SAJC H2 History Paper 2 2024 Lecture 1 Approaches to Governance SEA Background Knowledge

Paper 2: Developments in Southeast Asia (Independence – 2000) Theme I: Forming Nation-States- Establishing Political Structures and Legitimacy 1 SAJC/History Department/SEA/JC1/Theme 1: Forming Nation-States/Lt1/2023/ INTERNAL CIRCULATION ONLY Lecture 1: Pre-independent Southeast Asia SAJC History Unit, 2023 1. Making sense of the syllabus for our learning 2. [Background knowledge] When and how SEA become colonised? 3. [Background knowledge] The development of nationalism 4. [Background knowledge] Impact of Japanese Occupation on development of nationalism in SEA

Paper 2: Developments in Southeast Asia (Independence – 2000) Theme I: Forming Nation-States- Establishing Political Structures and Legitimacy 2 SAJC/History Department/SEA/JC1/Theme 1: Forming Nation-States/Lt1/2023/ INTERNAL CIRCULATION ONLY Syllabus Overview In this theme, students will study how Southeast Asian countries formed nation-states after World War Two. For most countries, this was an immediate and pressing task following decolonisation. The process of forming nation-states was characterised by different groups competing to shape political developments, including political parties, the military and traditional institutions. These groups came to political dominance at different points, which was reflected in the formation of different forms of government underpinned by different political ideologies. Efforts to form states were closely associated with the task of building nations to unite the different ethnic groups that lived within the territorial boundaries of the state – a legacy of colonial rule. National unity was an important objective for Southeast Asian governments to create social cohesion and a common identity for all who lived within the state. The experiences and outcomes of governments’ efforts in forming nation-states were shaped by interactions between local factors, and by international developments, in particular the Cold War. Syllabus Content Establishing Political Structures and Legitimacy • Democratic and authoritarian features of different forms of government established over time • Factors for the establishment of different forms of government: decolonisation experience, role of local political elites and masses, Cold War developments • Consolidation of power - Role of government leaders - Sources of power and legitimacy: constitutional processes and elections, the military, traditional institutions (religion and monarchy), government performance - Political challenges and popular opposition - Cold War developments Learning Outcomes (from the Examination Syllabus) Students are to • evaluate the factors that shaped the establishment of different forms of government across Southeast Asia over time; • evaluate the outcomes of Southeast Asian governments in consolidating power in different contexts and over time.

Paper 2: Developments in Southeast Asia (Independence – 2000) Theme I: Forming Nation-States- Establishing Political Structures and Legitimacy 3 SAJC/History Department/SEA/JC1/Theme 1: Forming Nation-States/Lt1/2023/ INTERNAL CIRCULATION ONLY 1. Making sense of the syllabus for our learning • The syllabus document informs us that an exploration of this topic on ‘Forming Nation-States’ needs to extend beyond acquiring information blindly for the sake of regurgitating it in an examination. Instead, as we read through the notes, we should consciously bear in mind that we are investigating into at least two phenomena: Syllabus learning outcome Question to bear in mind Evaluate the factors that shaped the establishment of different forms of government across Southeast Asia over time Why did different forms of government emerge in Southeast Asia over time? Evaluate the outcomes of Southeast Asian governments in consolidating power in different contexts and over time Why were some forms of government more effective in consolidating power in Southeast Asian countries over time? • It is important to note that the two learning outcomes and the accompanying questions are related. • First, it is necessary to understand that at different junctures in Southeast Asia’s history, different forms of government were established - with some lasting longer than others. • Second, if some forms of government failed to remain in place for the entire time frame of our examination (independence-2000), it becomes necessary to ask then why some forms of government lasted longer than others • We can begin to start unravelling parts of this puzzle as we delve deep into the colonial past of Southeast Asia and try to understand how this period impacted the decisions made by post -independence Southeast Asian governments.

Paper 2: Developments in Southeast Asia (Independence – 2000) Theme I: Forming Nation-States- Establishing Political Structures and Legitimacy 4 SAJC/History Department/SEA/JC1/Theme 1: Forming Nation-States/Lt1/2023/ INTERNAL CIRCULATION ONLY 2. [Background knowledge] When and how SE A become colonised? 2.1 Colonial SEA (1900-1942) • British colonies: Burma, Malaya + Straits Settlements [Penang, Malacca and Singapore], Brunei. • French colonies: Laos + Cambodia + Vietnam = French Indochina. • Dutch colonies : the sprawling span of i slands called Dutch East Indies [Indonesia]. • American colony: The Philippines 2.2 British Colonies • British rule in Burma lasted from 1824 to 1948, from the Anglo -Burmese Wars through the creation of Burma as a province of British India in 1897 to the establishment of an independently administered colony in 1937, and finally independence in 1948. • British Malaya composed of the Straits Settlements (1826), the Federated Malay States (1895), Unfederated Malay States (1914). Singapore was one of the three Straits Settlements, which was ruled directly by the British, unlike the Federated Malay States (FMS) and the Unfederated Malay States (UFMS)1. 1 The other Straits Settlements were Malacca and Penang.

Paper 2: Developments in Southeast Asia (Independence – 2000) Theme I: Forming Nation-States- Establishing Political Structures and Legitimacy 5 SAJC/History Department/SEA/JC1/Theme 1: Forming Nation-States/Lt1/2023/ INTERNAL CIRCULATION ONLY • Comparison between Burma and Malaya: o In Malaya, the British generally adhered to the more moral definition of colonialism as “the white man’s burden” 2 to help ‘civilise’ other peoples. Malaya was generally valued as an economic asset to the British, thus the British authorities in Malaya generally upheld the indigenous status of the Malays, respected local and non -Western cultures and maintained racial harmony among the myriad local communities in Malaya and Singapore, and provided reasonable standards of livi ng and welfare for the locals, all calculated to maintain British rule in Malaya. A prosperous and stable colonial society was created, so much so that anticolonial, nationalist movements were particularly weak in Malaya before WW2. o However, in Burma, the British had no original intent to colonise it: British had no economic reasons to interest them in it, and only conquered it in the 19th century in order to protect the British colony of India from Burmese expansionism under the aggressive Konbaung dynasty. Thus the British in Burma were far more exploitative and more ruthless in their divide -and-rule treatment of the various Burmese ethnic groups than the British were in Malaya. British rule in Burma British Malaya Acquired through annexation and conquest Acquired through treaty negotiations with either the Malay Sultans, the Thai monarch and other colonial powers like the Dutch Burma was under Direct Rule and was even administered directly as a province of India, which angered Burmese nationalists who resented With the exception of the Straits Se