Written by Emilie Sterna
10 July 2025
Over the past decade, many countries in Asia have become more authoritarian, with governments taking more control and allowing less freedom for people and the media. From Southeast Asia to Central Asia, strong leaders have gained more power as well as the grip of China’s one-party system has tightened. Once seen as a region of democratic promise, especially after the “Asian Spring” in the late 20th century, Asia is facing a shift towards autocratic governance. In countries like Myanmar, the military has overthrown democratically elected leaders, while in the Philippines and Thailand, populist leaders have weakened the systems that are supposed to limit their power. Even in more stable democracies such as India and Indonesia, pressures from corruption and social divisions threaten to erode democratic norms. This turning point towards authoritarianism is fuelled by both internal crises and external influences, notably the authoritarian models promoted by China and Russia. As a result, civil society and independent media are increasingly marginalised, raising serious concerns about the future of freedoms and human rights in the region. This article aims to explore the causes and possible futures of rising authoritarianism in Asia.
The Drivers of Authoritarianism in Asia
The drivers of authoritarianism in Asia are a combination of domestic challenges and international influences. Domestically, many Asian countries have experienced economic crises, persistent inequality, and social unrest, which have undermined public confidence in democratic institutions. In response, ruling elites have often centralised power, weakened checks and balances, and justify these actions as necessary for stability and economic progress. Populist leaders have capitalised on public discontent, using nationalist, religious, or anti-elite rhetoric to build support. Meanwhile, middle classes in some countries have backed strongman rule out of fear of instability or loss of status. The failure of liberal democracy to deliver tangible improvements in living standards has further fuelled nostalgia for more authoritarian forms of governance. For instance, in the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, a populist leader elected in 2016, rose to power by capitalising on public anger over crime and corruption. In Thailand, middle-class-backed elites lost support after policies increased inequality, leading to the rise of populist Thaksin Shinawatra. Fearing his popularity, traditional elites and the middle class supported a military putsch that removed him and 1
his sister Yingluck from power. In Cambodia, the main opposition party was dissolved in 2017 after its leader’s arrest, ending recent democratic gains and forcing many leaders into exile or silence. Furthermore, ethnic and religious tensions are also manipulated by governments to justify repressive measures, as seen in Myanmar, where the military has used fears of ethnic conflict to maintain strict control. Domestic dynamics can lead to the resurgence of authoritarianism, notably populist authoritarianism, social polarisation by dividing the population, marking security concerns in many Asian countries. These domestic factors thus create fertile ground for the emergence or return of authoritarian leaders, who often position themselves as the solution to the nation’s most pressing problems.
In addition, international influences have played a significant role in reinforcing authoritarian trends across Asia. The economic success of China and its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) have not only provided material support but also served as a model for authoritarian governance, especially in countries like Cambodia and Myanmar. Leaders in these states often use China as proof that democracy is not necessary for rapid development. Chinese investment has also often strengthened elite patronage networks and encouraged autocrats to disregard international criticism, as observed in countries like Cambodia and the Philippines. Meanwhile, Russia has promoted authoritarian norms in Central Asia through political, security, and economic linkages. Moreover, regional security concerns, such as terrorism, are also frequently used to legitimise authoritarian policies throughout Southeast Asia. These external influences interact with domestic vulnerabilities, weakening institutions and increasing elite fragmentation, thus creating an environment where authoritarianism is often seen as a viable alternative to the uncertainties of democracy. Thereby, authoritarianism in Asia is caused by a mix of internal problems, actions by powerful leaders, and support from strong countries like China and Russia, with each country’s situation shaped by its own history and social context.
