DOCSLIB.ORG

Imbalance of Power the Soviet Union and the Congo Crisis, 1960–1961

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Imbalance of Power the Soviet Union and the Congo Crisis, 1960–1961 IanImbdaollanceo of Power Imbalance of Power The Soviet Union and the Congo Crisis, 1960–1961 ✣ Alessandro Iandolo Introduction The Congo crisis of 1960–1961 was one of the ªrst times the United States and the Soviet Union vied for inºuence in the Third World. Moscow and Washington backed different parties in an internal conºict in Congo and re- sorted to force to support them. Despite the importance of the Congo crisis in the context of the Cold War, surprisingly little has been written about it, despite the availability of primary sources from Russia as well as the West. The ªrst international history of the crisis, which takes into account the points of view of the superpowers, the United Nations (UN), and the local ac- tors, appeared only recently.1 In recent years, several analyses of speciªc issues connected to the crisis have also been published.2 Moreover, inºuential works with a broader scope, such as Odd Arne Westad’s The Global Cold War and the recent three-volume Cambridge History of the Cold War, have high- lighted the Congo crisis as a key event for the Cold War in the Third World.3 1. Lise Namikas, Battleground Africa: Cold War in the Congo, 1960–65 (Stanford, CA: Stanford Uni- versity Press, 2013). For useful background information, see M. Crawford Young, “Zaire, Rwanda and Burundi,” in The Cambridge History of Africa, ed. Michael Crowder (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1984), pp. 717–722; Catherine Hoskyns, The Congo since Independence: January 1960–December 1961 (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1965); Madeleine G. Kalb, The Congo Cables. The Cold War in Africa—from Eisenhower to Kennedy (New York: Macmillan, 1982); and Ste- phen R. Weissman, American Foreign Policy in the Congo, 1960–1964 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1975). 2. On the tragic conclusion of the crisis and the role of Western business interests in it, see Ludo De Witte, The Assassination of Lumumba (London: Verso, 2002). On U.S. policy, see David N. Gibbs, The Political Economy of Third World Intervention: Mines, Money, and U.S. Policy in the Congo Crisis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991). 3. Odd Arne Westad, The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of Our Times (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 136–143; and Michael E. Latham, “The Cold Journal of Cold War Studies Vol. 16, No. 2, Spring 2014, pp. 32–55, doi:10.1162/JCWS_a_00449 © 2014 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology 32 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/JCWS_a_00449 by guest on 27 September 2021 Imbalance of Power However, so far only one work based on primary sources directly addresses the role the Soviet Union played in the Congo crisis.4 Using declassiªed Soviet, Western, and Ghanaian documents, this article aims to broaden the debate on Soviet policy during the Congo crisis. Its main purpose is not to present a detailed reconstruction of the crisis but to focus on Moscow’s actions and link them to overall Soviet policy toward the Third World. In particular the article highlights how the USSR’s relative inferiority in power-projection capabilities caused the Soviet strategy in Congo to fail. Moscow’s repeated threats to intervene in the conºict on the side of its local allies were nothing but a bluff and could not hide the real imbalance of power between the Soviet Union and the West in Africa. This had important repercus- sions in Congo as well as for Soviet policy in general. The ªrst consequence was that Congo turned from a potential Soviet ally into a ªrmly pro-Western re- gime, ending a phase of Soviet expansion in the Third World. Prior to this Moscow had managed to establish cooperative relations with several newly in- dependent countries largely thanks to offers of economic aid. However, after the “loss” of Congo, Soviet leaders began to realize that developing appropriate military and logistical capabilities to project power was an unavoidable necessity if the USSR hoped to challenge the West in the Third World. The Congo crisis, therefore, contributed to turning the Cold War in the Third World into a more militarized competition between the superpowers. The Soviet Union and the Third World Following Iosif Stalin’s death in 1953, the Soviet Union assumed a more ac- tive role in the Third World. Moscow abandoned Stalin’s restrictive interpre- tation of the “two camps theory,” which prescribed that alliances with non- Marxist nationalist elites were impossible, and instead jumped at the chance to make new friends in Asia, Africa, and Latin America at a time when more and more countries in these regions were becoming independent.5 Whereas Stalin believed that post-independence leaders were “lackeys” of the imperial- ists, Nikita Khrushchev, the new First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU), was convinced that the newly independent coun- War in the Third World, 1963–1975,” in Odd Arne Westad and Melvyn P. Lefºer, eds., The Cam- bridge History of the Cold War, 3 vols. