The politics of authoritarianism : the state and political soldiers in Burma, Indonesia, and Thailand

This thesis investigates the impact of military rule on the state and society by looking at three cases from the same geographical region -- Burma, Indonesia, and Thailand — that have experienced military intervention and military rule. The thesis is framed by a number of questions: Why does the military sometimes decide to stay on to run the state after it intervenes? What happens to the military, its leaders, and most importantly, the state and society when the military reorganizes the state into a military-authoritarian order? What are the political outcomes of military rule in terms of state autonomy? How can the political variations ~ the extent of military penetration into the state order ~ between military regimes be explained? This thesis has found that there are three vital factors influencing the military's decision, having intervened, to stay on to rule the country. The most important factor is the emergence of an extraordinary military strongman-ruler. The second, and related, factor is military unity ~ forged and maintained by the strongman-ruler and bound by the myth that the soldiers are the guardians and saviors of the state. The military supports the ruler and is in turn rewarded by him, and becomes a privileged class. Together they dominate and control other state and societal forces. In fact, while military-authoritarian states are highly autonomous from society, it is clear that the state is not well insulated from abuse by its own elites. The third factor is the extent to which the strongman-ruler is constrained by having to share power with an unimpeachable force (a person, ideal, or myth). This thesis has found that military rulers in Thailand have been constrained because of the person and the role of the monarch. This thesis has also found significant variations in military-authoritarian states. They range from a nearly pure praetorian example to a tentative quasidemocratic set up ~ resulting from historical circumstances combined with the vision, political will and astuteness of the strongman-ruler, his concern with his legacy, and the presence or not of an important consfraining force. The military has played a dominant role in politics in Burma and Indonesia since the 1960s; in Thailand, it has been in and out of power since the 1930s. It has become apparent from this research that, although the global democratization trend is hopeful, it is not so easy to get a politicized military to go back to the barracks to stay.Arts, Faculty ofPolitical Science, Department ofGraduat