Theme 6: Post-war Internationalism and the End of Empire Flashcards
The inception of the UN
282 delegates from 51 countries attended meeting in San Francisco which led to drafting of UN charter
The form the UN would take was unclear from the start – the processes and agenda of the UN were products of serendipity
What does Sluga say about the inception of the UN?
‘curiously utopian moment’
How did the UN have elements of imperialism at its inception?
New organisations still expressed legacies of empire – Pearson showed the old imperial powers tried to defend colonialism at the UN
Peacekeeping missions – e.g. 1960, Congo – mission deteriorated to the point where the UN almost became a colonial power in its own right
UNESCO
UNESCO – founded by Julian Huxley (opposed to the notion of race – pushed for UNESCO document which declared race as a non-scientific category – BUT also defended the colour line by advocating against the employment of black people in UNESCO)
Nov 1946 – UNESCO first general conference
e.g. of UNESCO’s activities – ‘The History of Mankind’ from the stone age to the 20th century, deemphasising war, conflict and high politics
^ also attempted to break w Eurosceptic perspective
How does the history of the UN relate to a history of decolonisation?
Decolonisation of south Asia and the middle east – imperialism doesn’t end in 1946/7, goes into the 1960s but the trend began around this time
^ last large-scale decolonization – 1975, Portuguese colonies in Africa
How was the ability of the UN to act in high politics limited?
Ability of UN to act in high politics quickly limited by Cold War – world bank, IMF etc became instruments of the west, rather than global institutions
^ notions of world community quickly forgotten again
(technical agencies like UNESCO largely carried on with their work)
Summarised history of Indian independence
1919 – reaction of Indian Congress Party (after British colonial govt wanted to keep certain measures they had imposed in wartime), non-cooperation movement, tries to withdraw labour from the British and discourages the consumption of British products
1928 – Gandi gets congress to demand independence within a year or resistance would start again
Jan 1930 – start of civil disobedience movement (e.g. salt march)
^ although this movement failed to bring about independence, constructs idea of independence among wider Indian population
During WW2, the British negotiate w congress to get full support during the war, but were only willing to offer dominion status
After WW2, Attlee’s govt promised Indian independence – negotiated this transition
Increased influence of Muslim league – Muhammad Ali Jinnah began to call for partition (conceptualised Muslims as a separate nation)
^ ends up w creation of two states – India and Pakistan (east and west)
^ partition characterised by violence, mass migration and vast displacement of peoples – estimated that between half a million and one million people die as a consequence
Summarise the politics of the Middle East at this time
Territories of former Ottoman Empire had become mandates of the LoN after WW1 – Britan and France had significant control in these territories
1941 – Syria declared independence (recognised in 1944, French forces left in 1946)
After Zionist Congress in 1897, and through Balfour Dec and 1922 LoN mandate to Palestine – strong immigration of Jewish populations into Palestine
At start of century, Jews made up 5-10% of population
Reached around a third of population in 1947
In 1947 UN proposed partition plan, aimed at creation of two states – Zionist leaders accepted this, but Arabs rejected it, causing widespread violence
^ this the traditional narrative from Zionist historians
Summarise the beginnings of the Cold War
US concerned about USSR in later war years – but conflict was not inevitable
Fear of a plethora of left leaning governments in aftermath of decolonisation – US govt resolved to counteract spread of communism
Truman doctrine
1947 National Security act mandated major reorganisation of foreign policy establishment of US govt
^ created the CIA, which became highly influential in CW – e.g. overthrowing several national leaders
Containment policy – to stop further spread of communism (central in conflicts in Korea and Vietnam)
USSR attempted to blockade Berlin, in hopes that they would be able to take over West Berlin once it had been drained of resources (Berlin airlift – Soviets gave up and reopened access)
4th April 1949 – Washington Treaty created NATO, based on principle of collective security (Article 5)
^ West Germany admitted 1955 – USSR reacts by creating Warsaw Pact in 1955
Examples of how wars of decolonisation were drawn into the Cold War
1949 – communists established People’s Republic of China (led to US view that wars of decolonisation risked the spread of communism)
Vietnam war – when French withdrew, US scared of communist takeover
^ started as a struggle for independence, morphed into an arena of the cold war
How did the spirit of empire remain strong at the inception of the UN?
When UNDHR was drafted in 1947/8, European states explicitly tried to exclude residents of colonial territories from these human rights - spirit of empire still strong
Explain the concepts of utopia/dystopia
Concept of utopia is to serve as a critique of the current state, based on a belief in our capacity to solve social issues by identifying and addressing their root cause
Utopia connected to a notion of modernity
Linked to dystopia - e.g. Hitler’s invasion of Russia instigated by utopian visions
Dystopia = utopia that has gone wrong, or that benefits only one section of society
Does the founding of the UN represent utopia or dystopia?
