Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T04:41:14.941Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Emergence of the Asian System of Powers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

A. W. Stargardt
A. W. Stargardt
Affiliation:
Project on Asian Diplomatic History, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The ‘downward sweep’ of Japan after Pearl Harbor has been widely noted for its long-term effects in Southeast Asia. The rule of the established colonial masters was shattered, and those failing to escape disappeared into the camps of the Kempeitai. In Burma and Java, in particular, Japanese rule promoted local organizations, local administratiors, the indigenous language and, in Burma, a ‘national’ government and a ‘national’ army, under Japanese supervision: the one thing Japan did not bring was freedom and independence. Yet the greatly-increased social mobility and political, military and administrative experience had long-term consequences: none of the post-war attempts at colonial restoration proved viable.

Type
Articles
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , July 1989 , pp. 561 - 595
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

The article is revised from a seminar paper given to the Asian Studies Centre, St Antony's College, Oxford, in May 1986.Google Scholar

1 Asian Relations Organization, Asian Relations; being Report of the Proceedings and Documentation of the First Asian Relations Conference New Delhi, March-April, 1947 (Asian Relations Organization, New Delhi, 1948), [ARC], p. 2.Google Scholar

2 ARC, p. 5.Google Scholar

3 Run by Krishna Menon.

4 ARC, p. 25.Google Scholar

5 ARC, p. 21.Google Scholar

6 ARC, p. 23.Google Scholar

7 ARC, p. 26.Google Scholar

8 In George, McTurnan Kahin, The Asian-African Conference Bandung, Indonesia, April 1955 (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1956), p. 75.Google Scholar

9 Taylor, A. M., Indonesian Independence and the United Nations (Stevens, London, 1960), pp. 66ff and 468ff.Google Scholar

10 See, Ruth, T. McVey, The Soviet View of the Indonesian Revolution; a study of the Russian attitude towards Asian nationalism; (Interim Report Series, Modern Indonesia Project, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., 1957), p. 70.Google Scholar This ‘Interim Report’ has weathered well for thirty years; see also, Herbert, Feith, The Decline of Constituational Democracy in Indonesia (Cornell University press, Ithaca, 1962), p. 11.Google Scholar

11 U.N. Good Offices Committee Report, 21/12/47 in Security Council Document S/1138; see also, Taylor, , Indonesian Independence, p. 166.Google Scholar

12 Afghanistan, Australia, Burma, Ceylon, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen.

13 Text of the Resolution adopted on 22 January 1949,. by the Conference on Indonesia held in New Delhi; UN Document S/1222.Google Scholar

14 Ellen, J. Hammer, The Struggle for Indochina, 1940–1955 (Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif., 1966), p. 248. This edition includes chapter 13, originally published as The Struggle for Indochina Continues.Google Scholar

15 Admiral, Decaux, A La Barre de l'Indochine: Histoire de mon Gouvernment Général (1940/1945) (Paris, 1949)Google Scholar, also quoted in Hammer, The Struggle, p. 32.Google Scholar

16 Devillers, , Histoire du Viêt-Nam de 1940 à 1952 (Seuil, Paris, 1952), p. 85.Google Scholar

17 Hammer, , The Struggle, p. 32.Google Scholar

18 ibid., pp. 32–3.

19 Devillers, , Histoire du Viêt-Nam, p. 158.Google Scholar

20 Field Marshal The Viscount Slim, Defeat into Victory (Cassell, London, 1956), p. 440.Google Scholar

21 Nehru on the Air Services Agreement with France, 13 January 1947, seeGoogle ScholarGopal, S., General Editor, Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru, Second Series, vol. I (Jawaharlal Nehru Foundation, New Delhi, 1984), pp. 564–5.Google Scholar

22 The Warsaw Pact came into existence only in May 1955.Google Scholar

23 Anthony, Eden, Full Circle: the memoirs of Sir Anthony Eden K.G., P.C., M.C. (Cassel, London, 1960), p. 89.Google Scholar

24 Randle, R. F., Geneva 1954; the Settlement of the Indochinese war (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1969), Part II, ch. 9.Google Scholar See also Eden, , Full Circle, p. 118: ‘We made no real progress over Korea, but these meetings and their preparation made heavy demands upon our [Eden's and Molotov's] strength and time’;Google Scholar and James, Cable, The Geneva Conference of 1954 on Indochina (Macmillan, Basingstoke, 1986).Google Scholar

25 India, House of the People, Parliamentary Debates, IV, ii, 24 April 1954, cols 5581–2.Google Scholar

26 SarDesai, D. R., Indian Foreign Policy in Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam 1947–1964 (University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1968), p. 42.Google Scholar

27 FO371 112070 and 112071, in Cable, Geneva Conference, p. 94.Google Scholar

28 ‘… do everything in [your] power to bring the Conference to an end as rapidly as possible’ Eisenhower to Bedell Smith, in Eden, , Full Circle, p. 128.Google Scholar

29 ibid., p. 129.