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010), Vol. 2, pp. 265– 266. 4. Sergey Mazov, A Distant Front in the Cold War: The USSR in West Africa and the Congo, 1956–1964 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2010), pp. 77–129. 5. Westad, The Global Cold War, pp. 57–72. 33 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/JCWS_a_00449 by guest on 27 September 2021 Iandolo tries represented a great opportunity for the Soviet Union.6 Khrushchev hoped “to use post-colonialist momentum, break into the soft underbelly of imperialism and win sympathies of the millions of people who woke up to the new life.”7 Soviet policy for the Third World was based on economic aid. In particu- lar, Khrushchev thought that the superiority of socialism as an economic sys- tem would convince the newly independent countries of Africa and Asia to choose a non-capitalist path to development. In 1955 he embarked on a series of trips to key countries in Asia, visiting India, Indonesia, Burma, and Af- ghanistan, offering aid and technical cooperation. Khrushchev also pushed to establish strong links between the Soviet Union and Gamal Abdel Nasser’s Egypt, including shipping weapons to Cairo through Czechoslovakia in 1955.8 It was precisely over Egypt that the USSR clashed with the West for the ªrst time in the Third World. In 1956, follow- ing Nasser’s decision to nationalize the Suez Canal, Britain, France, and Israel launched a coordinated attack against Egypt. Moscow issued an ultimatum threatening to intervene in the conºict on Cairo’s side and to attack Britain and France with long-range “nuclear missiles, which the Soviet Union did not [yet] possess.”9 British and French actions ceased shortly thereafter—but as a result of the U.S. threat to impose economic sanctions rather than because of the Soviet ultimatum. Nevertheless, Khrushchev saw his tough talk during the Suez crisis as a success. He had always regarded the Franco-British-Israeli attack on Egypt as a coordinated Western move that the U.S. government must have at least known about in advance. Khrushchev believed his ultima- tum had scared the Americans to the point that they had to restrain their allies.10 After Suez, Khrushchev became convinced that by talking belligerently and threatening intervention he could bully the West into making conces- 6. A good discussion of the differences between Stalin and Khrushchev in thinking about the Third World is in Ted Hopf, Reconstructing the Cold War: The Early Years, 1945–1958 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), pp. 131–133, 235–242. 7. Georgii Mirskii, quoted in Vladislav Zubok and Constantine Pleshakov, Inside the Kremlin’s Cold War: From Stalin to Khrushchev (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996). p. 139. 8. For more information on the arms deal with Egypt, see Guy Laron, “Cutting the Gordian Knot: The Egyptian Quest for Arms and the Czechoslovak Arms Deal,” CWIHP Working Paper 55, Cold War International History Project, Washington, DC, 2007. For a complete overview of the Suez crisis, see Keith Kyle, Suez: Britain’s End of Empire in the Middle East (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1991). 9. Vojtech Mastny, “Soviet Foreign Policy, 1953–1962,” in Westad and Lefºer, eds., Cambridge His- tory of the Cold War, Vol. 1, p. 321. 10. See “Transcript of a CC CPSU Plenum, Evening 28 June 1957,” in Cold War International His- tory Project Digital Archive, Collection: “Cold War in the Middle East,” http://www.wilsoncenter .org/digital-archive. 34 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/JCWS_a_00449 by guest on 27 September 2021 Imbalance of Power sions, even if the USSR did not actually have the capability to make good on the threats. This kind of bluff became a trademark of Khrushchev’s approach to foreign policy.11 As I discuss below, Moscow followed the same policy in Congo. The Soviet Union and Africa The Soviet Union was already active in Africa before Congo became inde- pendent. From 1957 to 1960 the USSR had established diplomatic relations and ambitious programs of economic and technical cooperation with newly independent Ghana, Guinea, and Mali. Khrushchev hoped to lure more newly independent African countries to the socialist camp by granting Soviet aid under favorable conditions. Therefore, once the possibility of establishing relations with Congo arose, Moscow was quick to move. Independent Congo was the ideal candidate to enter into an alliance with the USSR and receive economic aid. The country was much larger than all of Moscow’s existing Af- rican partners combined.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SELF-DETERMINATION OUTSIDE the COLONIAL CONTEXT: the BIRTH of BANGLADESH in Retrospectt