Idea of ‘world community’ had died - permanent world peace became a mirage, despite it being one of the UN’s founding aims
Failure of these institutions = dystopia?
^ spirit of world community continued on, e.g. Bandung, Afro-Asian solidarity
How do the concepts of utopia and dystopia relate to the partition of India?
India - Gandhi and Jinnah’s competing utopias
^ guiding narrative of Congress largely developed by Gandhi - constructed an entire system of utopian thought, with a notion of the ideal state - shifted terms of engagement away from the colonisers
^ issue = focus on ancient Hinduism made it difficult to construct a state that would be largely secular in which Muslims could be considered equal
Jinnah’s construction of Pakistan tended to avoid utopian undertones - rather than a utopian ideal, it was a fear of the sovereignty of Hindus over religious minorities came to dominate the imaginations of Indian Muslims
How do the concepts of utopia and dystopia relate to Palestine?
The Zionist Utopia - the idea that Zionism is utopian in its way of thinking is not a new observation. Expulsion of more than half of Palestine’s Arab population as a product of this conception of utopia must show a dystopian mirror image of the Zionist utopian vision.
How did the partition of India and Pakistan present a challenge to the wider independence movement?
4th Geneva Convention 1949 forbade forcible population transfers as a crime against community. Impacted the way in which leaders of newly independent states saw their scope of possibility - questions of minorities and self-determination became pressing (would minorities be able to declare their own independence?)
^ newly independent states would not be allowed to change their borders - when African states became independent, if there was a language community, neither the border nor this community could be removed.
^ e.g. South Sudan initially unable to claim independence as they had historically been within Sudan’s borders
Symbolism of the Doomsday clock
Doomsday Clock - appeared in 1947 in Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (created as an urgent education programme about atomic weapons)
^ has become a countdown to nuclear destruction
Mutually Assured Destruction
Possibilities afforded by nuclear energy (but Chernobyl incident - more post-apocalyptic than dystopian)
The Colonial clause debate
- In 1950, Western colonial powers (Britain, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands) proposed a colonial clause to exclude colonial territories from the application of human rights covenants. They argued that such territories lacked the “civilization” necessary to implement human rights effectively, invoking a rationale rooted in the 19th-century “standard of civilization.”
- The clause became a flashpoint in debates at the UN, with Third World nations rejecting the argument as a continuation of imperialism disguised as cultural relativism. Afro-Asian delegates insisted that universal human rights must include all people, regardless of their developmental status.
Resistance to the colonial clause from third world nations
- Representatives from newly independent nations such as Egypt, Iraq, and Ethiopia vocally opposed the colonial clause:
- Mahmoud Azmi Bey of Egypt compared the clause to Nazi ideologies that ranked humans into hierarchies of worth.
- Bedia Afnan of Iraq argued that the inherent nature of human rights, as acknowledged in the UDHR, should be applicable to all people, regardless of their societal “evolution.”
- Ethiopia’s delegate, Imru Zelleke, emphasized that colonial oppression had caused the underdevelopment of colonized peoples, making the application of human rights to these populations even more urgent.
Critique of the ‘standard of civilisation’ argument
- Liu critiques the classical “standard of civilization,” historically used to justify colonial rule. This framework classified nations as “civilized” or “uncivilized,” with only the former considered capable of sovereignty and human rights.
- She argues that this concept was rebranded post-WWII to exclude colonized peoples from human rights frameworks under the guise of developmental concerns, as seen in the colonial clause debate.
Examples of challenges to European imperialism after WW2
- Despite the weakening of European power, colonial empires resisted decolonization, often deploying violent repression to maintain control. For instance:
- The Setif massacre in Algeria (1945) involved the brutal suppression of independence protests.
- Similar violent responses occurred in the Dutch East Indies and Syria.
- This resistance underscored the persistence of colonial ideologies, even as the global geopolitical landscape evolved.
How was the UN a useful mechanism to decolonising states?
- The founding of the United Nations in 1945 provided a forum for decolonization debates, though initial discussions often prioritized European reconstruction over colonial issues.
- Over time, newly independent nations used the UN General Assembly to challenge imperial hierarchies. For example, India successfully brought the issue of racial discrimination against Indians in South Africa to the UN in 1946.
Asian leadership in decolonisation
- Leaders such as Jawaharlal Nehru emphasized Asia’s resurgence and its role in shaping post-colonial global governance. Nehru’s initiatives, like the Inter-Asia Relations Conference (1947), signified Asia’s growing influence in international politics.
- India also championed Indonesian independence, pressuring the Dutch and Western allies to recognize Indonesia’s sovereignty by 1949.
Structural challenges to decolonisation
- While the decline of European imperialism was evident, the transition was uneven. South Africa, for instance, implemented apartheid in 1948, revealing the persistence of colonial-era racial hierarchies.
