Bücher der Reihe Elements in Politics and Society in Southeast Asia

Explores why ASEAN has endured and why members, many of whom remain comparatively weak and poor, continue to invest in the regional project. Argues that ASEAN has and continues to serve state interest through the creation of a shared ritual and symbolic framework.

Explores the modes by which rulers have exercised power in Timor-Leste. Contrasts coercion under colonial rule and consent expressed through the 1999 referendum on independence. Since the restoration of independence, politics in Timor-Leste are understood in terms of economic constraints, and latterly a ruling strategy based on inducements.

Argues that after twenty years of democratization, Indonesia has performed admirably. Focuses on Indonesia's political regime, political economy, and identity-based mobilizations since democratization in 1998.

Reviews the historical origins, contemporary patterns, and emerging changes in civil-military relations in Southeast Asia. It analyzes military roles in state- and nation-building, political domination, revolutions and regime transitions, and military entrepreneurship.

Explores nation building and international relations in the small multicultural nation state and cosmopolitan global city of contemporary Singapore. Examines the exercise of smart power, or the ability to strategically combine soft and hard power resources.

Focuses on the transformation of the Vietnamese state as it transitioned away from a centrally planned socialist regime. It examines the drivers of socialist-regime change, the nature of the emergent state, and the basis of regime legitimacy in Vietnam.

Argues that following the 1993 United Nations intervention to promote democracy, the Cambodian People's Party (CPP) perpetuated a patronage state. They maintained electoral authoritarianism, but saw increased political awareness among the public. This Element explores Cambodia's return to authoritarianism, made possible in part by China's pivot to Cambodia.

Explores issues of global relevance around journalism's relationship with political power using Southeast Asian states. Argues that development of free, independent, and plural media has been complicated by commercialisation, the Internet, and identity-based politics. These open up political space and pluralise discourse, but do not necessarily produce change.

Conceiving of populism as the charismatic mobilization of a mass movement in pursuit of political power, this Element theorizes that populists thrive where ties between voters and either bureaucratic or clientelistic parties do not exist or have decayed. This is because populists' ability to mobilize electoral support directly is made much more likely by voters not being deeply embedded in existing party networks. This model is used to explain the prevalence of populism across the major states in post-authoritarian Southeast Asia: the Philippines, Indonesia, and Thailand. It extracts lessons from these Southeast Asian cases for the study of populism.

In 2016, Freedom House recorded the eleventh consecutive year of declining democratic freedoms, adding material to the growing political science literature on a global democratic recession. Southeast Asia is no exception in this regard. During the last decade, one previously democratic country experienced a full democratic reversal (Thailand), another has seen the rise of a populist with openly neo-authoritarian tendencies (the Philippines) and yet another has begun a slow but perceptible process of democratic deconsolidation (Indonesia). At the same time, semi-authoritarian regimes such as Singapore and Malaysia have defied predictions of a possible democratic trajectory and the fully authoritarian regimes of Vietnam, Laos and Brunei have firmly held on to power. Initially hopeful democratic transitions, finally, have ended either in autocracy (Cambodia) or in uncertainty (Myanmar). What explains this failure of democratization efforts in Southeast Asia? Why have autocracies proved so resistant to democratic opening? And what can the Southeast Asian experience tell us about the drivers of the global democratic recession.

Urbanization as a process is rife with inequality, in Southeast Asia as anywhere else, but resistance and contestation persist on the ground. In this element, the author sets out to achieve three goals: 1) to examine the political nature of urban development; 2) to scrutinize the implications of power inequality in urban development discussions; and 3) to highlight topical and methodological contributions to urban studies from Southeast Asia. The key to a robust understanding is groundedness: knowledge about the everyday realities of urban life that are hard to see on the surface but dominate how the city functions, with particular attention to human agency and the political life of marginalized groups. Ignoring politics in research on urbanization essentially perpetuates the power inequities in urban development; this element thus focuses not just on Southeast Asian cities and urbanization per se, but also on critical perspectives on patterns and processes in their development.