The Future of Authoritarianism in Asia
Recently, Asia has been marked by significant political and social events in 2024, such as escalating China–U.S. tensions, major elections in India and Indonesia, leadership transitions, political unrest and crises. Despite Asia’s economic dynamism, there is a growing sense of disillusionment with traditional democratic systems in places like Japan and South Korea. For instance, South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol declared martial law and called for the army last December. Asia has also been interconnected with global crises, as North Korea sent military troops to support Russia in the war with Ukraine, strengthening the China–Russia–North Korea axis. In 2024 Asia has seen a wave of political upheaval and reform. Singapore faced a planned transition from Lee Hsien Loong to Lawrence Wong, exemplifying the city-state’s focus on stability under the long-ruling People’s Action Party. Vietnamese governance remains authoritarian, with political purges and anti-corruption campaigns reshaping the Communist Party. Pakistan’s military maintains its grip on power despite popular support for Imran Khan,. In India, Narendra Modi’s BJP retained power but now depends on coalition partners, while continuing to limit freedoms and deepen social divisions through populist policies. Meanwhile, Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party secured a peaceful re-election under William Lai, maintaining high cross-strait tensions amid persistent Chinese pressure and military threats. Mongolia upheld democratic norms with closely contested parliamentary elections, while Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party lost its majority due to corruption scandals, sparking political uncertainty and debate over defence policy.
The future of authoritarianism in Asia remains precarious, shaped by intersecting pressures from social and economic instability, resilient democratic resistance, and the complex involvement of international actors. In 2025, several key themes are set to dominate the region’s trajectory. The new Republican administration in the United States is expected to recalibrate its approach to China and Asian allies, potentially reshaping regional alignments and intensifying strategic competition. Economic resilience continues to define Asia, as the region maintains robust growth and consolidates its status as a global innovation hub. However, the Trump administration and neo
populist U.S. policies may complicate relationships with traditional allies such as Japan and South Korea, as well as with Southeast Asian partners worried about being drawn into the growing U.S.- China rivalry. Meanwhile, India is increasingly positioned as a counterweight to China, and Taiwan’s strategic importance is underscored by its dominance in semiconductor manufacturing, making crucial partners for the United States and its allies. Despite the economic successes of some authoritarian regimes, sustainability challenges, including inequality, environmental degradation, and elite-driven development, are fuelling public discontent and testing the long-term viability of such models. Political instability often follows, as weakened institutions and economic shocks create cycles of authoritarian resurgence, particularly in South Asia, where fragile democracies are vulnerable to regression during crises. Finally, Asia’s dynamic political landscape, marked by shifting alliances, rising authoritarianism in some areas, and persistent democratic resilience in others, will continue to have significant implications for global security, economic trends, and technological advancement.
In conclusion, the rise of authoritarian regimes in Asia presents a complex challenge for both regional stability and global democracy. While these regimes may provide short-term stability, their long-term pose significant risks. The resilience of civil society and the actions of international actors will be crucial in determining whether Asia’s future is characterised by continued authoritarianism or a renewed push for democratic freedoms. Ultimately, the region’s future will depend on the balance between internal pressures and external influences, as well as the capacity of citizens and institutions to resist the shift towards autocracy.
References:
Afrimadona, and al. (2024, March 28). Authoritarian Nostalgia and Democratic Decline in Contemporary Indonesia. Sage. DOI:10.1177/18681034241252452
Casal Bértoa, F., and Lee, D. S. (2021, December 10). The future of democracy and rise of authoritarianism in Asia. East Asia Forum. https://eastasiaforum.org/2021/12/10/the-future-of democracy-and-rise-of-authoritarianism-in-asia/
Diamond, L. (2025, June 27). The status and prospects for democracy in Asia. East Asia Forum. https://eastasiaforum.org/2025/06/27/the-status-and-prospects-for-democracy-in-asia/
Docena, H. (2018). The rise of populist authoritarianisms in Asia: Challenges for peoples’ movements. Focus on the Global South. https://focusweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/ the_rise_of_populist_authoritarianisms_in_asia-nopictures.1.1.pdf
Péron-Doise, M. (2025, January 25). Political Developments in Asia in 2024: The Exhaustion of Democratic Systems and Values? IRIS. https://www.iris-france.org/en/evolutions-politiques-en-asie en-2024-lessoufflement-des-systemes-et-des-valeurs-democratiques/
Rancourt Duchesne, S. (2018). International factors and rising authoritarianism in Southeast Asia: China’s Belt and Road Initiative and the role of elite coherence in Malaysia and Indonesia. University of Ottawa. https://ruor.uottawa.ca/server/api/core/bitstreams/f985575e-1c9a-4fa7- a258-4b47a1e3d874/content
Schaffar, W. (2018). The social base of new authoritarianism in Southeast Asia: Class struggle and the imperial mode of living. Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 11(1), 141-148.