In the sixty years since the Japanese occupation, Southeast Asia has achieved impressive economic growth, stability, and developed a strong regional identity. Its record on democracy is less impressive. Of the eleven countries in the region, only one, Indonesia, is currently listed in the “free” categorization established by Freedom House.That Indonesia is listed as “free” is quite an achievement, since for the overwhelming majority of years since 1945 it has been an authoritarian regime, with over thirty-two years under the one-man rule of Soeharto. Why after sixty years since the horrors of the Japanese occupation have so few countries in the region become open democratic regimes? The question is particularly puzzling, since the region as a whole stands out for its achievements in development. Admittedly with diversity and continued inequality, Southeast Asia has been heralded as a model for the developing world to a much greater degree than Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East, even after the debilitating 1997 Asian financial crisis. Development has traditionally been seen to set conditions for greater democracy, not only in the West, but also in Latin America; rising incomes and the emergence of a middle class have seen to put pressure both for greater representation and greater democratic governance. Southeast Asia does not fit this mould. Many countries in the region have robust middle classes and comparatively high per capita incomes. Singapore in particular stands out as the most developed country in the region and is arguably among the least democratic. Brunei follows suit. Why then has Southeast Asia pursued a different path, the path of development without democracy?

This chapter attempts to answer this question. It examines the patterns of regime change in Southeast Asia, focusing on the record in the region since 1945. In the process, the chapter explores the relationships among regime change, democracy, and development. The findings suggest that the answer is not as simple as the question. Southeast Asia does have a record of democracy, although not a robust and region-wide one. There were three important periods of regime change in the region as a whole: (1) decolonialization, (2) authoritarian rule, and (3) disparate democratization. These periods are inconsistent temporally and uneven across the region, yet capture distinct periods of democratization or lack thereof in Southeast Asia.