Ruling in place: Geography, legitimacy, and regime survival in Singapore and Taiwan.

摘要

This study explores the phenomenon of authoritarian regime durability and change in two advanced industrialized countries of East Asia---Singapore and Taiwan. Why has the regime in Singapore been able to survive while the one in Taiwan ended two decades ago? Does authoritarian rule mainly depend on coercion and/or material rewards? Are there alternative sources of regime legitimacy and stability? How does a country's political geography influence the way in which a regime maintains power? This work argues that a viable source of authoritarian regime legitimacy is the country's geo-idea , which derives from the place's physical characteristics, historical legacies, and the spatial identity of its people.;Singapore's small size, strategic location, lack of resources and historical experiences of international and regional influences have engendered a geo-idea of a small vulnerable ethnically different place situated within a hostile region. Consequently, the ruling People's Action Party legitimized and prescribed restrictive pre-political rules, arguing that any overt politicking based on race and/or religion would heighten past animosities and lingering tensions, and destroy the barely surviving state. Taiwan's small size and location near China and history of external powers' colonialisms and Chinese intermittent rule have given rise to at least two competing geo-ideas. Claiming that Taiwan was an integral part of China in which it still represented and would eventually return, the ruling Kuomintang enacted martial law to halt national elections and ban political challenges. Arguing that the island possessed a geo-identity separate from China, the opposition constantly challenged the KMT's idea and finally capitalized on the international de-recognition of the KMT's claims to push for democratic reform and an end to authoritarian rule.;The study highlights the importance of a state's geography not only in its defense or geopolitics, but also in national policies, including identity construction and political domination. In legitimizing their rule, regimes can draw on its spatial surroundings and characteristics, the sort of history it has experienced, and the perception and fears of its people. The relative acceptance of the regime's claims validates its political order, and vice versa.