- Pan-Asian and pan-African solidarity faced internal divisions, limiting their effectiveness as cohesive decolonial movements.
How was the shift towards decolonisation reflected in changes to international institutions?
- The expansion of United Nations membership in 1955 included many new African and Asian states, signaling the growing influence of decolonized nations.
- The decline of Eurocentrism led to debates about economic and political systems that could address the needs of post-colonial states.
Arguments that decolonisation was more violent than emancipatory
Post-war European repression
Persistence of colonial hierarchies
Economic exploitation and strategic necessity
Resistance from settler colonies
Arguments that decolonisation was more violent than emancipatory (post-war European repression)
- Despite the global trend towards decolonization after WWII, European powers employed significant violence to suppress independence movements:
- The Setif Massacre (1945) in Algeria saw French colonial forces kill thousands of Algerians protesting for independence
- In the Dutch East Indies, the Netherlands used military interventions to resist Indonesian independence.
- Similar violent repression occurred in Syria, with French forces suppressing uprisings.
- These actions highlight the determination of European colonial powers to retain control, even at great human cost.
Arguments that decolonisation was more violent than emancipatory (persistence of colonial hierarchies)
- European colonial ideologies persisted, emphasizing the economic and strategic importance of colonies to justify violent suppression of independence movements.
- The institutionalization of apartheid in South Africa (1948) is an example of the violent racial hierarchies that colonial systems maintained even after decolonization efforts.
Arguments that decolonisation was more violent than emancipatory (economic exploitation and strategic necessity)
Colonies were seen as critical to the economic and strategic survival of European powers, reinforcing the use of violence to retain them. The economic dependence on colonies shaped colonial powers’ reluctance to relinquish control
Arguments that decolonisation was more violent than emancipatory (resistance from settler colonies)
Settler colonialism, particularly in Africa, posed unique challenges to decolonization. In regions like Algeria and South Africa, settler communities resisted decolonization through institutional violence, including racial segregation and apartheid
Arguments that decolonisation was more emancipatory than violent
International advocacy through the UN
Emergence of self-determination as a global norm
Pan-Asian and Pan-African leadership
Transformation of global institutions
Arguments that decolonisation was more emancipatory than violent (international advocacy through the UN)
- Newly independent nations used the UN to challenge colonial hierarchies:
- India raised the issue of racial discrimination in South Africa at the UN in 1946, marking a significant step in leveraging international platforms for decolonization.
- The expansion of UN membership in the 1950s brought more African and Asian states into global governance, diminishing European dominance and advancing emancipation.
Arguments that decolonisation was more emancipatory than violent (emergence of self-determination as a global norm)
Decolonization movements emphasized self-determination, reshaping international politics and norms. Leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru advocated for the rights of colonized peoples and framed decolonization as a pathway to sovereignty and equality
Arguments that decolonisation was more emancipatory than violent (pan-asian and pan-african leadership)
- Regional cooperation among decolonized states:
- The Inter-Asia Relations Conference (1947) demonstrated Asia’s growing influence and collective efforts to challenge colonialism.
- India’s leadership in supporting Indonesian independence pressured Western powers to recognize sovereignty
Arguments that decolonisation was more emancipatory than violent (transformation of global institutions)
Decolonization reshaped global governance structures, reducing Eurocentrism and empowering newly independent states. The shift in the UN’s composition during the 1950s symbolized the increasing influence of the Global South
What does Samuel Moyn argue about 1948?
- The UDHR, ratified in 1948, was considered a pivotal cosmopolitan moment.
- Samuel Moyn critiques the view that 1948 was a singular breakthrough for human rights, arguing that cosmopolitan ideals have been historically plural and contentious.
Nationalism vs cosmopolitanism in 1948
- Moyn emphasizes that nationalism, rather than the UDHR, shaped global politics post-World War II. Nation-states prioritized welfare over transnational human rights.
- The UDHR was seen as marginal at the time, functioning more as a rhetorical template for national governance than a transformative global initiative.
Anticolonial cosmopolitanism
- Moyn emphasizes that the decolonization process in the 1940s was largely shaped by a focus on collective self-determination rather than international human rights.
- This was rooted in the historical legacy of the French Revolution, where anticolonial movements aligned with the ideals of nationalism as a path to emancipation and individual protection.
- Giuseppe Mazzini’s influence on global anticolonial nationalism is highlighted, showcasing how his ideas catalyzed nationalist aspirations worldwide
The Atlantic Charter
- The Atlantic Charter (1941) is cited as a pivotal moment in anticolonial expectations, where the Allies pledged to respect the right of all peoples to choose their governments and restore sovereign rights to those deprived of them.
- However, the promise was selectively applied by Allied powers, notably excluding colonial territories.
- This betrayal fueled disillusionment and reinforced nationalist movements as the primary vehicle for achieving freedom, with international human rights taking a backseat.
