Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hong Kong, 1988.

published_or_final_version / Political Science / Doctoral / Doctor of Philosophy

Thesis (M.A.)--The University of Western Ontario (Canada), 1972. / Includes bibliographical references.

This study is an attempt to clarify whether Cuba and Yugoslavia adhere to the role expectations of the nonaligned movement. Chapter I introduces the criteria for nonalignment which are also considered as the role expectations for members of the nonaligned movement. Chapter II focuses on whether Cuba and Yugoslavia do fulfill the role expectations of the nonaligned movement. Chapter III discusses the voting behavior of Cuba and Yugoslavia on issues important to the nonaligned movement in the United Nations' General Assembly. Chapter IV concludes this study with the major finding that Yugoslavia adheres strictly to the role expectations of the nonaligned movement while Cuba's nonaligned status is questionable.

The nature and purposes of the post-apartheid South African foreign policy have become matters of intense debate and great confusion. This primarily emanates from the political reality of contemporary South Africa and the new global settings in general. The end of the cold war and apartheid provided an opportunity for foreign policy-makers and academics to re-assess South Africa's relations with the rest of the world. These developments raised questions for the democratic government. Where do such changes leave the new South Africa, and more importantly which foreign policy strategies serve it best? As a middle-range power, South Africa joined hands with other like-minded states in embracing multilateral mechanisms as tools of foreign policy.

No description available.

With the disappearance of the superpower conflict that characterised the Cold War era, many observers have begun to question whether the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has a role to play in the post Cold War era. However the emergence of a number of issues on the international agenda, such as United Nations peacekeeping operations, global environmental issues and an increasing unwillingness on the part of the major economic powers to abide by GATT/WTO rules, have increasingly become of concern to non-aligned states. However whilst the United States has recognised that these issues require leadership in dealing with them, it has not been willing to supply that leadership. It shall therefore be argued that the changing nature of hegemony in world politics has set conditions that allow non-aligned middle powers and institutions greater scope for action and influence. The emergence of these issues has provided a scope for non-aligned middle powers, acting in accordance with their interests to play alternate leadership roles within an expanded scope for institutions, such as organisations, regimes and multilateralism, in addressing the interests of non-aligned states. Firstly in looking at an expanded role for organisations, the United States has increasingly been unwilling to play a leadership role within UN peacekeeping operations. The continuing importance of the neutrality of UN peacekeeping operations has provided a scope for nonaligned middle powers to play a burden-sharing role with the great powers in addressing the concerns of non-aligned states with regard to these operations. Secondly in looking at an expanded scope for regimes, the emergence of a regime in the issue of ozone depletion may provide a foundation to analyse how non-aligned middle powers may play a bridge-building role between North and South in the issue of climate change. Middle powers could therefore play this role in the absence of United States leadership within this issue. Thirdly, the role of the Cairns Group within the Uruguay Round in addressing non-aligned states’ interests of maintaining stable agricultural trade, can be seen as a model of small group multilateralism in bridging the divide between the major powers in issue specific areas.

This dissertation examines how after decolonization the philosophical concept of universality was reimagined in European and Chinese literary and visual culture. My central argument is that, in the wake of the 1955 Bandung Conference and the Afro-Asian solidarity it embodied, writers and intellectuals from both sides of the Iron Curtain proposed alternative notions of universal culture and World Literature. While traditional Eurocentric conceptions of the universal were lodged in an exclusionary logic rooted in colonial violence and racism, after decolonization it became possible to imagine postcolonial claims to universality. I show how the Non-Alignment Movement imagined at Bandung inspired artists and intellectuals from both sides of the bipolar divide to voice new modes of solidarity in their work. I focus on three specific contexts: Italy, the Francophone world, and China. In the Italian context the writers I study include thinkers of a distinctively Gramscian lineage, from Pier Paolo Pasolini to Maria Antonietta Macciocchi. Conversely, the French and Francophone writers that I discuss, including Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, Frantz Fanon, and Patrice Lumumba, were reconfiguring universality chiefly from a Hegelian perspective. Finally, in the Chinese context, I show how the Chinese contributions to the Bandung-era reinvention of universal culture and the ulterior art practice of the post-Mao 1980s were both rooted in the Marxist tradition. I conclude with a discussion of how postcolonial claims to universality, such as those imagined at Bandung, relate to “globalized” conceptions of the universal. My work contributes to major recent debates in the fields of Comparative Literature and Postcolonial Studies by engaging with the theoretical questions of universality and translatability. Scholars like Emily Apter have recently published critical studies of what has been dubbed the “translatability assumption” at the heart of the burgeoning field of World Literature. My research discusses how an overt emphasis on reading works of literature in translation in the name of ease of access and universal circulation can gloss over the cultural and linguistic diversity of the world’s languages and literatures. My research also relies on Judith Butler’s notion of “competing universalities.” In her text of the same title, Butler draws from Hegel, Gramsci, and others as she sets out to think the conditions of possibility for political hegemony. She arrives at an open-ended conclusion. Since many political constructs claim universality from within their located particularity, Butler argues that the intellectual’s task is to “adjudicate among competing notions of universality.” In line with these recent debates on the question of universality, my dissertation navigates between the different competing universals at stake during and after the Cold War. My dissertation is original in the sense that it is one of the first multilingual and interdisciplinary studies that elucidate how current geopolitical changes on the world stage—from China’s expansionist politics to the rise of formerly Third World nations as global economic players—are embedded in a cultural history. While globalization is commonly seen as a phenomenon that expanded after the historical shifts of 1989, my project shows how the “postcolonial universalities” imagined in the wake of decolonization by Western and non-Western writers and artists constituted the groundwork for this history.

Thesis (M. A.)--University of South Africa, Pretoria, 2002.

India's nonalignment policy attracted the attention of many newly independent countries for it provided an alternative to the existing American and Russian views of the world. This dissertation is an examination of both India's nonalignment policy and the official American reaction to it during the Truman-Eisenhower years. Indian nonalignment should be defined as a policy of noncommitment towards rival power blocs adopted with a view of retaining freedom of action in international affairs and thereby influencing the issue of war and peace to India's advantage. India maintained that the Cold War was essentially a European problem. Adherence to military allliances , it believed, would increase domestic tensions and add to chances of involvement in international war, thus destroying hopes of socio-economic reconstruction of India. The official American reaction was not consistent. It varied from president to president, from issue to issue, and from time to time. India's stand on various issues of international import and interest to the United States such as recognition of the People's Republic of China, the Korean War, the Japanese peace treaty of 1951, and the Hungarian revolt of 1956, increased American concern about and dislike of nonalignment. Many Americans in high places regraded India's nonalignment policy as pro-Communist and as one that sought to undermine Western collective security measures. Consequently, during the Truman and Eisenhower presidencies the United States took a series of diplomatic, military, and economic measures to counter India's neutralism. America refused to treat India as a major power and attempted to contain its influence on the international plane by excluding it from international conferences and from assuming international responsibilities. The Russian efforts to woo India and other nonaligned countries with trade and aid softened America's open resistance to India's nonalignment. As a result, although tactical, a new trend in America's dealings with India was visible during the closing years of Eisenhower's presidency. Therefore, America sought to keep nonaligned India at least nonaligned by extending economic aid.