    SELF-DETERMINATION OUTSIDE THE COLONIAL CONTEXT: THE BIRTH OF BANGLADESH IN RETROSPECTt By VedP. Nanda* I. INTRODUCTION In the aftermath of the Indo-Pakistan War in December 1971, the independent nation-state of Bangladesh was born.' Within the next four months, more than fifty countries had formally recognized the new nation.2 As India's military intervention was primarily responsible for the success of the secessionist movement in what was then known as East Pakistan, and for the creation of a new political entity on the inter- national scene,3 many serious questions stemming from this historic event remain unresolved for the international lawyer. For example: (1) What is the continuing validity of Article 2 (4) of the United Nations Charter?4 (2) What is the current status of the doctrine of humanita- rian intervention in international law?5 (3) What action could the United Nations have taken to avert the Bangladesh crisis?6 (4) What measures are necessary to prevent such tragic occurrences in the fu- ture?7 and (5) What relationship exists between the principle of self- "- This paper is an adapted version of a chapter that will appear in Y. ALEXANDER & R. FRIEDLANDER, SELF-DETERMINATION (1979). * Professor of Law and Director of the International Legal Studies Program, Univer- sity of Denver Law Center. 1. See generally BANGLADESH: CRISIS AND CONSEQUENCES (New Delhi: Deen Dayal Research Institute 1972); D. MANKEKAR, PAKISTAN CUT TO SIZE (1972); PAKISTAN POLITI- CAL SYSTEM IN CRISIS: EMERGENCE OF BANGLADESH (S. Varma & V. Narain eds. 1972). 2. Ebb Tide, THE ECONOMIST, April 8, 1972, at 47.
    [Show full text]
  • H-Diplo Article Review Forum Commissioned for H-Diplo by Thomas Maddux Published on 16 May 2016
    H-Diplo Article Review 20 16 H-Diplo Article Review Editors: Thomas Maddux H-Diplo and Diane Labrosse H-Diplo Article Reviews Web and Production Editor: George Fujii No. 614 An H-Diplo Article Review Forum Commissioned for H-Diplo by Thomas Maddux Published on 16 May 2016 H-Diplo Forum on “Beyond and Between the Cold War Blocs,” Special Issue of The International History Review 37:5 (December 2015): 901-1013. Introduction by Janick Marina Schaufelbuehl, University of Lausanne; Sandra Bott University of Lausanne; Jussi Hanhimäki, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies; and Marco Wyss, University of Chichester Reviewed by: Anne Deighton, The University of Oxford Juergen Dinkel, Justus-Liebig-University Wen-Qing Ngoei, Northwestern University Johanna Rainio-Niemi, University of Helsinki, Finland URL: http://tiny.cc/AR614 Introduction1 by Janick Marina Schaufelbuehl, Sandra Bott, Jussi Hanhimäki, and Marco Wyss2 “Non-Alignment, the Third Force, or Fence-Sitting: Independent Pathways in the Cold War” n his recollection of recent events such as the Bandung Conference, the Soviet proposals for a unified and neutralised Germany, and the signing of the Austrian Treaty, veteran journalist Hanson W. Baldwin Iwrote in the New York Times in May 1955 that these ‘and half a dozen other developments in Europe and 1 H-Diplo would like to thanks Professor Andrew Williams, editor of IHR, and the four authors of this introduction, for granting us permission to publish this review. It original appeared as “Janick Marina Schaufelbuehl, Sandra Bott, Jussi Hanhimäki, and Marco Wyss, “Non-Alignment, the Third Force, or Fence-Sitting: Independent Pathways in the Cold War.” The International History Review 37:5 (December 2015): 901-911.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Alignment and the United States
    Robert B. Rakove. Kennedy, Johnson, and the Nonaligned World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. 315 pp. $31.99, paper, ISBN 978-1-107-44938-1. Reviewed by Simon Stevens Published on H-1960s (August, 2014) Commissioned by Zachary J. Lechner (Centenary College of Louisiana) The central historical problem that Robert B. of a policy of “engagement” of the “nonaligned Rakove sets out to solve in Kennedy, Johnson, and world.” The subsequent souring of relations was a the Nonaligned World is how to explain the re‐ consequence of the abandonment of that ap‐ markable transformation in the relationship be‐ proach under Lyndon Johnson. Central to tween the United States and much of the postcolo‐ Rakove’s argument is the distinction between nial world over the course of the 1960s. The assas‐ Kennedy’s approach to states in the Third World sination of John F. Kennedy in 1963 was met with that were “aligned” in the Cold War and those that genuine grief in many postcolonial states, reflect‐ were “non-aligned.” Common historiographic ing the positive and hopeful light in which the characterizations of Kennedy’s policy toward the United States under Kennedy had been widely Third World as aggressive and interventionist viewed. And yet by the second half of the decade, have failed to appreciate the significance of this the United States “had come to be seen not as an distinction, Rakove suggests. In the cases of states ally to Third World aspirations but as a malevo‐ that the U.S. government perceived to be already lent foe. Polarizing accusatory rhetoric unusual in aligned with the West, especially in Latin America the early 1960s became unremarkable by the and Southeast Asia, the Kennedy administration decade’s end, emerging as a lasting feature of was intolerant of changes that might endanger world politics, a recognizable precursor to con‐ that alignment, and pursued forceful interven‐ temporary denunciations of the United States” (p.