The nation-state and its role in decolonisation
- Decolonization in the 1940s and beyond is described as the triumph of the nation-state, with anticolonial movements adopting sovereignty as the dominant framework.
- Collective self-determination, not international human rights, became the rallying cry, with the nation-state seen as the most effective tool for ensuring individual and collective freedoms.
- This framework persisted through landmark events such as the founding of India, Pakistan, and Israel, which embodied the nationalist vision rather than a supranational human rights agenda
What does Moyn argue about the role of the UNDR in decolonisation efforts?
- Moyn critiques the marginal role of the UDHR in decolonization efforts, arguing that its principles were largely ignored by anticolonial movements in favor of nationalist ideologies.
- Even though self-determination was later incorporated into human rights law through subsequent legal covenants, this was decades after the initial decolonization wave.
How did trusteeship represent the colonial legacy within the UN?
- The UN’s Trusteeship system replaced colonial mandates, reflecting a transition from imperial oversight to promoting self-governance.
- Key figures, like Ralph Bunche (an African-American political scientist), played roles in shaping these policies, often clashing with traditional imperialist views.
- The concept of “underdevelopment” emerged, tied to economic and social reform programs.
Example of an unsuccessful UNESCO project
- Julian Huxley, UNESCO’s first Director-General, embodied a progressive, anti-racist vision but often perpetuated colonial dynamics under the guise of modernization.
- The “Fundamental Education” program aimed to address illiteracy and improve living standards but had mixed results, including failed projects in Tanganyika and Haiti.
^ Tanganyika groundnut scheme - - This project, a joint effort by Britain and UNESCO, aimed to modernize agriculture but ended in failure due to poor planning and disregard for local needs.
- It mirrored colonial priorities by emphasizing economic productivity over the welfare of local populations.
How did ideological conflicts challenge post-war internationalism?
Post-war internationalism faced ideological challenges from Cold War politics and the rise of McCarthyism, which eroded “one world” ambitions.
Explain the role of trusteeships as a replacement for mandates
- The concept of trusteeship was introduced in the UN Charter to replace the mandate system established under the League of Nations.
- Trusteeship aimed to provide international oversight of colonies, particularly those held by the Axis powers after World War II.
- These territories were labeled as “trust territories.”
- Other colonies were referred to euphemistically as “Non-Self-Governing Territories” (NSGT), which reflected the limited scope of the UN’s authority over colonial powers.
- Despite its promise of international supervision, the trusteeship system carefully avoided compelling colonial powers to relinquish their territories or directly intervene in their governance.
Contradictions in trusteeship
- Trusteeship exhibited significant contradictions:
- It held the potential for international accountability but remained constrained by the dominance of imperial powers in the Trusteeship Council.
- The system failed to apply uniformly to all colonies, favoring territories that were previously mandates or belonged to vanquished Axis powers, leaving other colonies outside its jurisdiction.
Key figures in trusteeship administration
- Victor Hoo, a Kuomintang Chinese diplomat, served as Assistant Secretary for Trusteeship and Information from NSGT.
- Ralph Bunche, an African-American political scientist and Director of Trusteeship, played a pivotal role in advocating for progressive policies within the trusteeship system.
- Bunche, a Marxist thinker on race, worked to challenge the colonial powers’ resistance to reforms.
- He secretly provided material to an Australian diplomat to provoke action against the disinclined post-Roosevelt U.S. government and the British imperial status quo.
- Wilfred Benson, a British Fabian and International Labour Organization veteran, led the Non-Self-Governing Territories division and coined the term “underdeveloped.”
- Benson’s more progressive stance on internationalism frequently clashed with imperialist representatives in the Trusteeship Council.
Tensions within the trusteeship system
- Internal conflicts often arose within the Trusteeship Department:
- Walter Crocker, Chief of the Africa Bureau and a self-described “internationalist,” opposed Benson’s progressive policies and Bunche’s leadership.
- Crocker, disillusioned with the democratic aspects of the UN and the racial dynamics of New York City, left the organization to return to academia and later joined the Australian diplomatic service.
Julian Huxley’s leadership of UNESCO
- Huxley’s Background:
- An evolutionary biologist, Huxley brought a scientific worldview to UNESCO, advocating for “world scientific humanism,” a philosophy emphasizing human progress through biological and cultural evolution.
- Cosmopolitan Aspirations:
- Huxley believed in creating a “world mind” and fostering “unity in diversity” across cultures, using science and education as tools for achieving a unified global civilization.
- Eugenic Influence:
- Huxley’s ideas were influenced by eugenics, evident in his belief in guiding humanity’s evolution consciously, which sometimes conflicted with UNESCO’s inclusive ideals.
Key UNESCO projects and outcomes
- Tanganyika Groundnut Scheme:
- A partnership between UNESCO and the British government aimed to modernize agriculture in East Africa by clearing millions of acres for peanut farming.
