No description available.

No description available.

University of Macau / Faculty of Social Sciences / Department of Government and Public Administration

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

At the beginning of the present century, Anglo-Russian rivalry was perhaps the most important factor in the international situation of the day. At that time it seemed sound doctrine to believe that Britain and Russia were bound to remain implacable enemies for an indefinite period of time. Nevertheless, seven years after the century had begun, these two apparently irreconcilable rivals had reached an agreement, which, if not cordial, was none the less real, and which relegated their well-night century-old rivalry to the realms of history. The animosity which was characteristic of Anglo-Russian relations throughout this period had its origins in the Near East during the last part of the eighteenth century, as a result of Russian efforts to obtain control of the Straits of Bosphorous and of the Dardanelles from the Ottoman Turk. However, the rise of revolutionary France put an end temporarily to this newly-born rivalry, and forced the two countries into a partnership to meet a nation who was a vital threat to both, with the defeat of Napoleon, though, this partnership dissolved and the rivalry appeared in a more intense form than before. Throughout the nineteenth century it spread successively from the Near East to Central Asia, and finally to the Far East. However, shortly after the coming of the twentieth century, both countries discovered they had a common rival in Imperial Germany, whose growing power now made her the leading European power on the continent. As in the case of revolutionary France, the two countries resolved to forego their rivalry in order to meet a common peril. Hence the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, From the British side, the material for the study of Anglo-Russian relations throughout this period is on the whole adequate. The original British Documents for the years 1878 - I897 are not available, but those for the years 1898 - 1907 are contained in the general collection "British Documents on the Origins of the War, 1898, - 1914". There is also much material available in the memoirs and biographies of the leading British statesmen. On the Russian side, however, there is much to be desired. A certain number of official documents have been published in a spasmodic and desultory manner in the "Krasny Archiv", but much which is pertinent has been withheld. Only a few documents are available in English translation. The memoirs of émigré Russian diplomats, while available in so far as they go, suffer from the fact that they were composed in exile, with little else save memory to serve as a guide. As a result, there is much on the Russian side which is, and likely will remain unknown. Nevertheless, there is enough Russian material extant which, taken in conjunction with the British material available, is sufficient to enable the determining of the course followed by Anglo- Russian relations with a reasonable degree of certainty. In summing up, it should be emphasized that Anglo-Russian rivalry flourished most vigorously when neither country was menaced by a strong European power. When a strong power emerged which threatened to dominate the continent of Europe, this rivalry temporarily ceased. Since both Great Britain and Russia had developed immense empires in Asia in close proximity the one to the other, it was perhaps only natural that they should be serious rivals. Nevertheless, they both remained powers whose major interests lay in Europe. Here, in Europe, if the Near East be excluded, the vital interests of the two countries did not conflict. Both countries were interested in maintaining the status quo in Europe, as they clearly recognized that a Europe organized under the hegemony of another single power was a mortal threat to both. It can therefore be said that both Great Britain and Imperial Russia considered the maintenance of the European balance of power as essential to their long-term interests, and were prepared to forego their mutual rivalry to maintain it. / Arts, Faculty of / History, Department of / Graduate

With the introduction of the people’s communes in the People’ s Republic of China in 1958, a far-reaching ideological dispute arose between the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the Communist Party of China. In the years following the death of Stalin, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union had embarked upon a domestic policy which largely ignored many of the directives laid down by the fathers of Communism, and which often subordinated ideological considerations to pragmatic economic considerations. The people's communes embodied an attempt by the Chinese communists to realize all the prerequisites to Communism which the Soviet Union had forsaken in their drive to increase production and thus constituted a challenge to the "revisionist" policies of the Soviet Union. This was especially true in the light of the specific rejection of communes by the Soviet leaders a few months before the Chinese communes were introduced. Moreover, because "anti-party" groups existed both within the Chinese and Soviet parties, and were given ideological support by the opposing party, the dispute over the principles involved in the communes was turned from a theoretical dispute into a concrete struggle with in the separate parties. Besides being an ideological dispute over the correct policies to follow during the transition to Communism, the commune controversy also related directly to the more predominant issues of the Sino-Soviet dispute. The military significance of the communes provided one such link; the detrimental effect of the communes on the world's image of Communism provided another such link, and the existence of pro-Soviet and pro-Chinese factions within the two parties, provided the other link; the latter situation was especially significant in the commune controversy since the C.P.S.U.’s support for the anti-commune faction of Marshall Peng Teh-huai and Chang Wen-tian, was at the same time support for a faction more in sympathy with the "revisionist" foreign policy of the Soviet Union. In a broader perspective, the commune controversy also raised important issues concerning ideological authority, particularly over questions of domestic policy during the transition to Communism. Since the Chinese party remains determined to proceed with their commune program as soon as economic conditions allow, and since the C.P.S.U. continues to make a more and more liberal interpretation of Communist society, it can be expected that the issues embodied in the commune controversy will continue to be strongly contended by the two parties. Moreover, the fact that the commune issue is related to the more predominant issues of the Sino-Soviet dispute, suggests that the debate over the communes will continue as long as differences remain between the two giants of the Communist world. / Arts, Faculty of / Political Science, Department of / Graduate

The purpose of this thesis is to investigate Finland's postwar relations with the Soviet Union from six different perspectives (systemic, strategic, domestic political, personality, economic and cultural) in order to (1) achieve a better general understanding of this unique situation in international relations, and (2) make a systematic analysis of the variables which are most salient in describing and explaining this relationship. The study is approached mainly from the Finnish point of view, although Soviet factors and perspectives must obviously be included, especially in discussing systemic and strategic variables. It is hypothesized that the critical phase in postwar Finnish-Soviet relations was the 1944-48 period. Once Finland's status as a sovereign and independent buffer-state was established, the development of her relations with the Soviet Union can be characterized by (1) her constant striving to widen her maneuverability in international relations, and (2) the Soviet Union's increasingly lenient attitude towards Finland as the international situation improved and as the Russians became more certain of Finland's intention to maintain friendly relations and a credible neutrality. These developments are discussed in the context of each of the six perspectives. The thesis concludes with an assessment of the relative importance of the perspectives in analyzing Finnish-Soviet relations and a discussion of the relevance of the Finnish model in studying small power-great power relationships and neutral buffer-state policies. / Arts, Faculty of / Political Science, Department of / Graduate

The purpose of this study is to examine the variables responsible for the fact that Southeast Asian Communist parties sided with Peking In the latter’s ideological dispute with Moscow. The analysis is to a large extent based upon a comparison of Communist journals, the most important being the Peking Review and the World Marxist Review. I have assumed that the latter, controlled by the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, will print only those items reflecting its interpretation in the dispute. And the former, published by the Communist Party of China, will do likewise. In addition, the author has relied heavily on Western sources which specialize in translating Communist material relating to Sino-Sovlet polemics. The assumption of this paper has been that Southeast Asian Communists would realistically assess which protagonist in the dispute offered the best advice on the question of how to gain power and, consequently, would confer their loyalty to that side. However, after an analysis of differing Chinese and Russian opinions of the best way to obtain power and an examination of the domestic position of the individual Communist parties the above assumption had to be qualified. It was found that although all parties examined opted for the Chinese side, this was not so much a consequence of the greater utility of Chinese- advocated strategy but more a factor of domestic necessity for and Chinese organizational control of the Southeast Asian Communist parties. / Arts, Faculty of / Political Science, Department of / Graduate