Streets and in Parliament
Dean E. McHenry, Jr., Claremont Graduate University
There is no democracy in the world where political protest so extensively permeates the polity as India. No day passes without significant “street” protests over some type of issue in many parts of the country. No session of parliament passes without major disruption caused by protesting MPs. Protests take a very wide range of forms from bandh to hartal to gherao to yatra to roko to fast and to a variety of other forms. Why do they take place so frequently, in so many forms, and in so many parts of the country? The possible answers we will examine in this paper are several: It is due to the historical/cultural tradition of Gandhi’s satyagraha. It is due to the inability of the less powerful to engage fruitfully in verbal debate. It is an effective means of attracting attention to a position held by a minority of the population. It is an effective means by which politicians may demonstrate their support among the population. The basis for the assessment of these answers is data concerning political protest collected over several years from leading newspapers and journals in India, from Indian scholars and politicians during the author’s research and teaching in the states of Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal, and from parliamentary records related to events in the Lok Sabha.
The Institutionalization of Political Party Systems in Southeast Asia (Indonesia, Thailand, and the Philippines)
Andreas Ufen, Institute of Asian Affairs
Referring to theories on the institutionalization of party systems, this paper tries to analyze recent political developments in Indonesia, Thailand, and the Philippines. More institutionalized systems, according to Mainwaring and Torcal, are more stable, that is patterns of party competition manifest regularly. Parties have strong roots in society and the linkage voter-party is closer. Political actors see parties as a legitimate, necessary part of democratic politics, and party organizations are not dependent on charismatic leaders. According to that definition there are two party system types in Southeast Asia: a rather fluid, unstable type epitomized by Thailand and the Philippines, and a system like that in Indonesian with rather solid structures.
The comparison is a means to distinguish different degrees of institutionalization and to unfold hypotheses concerning the causes of fluidity and stability. Most important factors, that is the election and governance type, the elite structure, and the relation between state and organized civil society will be discussed. The main thesis is that only in Indonesia social cleavages (à la Lipset/Rokkan) were effectively translated into the party system. The reasons are: the early politicization during the fight against colonialism, the vulnerability of the national bourgeoisie and of the state elites (at least until 1966/67), the centralization of power and weakening of regional and local elites, and the enduring strength of major Muslim organizations.
A Theory of Civilian Control of the Military in India: 1947-2006
Ayesha Ray, University of Texas, Austin
This paper deals with understanding the relationship between civilians and the military in India and how changes in the relationship since 1947 to the present day have influenced the extent of civilian control over the military. More specifically, I examine whether or not the Indian military has influenced civilian capacity to make decisions. Through extensive interviews with high ranking military and civilian personnel, I argue that the Indian military has been able to influence civilian capacity to make decisions in certain key issue-areas. However, overall civilian control in India remains complete. The significance of this paper lies in understanding how a change in the relationship between statesman and soldier signifies a blurring of the division of labor between civilians and the military. It is a situation where it becomes unclear whether the political leadership is actually making policy (as it should) or whether the military is shaping policy and the political leaders are merely implementing such policy. Even if the military does not take the final decision on policy matters but has the capacity to influence civilian decisions, then the military’s role has expanded much beyond its war-fighting functions. I also argue that specific developments such as the 1962 Sino Indian Conflict, the development of nuclear weapons, the Kargil war of 1999, Operation Parakram in 2002, the Siachen issue, and the involvement of the Indian army in combating insurgency have significantly influenced the relationship between civilians and the military in India. Moreover, under specific conditions such as the absence of a coherent military doctrine, the presence of information asymmetries and the lack of institutional channels, one is more likely to expect a blurring in the division of labor between the two domains. The framework I propose provides an answer to two important problems that might emerge in the future; problems that are most likely to occur in the event of a war or crisis. First, the presence of a coherent military strategy to fight a nuclear adversary prior to the onset of a war or crisis can significantly strengthen civilian capacity to make decisions instead of undermining it. Second, the sharing of information between civilians and the military over matters of strategy can help reduce instances of military insubordination in future wars or crisis. Therefore, the overall importance of the framework is its ability to identify possible deviations to civilian control during both war time and peace time.The paper has a concluding section which compares the Indian experience of civilian control to the American experience of civilian control.