ACJC H2 HIST SEA Suggested approaches Essays

©2016 ACJC History Department  SEAH Prelim – Suggested Approaches  1 | Page     Southeast Asian History Preliminary Examinations (2016) – Suggested Approaches 2. Assess the claim that successful pre-1941 movements were mainly driven by Western ideologies. The claim suggests that movements which were successful either by making significant progress towards independence through a collaborative relationship with colonial masters, establishing broad based support as a critical foundation to the eventual aim of overthrowing unrelenting colonial masters or simply preserving their ethno-religious identities in an overwhelming climate of Westernization; were all driven by Western ideologies in the form of democracy or communism. While this is true as seen via movements which were sophisticated in their worldview and stratagem as well as the failures of petulantly traditional movements, this claim overlooks the fact that there were Western-driven movements which failed. In addition, movements which were successful in either garnering broad-based support or preserving the ethno-religious identity of particular segments of the society utilized the masses’ ethno-religious adherence as much as they were driven by modern i deologies. Furthermore, the question has limited success to the mere facilities of Western ideologies without acknowledging the important role played by the attitudes of colonial masters in determining the success of pre-1941 movements. (Supporting) Line of Argument 1: successful movements with sophisticated world view and stratagem Vietminh which utilised the Communist strategy to break into cell groups; dual function: infiltrate into the rural population (peasants) faster & to avoid the detection of the punitive French colonial masters (Supporting) Line of Argument 2: failure of traditional movements which refused to embrace Western ideologies and were crushed under Western firepower Case studies: Mat Hassan & the Kelantan Uprising (1915) & Saya San rebellion (1931) (Challenging) Line of Argument 3: failed to acknowledge that there were movements driven by Western ideologies which struggled or totally failed as the masses couldn’t identify with their alien concepts Indochina Communist Party (ICP) & Partai Komunis Indonesia (PKI) (Challenging) Line of Argument 4 : movements which was successful because they were driven by a combination of ethno-religious concepts & Western ideologies. Partai Nasional Indonesia (PNI) : Sukarno’s “Nationalism, Islam & Marxism” and the concept of Ratu Adil Dobama Aseayone: Mass support spearheaded by General Council of Burmese Associations & intellectual direction provided by students from Rangoon University (Challenging) Line of Argument 5: movements were successful not because they were driven by Western ideologies but because they were focused on preserving the ethno-religious identities of the majority of the population Muhammadiyah and YMBA

©2016 ACJC History Department  SEAH Prelim – Suggested Approaches  2 | Page     (Challenging) Line of Argument 6: Question underestimated the role played by the attitudes of colonial masters in determining the success of nationalist movements Permissive colonial masters: America & their attitude towards the Nacionalista Party Oppressive colonial masters: French towards Phan Chun Trinh 3. To what extent was decolonization in Southeast Asia halted due to the intervention of foreign powers? The question requires an analysis of the negative impact of the Japanese during the Japanese Occupation (1941-45) and the superpowers during the Cold War upon local nationalists’ attempts to attain independence from their colonial masters. This essay will assert that the Japanese presence in Southeast Asia did cause the decolonization process to come to a halt as they stunted promised independence for the Philippines. Furthermore, the US paranoia manifested through the Domino Theory during the Cold War period will delay the complete decolonization and subsequent unification of states like Vietnam and Laos. However, the question overlooked the role played by the Japanese who actually quickened the decolonization process via their unprecedented militarization of nationalist movements which provided the much needed leverage for nationalists against their returning colonial masters. In addition, US paranoia continued to significa ntly influence the pace of decolonization in Southeast Asia albeit by hastening the decolonization process by pressuring colonial masters to grant the elusive independence to anti-communist nationalists. Furthermore, the question’s emphasis on the intervention of foreign powers undermined the significant role oppressive colonial masters had in halting the process of decolonization in Southeast Asia. (Supporting) Line of Argument 1: Japanese presence halted the decolonization process in the Philippines (Supporting) Line of Argument 2: US intervention in Southeast Asia because of Domino Theory paranoia further significantly delayed progress towards independence Vietnam: supported by installing Ngo Dim Diem in South Vietnam; prolonged unification process (1954-1975) Laos: Pathet Laos came into power; US fear of communist threat led to their intervention up till 1975 (Challenging) Line of Argument 3: Japanese actually quickened the pace of decolonization Unprecedented militarization and politicization: PETA/BNA/PUTERA/kujeros for Malay elites (Challenging) Line of Argument 4: US intervention hastened decolonization Madiun Affair (1948) led to US pressurizing the Dutch to withdraw from Indonesia (Challenging) Line of Argument 5: the role of foreign powers significantly delayed/halted decolonization process French: dragged the war in Vietnam to almost ten years (1945-1953) Indonesia: despite Renville and Linggadjati Agreements, still imposed 2 Police Actions

©2016 ACJC History Department  SEAH Prelim – Suggested Approaches  3 | Page     4. ‘The Asian Financial Crisis proved the incompatibility of capitalism with Southeast Asian economies.’ How far is this assertion justified? The given assertion posits that the Asian Financial Crisis is a glowing evidence of how capitalism was ill-suited for Southeast Asian economies. Indeed, this claim is supported by how the devastation caused by the Asian Financial Crisis impacted only Southeast Asian states which embraced capitalism which highlighted how the much lauded economic miracle was a mere illusion and that the collapse of capitalist economies due to inherent structural deficiencies highlighted how Southeast Asian economies were not ready to deal with the repercussions brought about by a capitalist system. However, this assertion erroneously failed to point out that the downfall of Southeast Asian economies was not because of the incompatibility of capitalism with Southeast Asian economies but more to the malpractices and poor decisions made on the part of the governments which laid the foundations for the Asian Financial Crisis to occur. In addition, the ability of the Singapore and Malaysia governments to recover from the initial speculator attacks during the conflict despite the capitalist structure they both embraced further highlighted that capitalism was always compatible to Southeast Asian economies so as long as governments remain incorruptible and pragmatic. Furthermore, to merely use the Asian Financial Crisis as a basis to highlight the incompatibility of capitalism to Southeast Asian economies would be to grievously overlook how capitalism was pivotal to the rapid development of Southeast Asia economies which brought about unprecedented growth and prosperity in the said region. (Supporting) Line of Argument 1: the collapse of capitalist economies during AFC highlighted how Southeast Asian economies were not ready to deal with the repercussions brought about by a capitalist system hence proving its in