- The project failed spectacularly, leading to environmental degradation, financial losses, and the disruption of local practices, symbolizing the flaws in top-down development models.
- Haiti Pilot Project:
- This initiative sought to combat illiteracy and improve living conditions in Haiti’s Marbial Valley through education and community development.
- While it raised global awareness of Haiti’s challenges, the project failed due to mismanagement, lack of resources, and inadequate understanding of local needs.
Racial narratives in the Vietnam war
Vietnamese propaganda accusing the French of turning Vietnamese soldiers into “black soldiers” through electric ovens, reflecting deep-seated fears and racialized anxieties. For example, tracts found in Vĩnh Long and other regions depicted grotesque acts, such as transforming Vietnamese youth into Africans to emphasize the barbarity of the French
The involvement of African and Moroccan soldiers in the French army introduced layers of racialized antagonism. The Resistance vilified these dark-skinned soldiers, portraying them as agents of colonial oppression while simultaneously reaching out to them as fellow victims of colonialism
Colonial views on race in the Vietnam war
French colonial policies exhibited racial biases in troop composition. Initially, France avoided deploying African or North African soldiers in Indochina, fearing racial backlash and undermining the “prestige of the white race” (p. 136). This policy shifted in 1947 due to manpower shortages, resulting in a mixed-race colonial army by 1954
Decolonisation as a struggle for identity (Vietnam war)
Decolonization in Vietnam was not merely a struggle against foreign domination but also a fight for cultural and racial survival. Propaganda during the war sought to racialize the conflict by accusing the French of turning Vietnamese soldiers into Africans, symbolizing a loss of national identity and purity
French colonial policies and racial hierarchies in Vietnam
French colonial policies were deeply racialized, reflecting their concerns about maintaining white supremacy. During their return to Indochina in 1945, the French initially deployed only white troops, associating whiteness with prestige and authority. However, manpower shortages led to the inclusion of African and North African soldiers by 1947
The concept of nòi giống (race or bloodline) was a central tenet in defining the Vietnamese nation, often juxtaposing the purity of the Vietnamese people against the perceived barbarity of colonial forces
Scale of displacement due to the 1947 partition of Vietnam
At least half a million individuals fled from the Mekong Delta, with many moving to Saigon, Cholon, or Phnom Penh. This exodus is supported by French and South Vietnamese population statistics, which indicate a dramatic population loss in the region.
War-induced displacement led to decreased agricultural production and food shortages. Rice production halved between 1943–1944 and 1947–1948, exacerbating the hardships of the displaced population.
Demographic changes after the 1947 partition of Vietnam
- Saigon and Cholon experienced population booms, tripling their size as refugees sought safety. The Chinese population also doubled, partly due to immigration from China and internal rural-to-urban migration.
- Statistics highlight a 20% overall population decline in the Mekong Delta from 1943 to 1951, with some provinces losing nearly half their population.
East Asia after WW2
The conclusion of the Sino-Japanese War in 1945 marked a dramatic change in East Asia’s international order. This period saw the establishment of the PRC on October 1, 1949, and its entry into the Korean War in 1950. These events solidified the Cold War’s spread to East Asia, aligning the PRC against the United States and with the USSR
Domestic Chinese politics after WW2
China’s choices, including its alliance with the USSR and entry into the Korean War, were shaped by its internal politics. Four actors (the United States, USSR, Guomindang (GMD), and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)) interacted dynamically, pushing China deeper into Cold War dynamics
China: the Yalta agreement and Sino-Soviet treaty
These agreements in 1945 significantly influenced China’s internal politics and set the stage for interactions among the US, USSR, GMD, and CCP. While the US sought a pro-American China to counter the USSR and revolutionary trends, the USSR was cautious, prioritizing relations with the US and the GMD over direct support for the CCP
The Chinese Civil War
Fragile Peace and Escalating Tensions: After Japan’s surrender in 1945, the GMD and CCP negotiated, influenced by superpower dynamics. However, these negotiations faltered as the Cold War intensified, leading to the outbreak of civil war in 1946. Both the US and USSR aimed to avoid such a conflict initially, supporting Jiang Jieshi’s leadership as a stabilizing force
- Civil War and Cold War Dynamics: The 1946 civil war’s timing aligned with the onset of Cold War tensions, reflecting the US and USSR’s broader geopolitical interests. Both superpowers supported their respective allies in China—US troops aided the GMD, while the USSR provided limited aid to the CCP.
- CCP’s Strategic Shift: By 1948, the CCP gained the upper hand in the civil war, prompting closer alignment with the USSR. Mao’s strategy to lean toward the Soviet side formalized this alliance, culminating in the 1950 Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Alliance, and Mutual Assistance
China’s entry into the Korean war
- Initial Chinese Caution: Initially focused on internal consolidation, the PRC did not prioritize Korea. However, the US intervention in Korea and military presence in Taiwan signaled a strategic threat. These developments, coupled with North Korea’s request for support, pushed China toward intervention.