30 Based on two minutes of the French Delegation at Geneva, in the Archives of the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as quoted in François, Joyaux, La Chine et le règlement du premier conflit d'Indochine (Genève 1954) (Publications de la Sorbonne, Paris, 1979), pp. 230–1 (my translation).Google Scholar

31 France, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Conférence de Genève sur l'Indochine (8 mai–21 juillet 1954).Google ScholarProcès-verbaux des Séances, Propositions, Documents finaux (Imprimerie Nationale (not public), Paris, 1955), p. 302;Google Scholar quoted in Joyaux, , La Chine, p. 228 (my translation).Google Scholar

32 Joyaux, , La Chine, p. 240 (my translation).Google Scholar The original reads: ‘Le premier ministre chinois avait également affirmé qu'il poussait la délégation de “la République démocratique du Viêt-Nam à se rapprocher non seulement de la France, mais aussi du Viêt-Nam de Bao Dai”. Cette dernière remarque était, quant à elle, étonnement nouvelle.’ Unfortunately, there is no specific attribution despite the quotation marks, in this otherwise very carefully documented and thoughtful work, unless we are to subsume it under a previous attribution to Joyaux's interview with Mendès-France, M., on 3 July 1975.Google Scholar

33 ‘Agreement on Trade and Intercourse between the Tibet Region of China and India, 1954’; Foreign Policy of India; Texts of Documents, 1947–64 (Lok Sabha Secretariat, New Delhi, 1966), pp. 198ff.Google Scholar

34 ‘Panchasheel represents the pronunciation more correctly [than] … Panch Shila’ Nehru to Fifield, in Fifield, R. H., The Diplomacy of Southeast Asia, 1945–1958 (Harper, New York, 1958), pp. 510–11.Google Scholar

35 Poplai, , The Temper of Peace: select documents 1954–5 (Indian Council of World Affairs, New Delhi, 1955), p. 10.Google Scholar

36 ibid., p. 11.

37 Ibid., pp. 11–12.

38 Ibid., pp. 13–14.

39 Eden, , Full Circle, p. 142.Google Scholar

40 Joyaux, , La Chine, pp. 296–7Google Scholar: his interview with Ngo, Dinh Luyen, 2 February 1976. (My translation.)Google Scholar

41 Penders, C. L. M. (ed.), Milestones on my Journey: the memoirs of Ali Sastroamijoyo, Indonesian patriot and political leader (University of Queensland Press, St. Lucia, 1979), pp. 277–8.Google Scholar

42 DrRoeslan, Abdulgani, The Bandung Connection; the Asia-Africa Conference in Bandung in 1955; trs. by Molly, Bondan (Gunung Agung, Jakarta and Singapore, 1981), p. 15.Google Scholar

43 Ibid., p. 16.

44 cf.Feith, , Decline, pp. 331–41.Google Scholar

45 ibid., p. 387.

46 Abdulgani, , Bandung Connection, p. 16. Abdulgani was then Secretary-General of the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.Google Scholar

47 India, Lok Sabha Debates, pt. 2, 7th Session 1954, cols 3672–97 (29 September 1954).Google Scholar

48 cf.Gopal, S., Jawaharlal Nehru: a biography, vol. II, 1947–1956 (Cape, London, 1979), p. 232.Google Scholar

49 Abdulgani, , Bandung Connection, p. 31.Google Scholar

50 Ibid., p. 37.

51 A former Secretary of the Australian Department of External Affairs, Dr John Burton and the sinologist, C. P. Fitzgerald, of the Australian National University, attended as observers. For Menzies' attitude to Bandung, see Stargardt, A. W., Australia's Asian Policies: the history of a debate, 1839–1972 (Harrassowitz for The Institute of Asian Affairs in Hamburg, Wiesbaden, 1977), pp. 244–5.Google Scholar

52 India, Foreign Policy of India, p. 544.Google Scholar

53 The five Colombo powers and twenty-four invitees, in all twenty-nine: Afghanistan, Burma, Cambodia, Ceylon, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, the Gold Coast, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Jordan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, the Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Turkey, Democratic Republic of Vietnam, State of Vietnam, and Yemen.

54 For the text, see Kahin, , Asian–African Conference, pp. 39–51; and Abdulgani, Bandung Connection, pp. 169–88.Google Scholar

55 Kahin, , Asian–African Conference, pp. 28–9; Abdulgani, Bandung Connection, p. 151.Google Scholar

56 Abdulgani, , Bandung Connection, p. 154; Roeslan Abdulgani was then also Head of the Joint Secretariat of the Conference.Google Scholar

57 Kahin, , Asian–African Conference, pp. 19–20.Google Scholar

58 ibid., p. 57–8.

59 Williams, L. F. R., The State of Pakistan (Faber, London, 1962), p. 120.Google Scholar Williams claims that this information came to him from an ‘unimpeachable source’ and Gopal repeated it in his very careful Nehru biography. Gopal, Cf., Jawaharlal Nehru, pp. 242–3.Google Scholar

60 Nehru to Political Committee, 22/4/55: in Kahin, Asian–African Conference, p. 66.Google Scholar

61 Kahin, Asian–African Conference, p. 36.Google Scholar

62 Rothermund, D., Indien und die Sowjetunion (Tübingen, 1968), p. 26. The passage reads: ‘The main preoccupation of a striving China was to keep the Soviet Union as well as India reined in since, within the Communist camp, it contested the Soviet claims to hegemony and, in comparison with India, China had to show greater progress in the sense of its revolutionary self-awareness. The Indo-Soviet friendship was therefore especially embarrassing to China. China had to do all it could to break up this co-operation by pushing India onto the side of the West. At the same time, China could hope that a reactionary development in India would finally provoke a revolution there, that could only run its course according to the Chinese model. An Asia in the Maoist mould should put an end once and for all to Soviet claims to hegemony.’ (my translation.)Google Scholar