Southeast Asia's New Nationalism: Causes and Significance

Abstract

This paper explains the post-Cold War surge of nationalism in Southeast Asia and discusses its significance for regional peace and cooperation. As argued, the growth of nationalism as a form of mass politics has different causes in each Southeast Asian context where it occurs, but at the regional level the phenomenon can be explained by three factors: the failure of earlier nationalist movements to fully deliver their promises; a shift in the international and regional order (the end of the Cold War and the rise of China); and a change in domestic order (political liberalisation and democratisation) that was also occurring across many countries in the region. While the main mission of the new nationalism is the defence of national territory, the movements have the unintended impact of bringing together national communities once divided by Cold War ideologies. The phenomenon also poses some serious risks to regional peace and cooperation.

Southeast Asia under Great-Power Competition: Public Opinion About Hedging in the Philippines

“…Coinciding with China's rise, several recent developments have made public opinion a major political force in foreign policy making in Southeast Asia. First, the post-Cold War era has seen the reemergence of nationalism in Asia as a result of an opening up of ideological space, lingering territorial disputes, and shifts in the regional power structure (Gries 2004; Lee 2007; Vu 2013). Compared with the earlier nationalist movements in the mid-twentieth century aimed at independence from colonial rule, the new nationalism has sought to assert national identity, exercise independent foreign policy, and defend national territories (Bui 2017; Cotillon 2017; Lee 2007; Machida 2017; Noor and Qistina 2017; Tønnesson 2016; Vu 2013).…”

“…First, the post-Cold War era has seen the reemergence of nationalism in Asia as a result of an opening up of ideological space, lingering territorial disputes, and shifts in the regional power structure (Gries 2004;Lee 2007;Vu 2013). Compared with the earlier nationalist movements in the mid-twentieth century aimed at independence from colonial rule, the new nationalism has sought to assert national identity, exercise independent foreign policy, and defend national territories (Bui 2017;Cotillon 2017;Lee 2007;Machida 2017;Noor and Qistina 2017;Tønnesson 2016;Vu 2013). Second, a wave of political liberalization and democratization in Asia during the period has expanded mass participation in politics (Laksmana 2017;Lee 2007;Murphy 2017;Syailendra 2017;Vu 2013).…”

“…Compared with the earlier nationalist movements in the mid-twentieth century aimed at independence from colonial rule, the new nationalism has sought to assert national identity, exercise independent foreign policy, and defend national territories (Bui 2017;Cotillon 2017;Lee 2007;Machida 2017;Noor and Qistina 2017;Tønnesson 2016;Vu 2013). Second, a wave of political liberalization and democratization in Asia during the period has expanded mass participation in politics (Laksmana 2017;Lee 2007;Murphy 2017;Syailendra 2017;Vu 2013). Finally, the advancement of communication technologies in the last two decades has made it easier for the public to access information about foreign affairs and more difficult for governments to insulate foreign policies from public scrutiny (Montiel and Dela Paz 2020;Montiel et al 2014;Murphy 2017;Noor and Qistina 2017).…”

“…But a focus on the logic of hedging from the governments' perspective overlooks an important question: how has the strategy been perceived by the publics in the region? While foreign policy making has traditionally been within the exclusive purview of government elites, the rise of nationalism in Asia since the end of the Cold War, combined with a wave of democratization in the region and the advancement of communication technologies, have brought mass participation into the foreign policy-making process (Heydarian 2017;Laksmana 2017;Lee 2007;Montiel and Dela Paz 2020;Montiel et al 2014;Tønnesson 2016;Vu 2013). In particular, the SCS territorial disputes have generated strong public reactions in countries such as the Philippines and Vietnam, which may put pressure on the governments to forge closer security ties with the United States to balance against China (Bui 2017;Machida 2017;Noor and Qistina 2017).…”

Nationalism and development in Asia

“…Similarly, popular nationalisms have forced the hand of the Vietnamese government, generated conflicts between Thailand and Cambodia, between Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore, among many others. Islamic nationalism in Indonesia and to a lesser extent in Malaysia, regional Muslim uprisings in Southern Thailand and the Philippines, and Buddhist nationalism in Myanmar have also stoked violence in the ASEAN region just as it has begun to gain some traction as an economic formation (Vu 2013).…”