- Decision to Intervene: The crossing of the 38th parallel by US forces and Stalin’s persuasion were decisive. On October 19, 1950, Chinese troops crossed the Yalu River, marking the PRC’s entry into the Korean War. This decision solidified the Sino-Soviet alliance and deepened hostilities with the US
- Cold War Alignment: The Korean War entrenched the PRC in the Soviet camp, defining its early Cold War strategy. The war also escalated Sino-American antagonism, with long-lasting effects on China’s foreign policy and regional dynamics in East Asia
The historical significance of 1948 (Palestine)
- The Nakba: Marks the displacement of over half of Palestine’s Arab population during the establishment of Israel. Palestinians view it as a catastrophe (nakba), while Israelis regard it as the foundation of their national state.
- Internationalization of the Palestine Question: Events like the 1917 Balfour Declaration, the League of Nations mandate, the 1947 UN partition, and the Cold War underpinned its global dimensions.
- Colonial Framework: The Zionist movement is framed as a colonial enterprise, supported by European powers like Britain, which systematically advantaged Jewish settlers over Palestinians.
Palestinian-Israeli disparities
- Inequality in Nationalism: Khalidi describes the conflict as unequal—dominated by a militarily and politically superior Israel versus the stateless Palestinians.
- U.S. and British Roles: Britain fostered division via policies such as the Balfour Declaration, favoring Zionism while ignoring Palestinian rights.
- American Influence: U.S. support for Israel has been consistent, driven by domestic political considerations, starting with President Truman’s administration, which prioritized pro-Zionist policies over strategic or ethical concerns.
The Oslo accords and aftermath
Colonial Policies: The Oslo Accords institutionalized inequalities, ensuring Israeli control over settlements, security, and resources while relegating Palestinians to limited autonomy.
The Oslo Accords were supposed to bring about Palestinian self-determination, in the form of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. This would mean that Israel, which was formed on the land of historic Palestine in 1948 in an event Palestinians know as the Nakba, would accept Palestinian claims to national sovereignty. The claims, however, would only be limited to a fraction of historic Palestine, with the rest left to Israel’s sovereignty.
West Bank divided into 3: Area A under Palestinian control (18% of the land), Area B under joint control (22%) and Area C under Israeli control (60%)
Universal themes shown by the case of Palestine
- Human Rights Violations: The denial of basic rights to Palestinian refugees contrasts sharply with post-World War II ideals, such as self-determination and human rights, enshrined in the UN Charter.
- Global Lessons: Khalidi argues that the lessons of Palestine are universally significant, highlighting failures in international justice and the enduring influence of colonial paradigms.
What were the Calcultta riots?
- On 16 August 1946, the Muslim League called for Direct Action Day, which devolved into one of the most violent riots in Indian history.
- At least 4,000 deaths and 10,000 injuries occurred in just three days, with massive destruction of property.
What were the causes of violence behind the Calcutta riots?
Jinnah - Called for peaceful demonstrations but couched his rhetoric in ambiguous language, which lent itself to violent misinterpretation
Advertisements and posters, using religious symbolism, urged Muslims to take part in a jihad-like movement, amplifying tensions
The aftermath of the Calcutta riots and the escalation of communal violence
- The riots symbolized the collapse of multi-religious trust and marked a decisive shift towards religious polarization.
- They reinforced the perception among leaders and the public that Hindus and Muslims could not coexist, shaping the narrative for partition
Spread of violence - October 1946 Noakhali Riots (Systematic ethnic cleansing was organized under Golam Sarwar. Over 5,000 Hindus were killed, and many others were forced to convert to Islam or flee)
Examples of communal riots in India
Bihar Riots (October-November 1946) - - Communal violence erupted, particularly in Patna, Chapra, Monghyr, Bhagalpur, and Gaya.
- An estimated thousands of Muslims were killed, and 400,000 displaced, often amid horrific brutality
Economic impact of communal riots in India
Laborers and tradesmen refused to work across communal lines, exacerbating shortages and economic disruption.
Political and administrative breakdown in India
British officials, like A.P. Hume in Varanasi, expressed pessimism about India’s future and withdrew from active intervention
Inquiries into communal riots, such as those in Calcutta and Bihar, were abandoned, reflecting a lack of administrative will
Broader social and psychological effects of communal violence in India
Rise of communal identities - Polarization transformed previously diverse urban and rural areas into segregated enclaves, deepening mistrust between communities
Religious and gendered violence - Women became key targets in communal violence, their bodies politicized as symbols of honour and territory. Abductions and forced conversions were frequent
Humanitarian efforts - Relief efforts, often led by partisan groups like the Muslim League or Hindu Mahasabha, further solidified communal divisions
The lead-up to the partition of India and Pakistan
- By late 1946, political leaders increasingly viewed partition as the only viable resolution to communal tensions.