    [Show full text]
  • Cold War History the Rise and Fall of the 'Soviet Model of Development'
    This article was downloaded by: [LSE Library] On: 30 September 2013, At: 11:04 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Cold War History Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fcwh20 The rise and fall of the ‘Soviet Model of Development’ in West Africa, 1957–64 Alessandro Iandolo a a St Antony's College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK Published online: 14 May 2012. To cite this article: Alessandro Iandolo (2012) The rise and fall of the ‘Soviet Model of Development’ in West Africa, 1957–64, Cold War History, 12:4, 683-704 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14682745.2011.649255 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
    [Show full text]
  • America's War in Angola, 1961-1976 Alexander Joseph Marino University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 5-2015 America's War in Angola, 1961-1976 Alexander Joseph Marino University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the African History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Marino, Alexander Joseph, "America's War in Angola, 1961-1976" (2015). Theses and Dissertations. 1167. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1167 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. America’s War in Angola, 1961-1976 America’s War in Angola, 1961-1976 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History by Alexander J. Marino University of California, Santa Barbara Bachelor of Arts in History, 2008 May 2015 University of Arkansas This thesis is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council ______________________________________ Dr. Randall B. Woods Thesis Director ______________________________________ Dr. Andrea Arrington Committee Member ______________________________________ Dr. Alessandro Brogi Committee Member ABSTRACT A study of the role played by the United States in Angola’s War of Independence and the Angolan Civil War up to 1976. DEDICATION To Lisa. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Angolan Civil War – a Cold War Microcosm? In: Thomas Spielbuechler/Markus Wurzer (Hg.): Afrika – Zugänge Und Einordnungen
    Gesellschaft zur Förderung wissenschaftlicher Forschung und Publikation www.begutachtet.at [email protected] Thomas Schwärzler: The Angolan Civil War – A Cold War Microcosm? In: Thomas Spielbuechler/Markus Wurzer (Hg.): Afrika – Zugänge und Einordnungen. Afrikaforschung in Österreich, Linz 2017, S. 85–111. Dieser Artikel ist Teil eines Sammelbandes als Ergebnis der der Konferenz Afrika – Zugänge und Einordnungen, die vom 17. bis 18. November 2016 an der Johannes Kepler Universität Linz stattfand. Online abrufbar unter: http://epub.jku.at/nav/classification/1479225 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The online version of this and other articles can be found at the Repository of the Johannes Kepler University, Linz <http://epub.jku.at/nav/classification/1479225> Begutachtet.at is an open-access platform at the library of the Johannes Kepler University, Linz. Papers may be copied, distributed, displayed, performed and modified according to the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-SA 4.0). The Angolan Civil War – A Cold War Microcosm? Thomas Schwärzler1 ABSTRACT: Following the independence of Angola in 1975, the country descended into a decades- lasting civil war between three indigenous movements who previously had fought for independence from Portugal. The first period of the civil war from 1975 until 1988 was characterized by significant involvements from several international actors, including South Africa, Cuba, the United States and the Soviet Union. Especially the involvement of the two superpowers and the dominating nature of the Cold War in international politics in the second half of the 20th century, raises the question, whether the Angolan civil war was a proxy war of the Global Cold War. Particularly the involvement of South Africa casts doubt on this notion since the apartheid-regime directed vast recourses towards preventing majority-ruled countries in southern Africa from consolidating their power to protect its domestic sociopolitical system.
