The Covenant Connection Reexamined: The Nexus between Religions and Federalism in Asia
| DOI | 10.1177/0032321717731660 |
| Author | Baogang He,Laura Allison-Reumann,Michael Breen |
| Published date | 01 August 2018 |
| Date | 01 August 2018 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321717731660
Political Studies
2018, Vol. 66(3) 752 –770
© The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0032321717731660
journals.sagepub.com/home/psx
The Covenant Connection
Reexamined: The Nexus
between Religions and
Federalism in Asia
Baogang He1, Laura Allison-Reumann2
and Michael Breen2
Abstract
The covenant connection thesis forms an important basis from which to understand the religious
source of federalism. Yet with its Judeo-Christian roots, to what extent does it apply to Asian
countries that have different religious traditions? In this article, we explore whether the covenant
connection thesis is relevant to Asian federalism in the context of Muslim-, Hindu-, and Buddhist-
majority countries. We find that while the presence or absence of a covenantal tradition within a
religion can partially explain acceptance of, or resistance to, federalism, there are other religious
features that also play a role. These include the extent to which traditional religious organizations
are internally centralized, the extent to which religion and state governance are intertwined or
separate from each other, and the extent to which a religion that constitutes the core national
identity is threatened by other religions that are or may be empowered by federal arrangements.
Keywords
comparative federalism, covenant connection, religious traditions, federalism in Asia, religious
perspective on federalism
Accepted: 23 August 2017
Introduction
In Asia, the correlations between religions and federalism are puzzling and reveal some
striking patterns. Among secular states and societies with Confucian traditions, like
China, the two Koreas, Vietnam, and Singapore, none have federalism. No Buddhist-
majority country has federated, although Myanmar and Sri Lanka have quasi-federal sys-
tems. In contrast, both Hindu-majority countries (India and Nepal) have accepted
1School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia
2Public Policy and Global Affairs, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore
Corresponding author:
Baogang He, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood,
VIC 3125, Australia.
Email: baogang.he@deakin.edu.au
731660PSX0010.1177/0032321717731660Political StudiesHe et al.
research-article2017
Article
He et al. 753
federalism as an appropriate means of accommodating diversity. Two Muslim-majority
countries—Malaysia and Pakistan—established federalism, although in a more central-
ized and authoritarian manner. Christian-majority countries with covenantal traditions,
like the Philippines, East Timor, and Papua New Guinea, have unitary political systems,
although Christianity has been a relatively recent import.
Why are there such differences among Buddhist-, Muslim-, and Hindu-majority coun-
tries with regard to federalism in Asia? Obviously there are many historical, geo-political,
economic, social, and cultural factors that contribute to these differences. In this article,
we focus on religious factors to account for these. We first revisit the covenant connection
thesis in the Western federalism scholarship. From a religious perspective, the idea of a
covenant encapsulates the idea that relationships between God and humans are under-
pinned by morally sustained mutual promises and obligations (Elazar, 2000). Politically,
a covenant refers to the process of creating communities and civil societies through com-
pacts and agreements to establish durable partnerships (Elazar, 2000). The covenant con-
nection’s core idea is that federalism is rooted in Judeo-Christian covenantal traditions
(see, for example, Elazar’s four volume study, The Covenant Tradition in Politics),
whereby covenantal partnerships create a situation in which “each partner can at least
recognize the justice of the other’s claims and then negotiate these claims through mutu-
ally agreeable structures designed to facilitate cooperative activity” (Elazar, 2000: 5).
Inspired by this simple but powerful intellectual explanation, we attempt to discover
whether the covenant connection thesis extends beyond Christianity in the context of
Asian federalism. We analyze how the presence or absence of a covenantal connection
within Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism affects the establishment and development of
federalism in Asia. Our finding is that the covenant connection thesis can partially explain
why federalism has taken root in Muslim-majority countries, and it helps elucidate why
federalism has not been established within Buddhist-majority countries, where there are
no covenantal traditions. However, the covenant connection thesis cannot explain why
Hinduism, which also has no covenantal tradition, has been associated with the develop-
ment of federalism in India and its emergence in Nepal. It cannot explain why Christian-
majority countries in Asia have unitary political systems. Clearly, there is a limit to the
covenant connection thesis even within Christianity.
We thus contend that the covenant connection thesis merely focuses on the ideational
and philosophical bases of federalism, and overlooks other aspects of religion that have
played various roles in influencing the development of federalism. We aim to broaden the
covenant connection thesis through identifying and examining several pertinent institu-
tional and social factors within religious traditions. They include the extent to which tra-
ditional religious organizations are internally centralized by themselves or state power,
the extent to which religion and state governance are intertwined or separate from each
other, and the extent to which a particular religion that constitutes the core national iden-
tity is perceived to be threatened by other religions that are or may be empowered by
federal arrangements. We therefore make and test the following hypotheses:
1. A decentralized administrative structure of a religion creates a favorable condition
for federalism. Otherwise, an administratively centralized religion is more likely
to lend its support to a unitary system.
2. Differentiation between a particular religion and a state or government creates a
favorable condition for federalism. In contrast, if a particular religion is closely
identified with a state or government, a federal polity is likely to be more
To continue reading
Request your trial