- However, the belief that partition would end violence proved tragically misplaced, as it unleashed further massacres and mass displacements
The decision to partition India and Pakistan
- Partition emerged as a reluctant solution for Indian leaders like Nehru, who sought a way out of political deadlock and the risk of delaying independence.
- Despite its perceived utility for political consolidation, Partition was a poorly debated and hastily implemented solution, with significant consequences for regional politics and communal harmony
- The last Viceroy, Mountbatten, accelerated the process of Partition, focusing on expediency rather than the human and logistical challenges it posed.
- The 3 June Plan outlined the creation of Pakistan but left unresolved key issues such as borders and the future of princely states, leading to confusion and apprehension
Boundary commissions and the Radcliffe line
- Boundary Commissions for Punjab and Bengal, chaired by Cyril Radcliffe, were formed to decide the division.
- Radcliffe had no prior knowledge of India, leading to flawed decisions based on outdated census data.
- Maps and population ratios became central to arguments, but cultural and geographical factors led to significant disputes.
- The final boundary line was revealed only on August 17, two days after Independence, leading to widespread confusion and discontent.
Administrative challenges to the newly partitioned India and Pakistan
Government machinery, including libraries, office equipment, and soldiers, was divided hurriedly, leading to inefficiencies and disputes
Humanitarian and social impact of the partition of India and Pakistan
Armed groups and militias, particularly in Punjab, caused widespread violence. Sikh leaders openly prepared for conflict, while other communities armed themselves. Violence was marked by bombings, killings, and abductions, with both sides attempting to cleanse areas of opposing groups.
By mid-1947, large-scale migrations began as people sought safety.
Cities like Karachi became overwhelmed as capitals, while rural areas descended into lawlessness.
Smaller groups like untouchables, Christians, and Anglo-Indians were sidelined. Their concerns often went unaddressed.
Examples of contributors to ‘One World or None’
Niels Bohr, Albert Einstein, Robert Oppenheimer
What does OWoN suggest about national sovereignty and atomic weapons?
The contributors emphasize the necessity of relinquishing aspects of national sovereignty to establish international control over atomic energy. They argue that without a unified global governance structure, the threat of atomic warfare will persist.
Walter Lippmann discusses how world security depends on mutual agreements between nations to prioritize collective security over national interests
Leo Szilard addresses inspection systems to prevent an arms race, proposing international frameworks for monitoring and control
What does OWoN state about the dangers of an unregulated atomic arms race?
Irving Langmuir explores how the absence of international agreements could lead to an exponential growth in nuclear arsenals, exacerbating global instability
Albert Einstein and the Federation of American Scientists emphasize that humanity’s survival hinges on cooperation and the prevention of nuclear conflict
How did the development of atomic arms transform warfare?
H. H. Arnold and Louis Ridenour discuss how atomic bombs reshape military strategies, rendering traditional defenses inadequate and emphasizing deterrence as a primary strategy
Traditional systems like anti-aircraft defenses and shelters cannot cope with the scale and suddenness of atomic strikes
- The atomic bomb represents a fundamental shift in military power, offering unparalleled destructive capacity.
- Philip Morrison vividly describes the devastation caused by the Hiroshima bombing and the concept of “saturation,” where defenses are overwhelmed due to the bomb’s sheer impact
How did the development of atomic arms disrupt traditional power structures?
- Nations with atomic capabilities gain disproportionate influence in global affairs, creating a divide between nuclear-armed and non-nuclear states.
- Contributors highlight how atomic power centralizes geopolitical influence, potentially destabilizing existing alliances and creating new hierarchies in international relations
- Without access to nuclear technology, many states may feel excluded from critical decisions that shape global policies.
- This exclusion increases reliance on alliances with nuclear powers, further entrenching inequalities in the global order
How did the development of atomic arms create a need for international governance?
Walter Lippmann and others argue for the establishment of an international governing body to regulate atomic energy and prevent unilateral actions by any nation
Leo Szilard advocates for robust inspection systems to ensure compliance with disarmament and arms control agreements
Effective global control of atomic energy requires nations to cede aspects of their sovereignty to an international authority.
External factors affecting Vietnam in 1950
- Key Events in 1950: The year marked significant diplomatic shifts as the Soviet Union and Maoist China recognized the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (DRV). In response, the U.S. quickly recognized the French-backed Associated State of Vietnam led by Bao Dai and allocated substantial military aid, increasing from $15 million in May 1950 to $100 million by year’s end.
- American Policy Conflicts: American policymakers were divided between supporting colonial powers and addressing the anti-colonial sentiments in Vietnam. The internal conflicts within the Truman administration reflected broader uncertainties about U.S. involvement in Vietnam
The Chinese Civil War - Background: the End of WW2 and the Resumption of Civil War (1949-53)
- After Japan’s surrender in August 1945, the Chinese Civil War between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the Kuomintang (KMT) resumed.