    [Show full text]
  • AMERICAN CO[VJ-Ni-'F~"Jfee on AFRICA
    CO·CHAIRMEN Donald S. Harrrngton A. Philip Ra,dolph VICE-CHAIRMAN publishers of AFRICA TODAY James A. Pike PRESIDENT CO[VJ-Ni-'f~"JfEE Peter WeIss AMERICAN ON AFRICA VICE·PRESIDENTS 211 East 43rd Street· New York, 12) TN 7-8733 • Cable AMCOMMAF Soph a Yarnall Jacobs Hope R. Stevens SECRETARY Farrell Jones TREASURER Nelson Be,ngston NATIONAL COMMITTEE (partial listing) Sadie T. M. Alexander Thurman Arnold Roger N. Baldwin Stringfellow Ba rr November 27, 1964 Richard Boiling Mrs. Chester Bowles James B. Carey Marguerite Cartwright Allan Knight Chalmers Max Delson Peter De Vries Charles C. Diggs J r The Honorable Dean Rusk Harry Emerson Fosdick Lewis S. Gannett Secretary of State Carlton B. Goodlett Henry W. Hobson State Department Arthur N. Holcombe Elmer J. Holland Washington, D.C. Hubert H. Humphrey Martin Luther King, J r George M Leader Rayford W. Logan Dear V~. Secretar,y: Eugene J. McCa rthy Robert J. McCracken John A. Mackay' Will Maslow We write you urgently at this time to m<°.ke a proposal on the Alexander Meiklejohn Howard M. Metzenbaum Congo crisis. It is obvious that the events of the last few days Wayne Morse Reinhold Niebuhr constit"J.te a crisis fiot only for the Coogo and for Africa, but F. D. Patterson Clarence Pickett for U. S. poli.cy in relation to Africa. Because of the events in ~~du~ex ~~i~:~ Stanleyville, a new chapter will be opened in Congo history, although Melvin Price Ira De A. Reid it may not necessarily be one any less violent nor more stable than Jackie Robinson James Roosevelt the history of the last few years.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the Congo Crisis, 1960-1961
    The Congo Crisis, 1960-1961: A Critical Oral History Conference Organized by: The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars’ Cold War International History Project and Africa Program Sponsored by: The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars September 23-24, 2004 Opening of Conference – September 23, 2004 CHRISTIAN OSTERMANN: Ladies and gentlemen I think we’ll get started even though we’re still expecting a few colleagues who haven’t arrived yet, but I think we should get started because we have quite an agenda for this meeting. Welcome all of you to the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars; my name is Christian Ostermann. I direct one of the programs here at the Woodrow Wilson Center, the Cold War International History Project. The Center is the United States’ official memorial to President Woodrow Wilson and it celebrates, commemorates Woodrow Wilson through a living memorial, that is, we bring scholars from around the world, about 150 each year to the Wilson center to do research and to write. In addition to hosting fellowship programs, the Center hosts 450 meetings each year on a broad array of topics related to international affairs. One of these meetings is taking place today, and it is a very special meeting, as I will explain in a few moments. This meeting is co-sponsored by the Center’s Cold War International History project and 1 the Center’s Africa Program, directed by former Congressman Howard Wolpe. He’s in Burundi as we speak here, but some of his staff will be joining us during the course of the day.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Security Council (1962) President's Letter St
    Historical Security Council (1962) President's Letter St. Bonaventure Conference 2017 Permanent Members: United States, USSR, United Kingdom, China, France Non-permanent Members: Chile, Ghana, Ireland, Romania, United Arab Republic (Egypt), Venezuela Chairing Style I believe that our conference should be driven by delegates rather than the chair. I expect delegates to be properly prepared to guide discussions and debates of topics relevant to the 1962 Security Council. I will only step in if Rules of Procedure are not being followed, discussion has become unprofessional or too far off the topic under consideration. When it comes to working papers, I cannot stress enough the need for meaningful cooperation. As tempting as it is to simply become a co-sponsor of every working paper to give the impression of cooperation, this is not enough. Make an effort to add amendments, fight amendments not beneficial to your nation, create rival working papers, and employ any other means by which you can protect and advance your nation's interests. I expect to see a lot of healthy debate over the clauses and language of working papers. I expect all working papers to be well-written, correctly formatted, and fall within the purview of the United Nations Security Council. I would also like to note that I expect all delegates to speak up and contribute to discussion. I know that this may be the first time some of you participate in a Model UN conference, so I perfectly understand if some may be hesitant to immediately jump into discussion. I also understand that some nations may not have a strong stance on a certain topic and thus might not have much to contribute to the discussion.