- The war was a struggle between Mao Zedong’s CCP, which had strong rural support and a disciplined People’s Liberation Army (PLA), and Chiang Kai-shek’s KMT, which controlled cities and had US backing.
- The US provided the KMT with $3 billion in military aid between 1945–1949, but corruption and low morale weakened Chiang’s forces.
- The decisive phase of the war took place between 1947 and 1949, when the CCP launched its final offensive.
The Chinese Civil War: Key Battles and Communist Victory
- The Liaoshen Campaign (Sept–Nov 1948)
- The CCP’s PLA, led by Lin Biao, decisively defeated the KMT in Manchuria.
- The PLA captured over 400,000 KMT troops, securing key cities such as Shenyang and Changchun.
- The Huaihai Campaign (Nov 1948 – Jan 1949)
- This battle in Central China destroyed the main KMT forces, leading to the loss of 500,000 KMT troops.
- The Pingjin Campaign (Nov 1948 – Jan 1949)
- The CCP took Beijing (then Peking) on January 31, 1949, effectively sealing the fate of the KMT.
The Declaration of the PRC
- With the KMT in retreat, Mao Zedong proclaimed the founding of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) on October 1, 1949, in Tiananmen Square, Beijing.
- The KMT fled to Taiwan in December 1949, where Chiang Kai-shek established the Republic of China (ROC), which the US continued to recognize as the legitimate government of China.
Statistics on the Chinese Civil Wars casualties and refugees
- Civil War Deaths: 6–8 million
- Refugees to Hong Kong and Taiwan: 8–10 million
International reactions to the declaration of the PRC
- The USSR (Joseph Stalin) immediately recognized the PRC, seeing it as a new communist ally in the Cold War.
- The United States refused to recognize the PRC, supporting Taiwan instead.
- Britain recognized the PRC in January 1950, but most Western nations followed the US policy of non-recognition.
The Korean War - Background: the Division of Korea
- After WWII, Korea was divided at the 38th parallel, with:
- North Korea, led by Kim Il Sung, supported by the USSR
- South Korea, led by Syngman Rhee, supported by the United States
- Both Korean leaders sought to unify the country under their rule.
The Outbreak of the Korean War
- On June 25, 1950, North Korean forces invaded South Korea with 135,000 troops, quickly capturing Seoul.
- The United Nations (led by the US) intervened, sending troops under General Douglas MacArthur.
- By October 1950, UN forces had pushed the North Koreans back to the Yalu River, near the Chinese border.
Why did China intervene in the Korean War
- Security Concerns
- The US presence near Manchuria (China’s industrial region) was seen as a direct threat.
- Mao feared a potential US invasion of China, especially after MacArthur suggested using nuclear weapons.
- Pressure from Stalin
- Joseph Stalin urged Mao to intervene, but the USSR provided limited direct military support.
- Instead, Stalin pressured China to send its own troops while supplying weapons.
- Ideological and Political Factors
- Mao saw the war as a way to assert China’s status as a communist power.
- Strengthening ties with North Korea and the USSR was important for China’s long-term strategy.
China’s intervention in the Korean War
- On October 19, 1950, China deployed 300,000 troops under General Peng Dehuai.
- These forces, known as the People’s Volunteer Army (PVA), launched a massive counteroffensive.
- Using guerrilla tactics, human wave attacks, and night raids, China pushed UN forces back.
Korean War statistics
- Total Chinese troops sent: 3 million
- Chinese casualties: 400,000–600,000
- Financial cost to China: Over $10 billion
Impact of the Korean War on China
- Strengthened Mao’s Leadership: The war cemented Mao’s control over the CCP and China.
- Increased Militarization: China developed a stronger military and industry.
- Political Repression: The war justified internal purges, such as the Three-Anti and Five-Anti Campaigns (1951–1952).
Geopolitical consequences of the Korean War
- China-US Relations
- The US refused to recognize the PRC, instead supporting Taiwan.
- The US imposed a trade embargo on China, isolating it economically.
- Strengthening the Cold War
- China became the leading communist power in Asia, increasing US fears of “Red China.”
- Sino-Soviet Relations Improved (but later deteriorated in the 1960s).
- The Division of Korea
- The 1953 armistice left Korea permanently divided at the 38th parallel.
Historian’s interpretations of China’s role in the Korean War
John Gaddis - describes the Korean War as a proxy war between the US and USSR. Argues China’s intervention was defensive rather than expansionist.
Chen Jian - argues Mao viewed the war as an opportunity to assert China’s role as a global revolutionary leader
Odd Arne Westad - suggests China’s intervention transformed the Cold War, leading to decades of US-China hostility