    [Show full text]
  • Internal Colonialism and Humanitarian Intervention M
    INTERNAL COLONIALISM AND HUMANITARIAN INTERVENTION M. Sornarajah* I. INTRODUCTION International lawyers generally agree that if a right of self- determination exists in international law,' it is exhausted once the process of decolonization ends." The basic argument for this view relates to international security: to preserve the stability engen- dered by an international order based on a system of states, self- determination must not be extended beyond the context of de- colonization to include a right of secession to minority groups. It is argued that the continued existence of the principle would legiti- mize the right of secession. As a result, states with a plurality of ethnic groups would be subject to the constant threat of secession. Because claims to secession often are asserted violently, other states might be tempted to intervene militarily to enhance their influence. The fear that internal strife may be an avenue by which major powers spread their influence or weaken their enemies is a real one. The promotion of a separate Baluchistan in Pakistan, or a Kurdistan in Iran, would have serious effects on those states and on their regions. Another reason for denying the right of self- determination following decolonization is that the concept of state sovereignty would be weakened. This concept reflects the posi- tivist notion that only states are subject to international law and *LL.B. (Ceylon), LL.M. (Yale), Ph.D. (London); Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Tasmania, Australia. ' Some lawyers doubt the existence of the right. See Green, Self-Determinationand the Settlement of the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 65 AM. Soc'Y INT'L L.
    [Show full text]
  • South Africa and the 'Congo Crisis', 1960-1965
    South Africa and the ‘Congo Crisis’, 1960-1965 By Lazlo Patrick Christian Passemiers SUBMITTED IN FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN RESPECT OF THE DOCTORAL DEGREE QUALIFICATION IN AFRICA STUDIES IN THE CENTRE FOR AFRICA STUDIES, IN THE FACULTY OF THE HUMANITIES, AT THE UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE February 2016 Supervisor: Prof. I.R. Phimister Co-supervisor: Dr. A.P. Cohen Declaration (i) I, Lazlo Passemiers, declare that the Doctoral Degree research thesis that I herewith submit for the Doctoral Degree qualification in Africa Studies at the University of the Free State is my independent work and that I have not previously submitted it for a qualification at another institution of higher education. (ii) I, Lazlo Passemiers, hereby declare that I am aware that the copyright is vested in the University of the Free State. (iii) I, Lazlo Passemiers, hereby declare that all royalties as regards intellectual property that was developed during the course of and/or in connection with the study at the University of the Free State will accrue to the University. Signature: Date: I Abstract On 30 June 1960, the Belgian Congo gained independence. Congo’s newfound freedom was soon disrupted by a period of severe socio-political chaos and conflict that became known as the ‘Congo crisis’. The exact nature of the relationship between South Africa and the Congo crisis largely remains unknown. The thesis addresses this historiographical omission by asking three main questions. First, how was South Africa involved in the Congo crisis? Secondly, what was the rationale for its involvement? Thirdly, how was the Congo crisis perceived inside South Africa? Besides significantly strengthening and expanding the existing historiography on Pretoria’s involvement and South African mercenaries, hitherto neglected aspects of the crisis are also examined.
    [Show full text]
  • Moral Masculinity: the Culture of Foreign Relations
    MORAL MASCULINITY: THE CULTURE OF FOREIGN RELATIONS DURING THE KENNEDY ADMINISTRATION DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Jennifer Lynn Walton, B.A., M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 2004 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Michael J. Hogan, Adviser ___________________________ Professor Peter L. Hahn Adviser Department of History Professor Kevin Boyle Copyright by Jennifer Lynn Walton 2004 ABSTRACT The Kennedy administration of 1961-1963 was an era marked by increasing tension in U.S.-Soviet relations, culminating in the Cuban missile crisis of October 1962. This period provides a snapshot of the culture and politics of the Cold War. During the early 1960s, broader concerns about gender upheaval coincided with an administration that embraced a unique ideology of masculinity. Policymakers at the top levels of the Kennedy administration, including President John F. Kennedy, operated within a cultural framework best described as moral masculinity. Moral masculinity was the set of values or criteria by which Kennedy and his closest foreign policy advisors defined themselves as white American men. Drawing on these criteria justified their claims to power. The values they embraced included heroism, courage, vigor, responsibility, and maturity. Kennedy’s focus on civic virtue, sacrifice, and public service highlights the “moral” aspect of moral masculinity. To members of the Kennedy administration, these were moral virtues and duties and their moral fitness justified their fitness to serve in public office. Five key elements of moral masculinity played an important role in diplomatic crises during the Kennedy administration.
    [Show full text]