Pub Date : 1965-07-01DOI: 10.1177/0974928419650307
Z. M. Quraishi
{"title":"Reviews & Notices India","authors":"Z. M. Quraishi","doi":"10.1177/0974928419650307","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0974928419650307","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43647,"journal":{"name":"India Quarterly-A Journal of International Affairs","volume":"675 1","pages":"318 - 320"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"1965-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76862820","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1965-07-01DOI: 10.1177/0974928419650302
Baljit Singh, Kobayashi Mei
Since World War II guerrilla warfare has attracted world-wide attention. Some twenty countries have undergone extensive guerrilla activities. Almost half of -the population on the earth has been involved in this struggle. Millions of lives have been sacrificed and billions of dollars spent. Indeed guerrilla warfare is one of the most serious concerns of our time. Just what is guerrilla warfare? Who may be called a guerrilla? • Historically, the term guerrilla originated in Spain during the Peninsular War (1808-14) when the Spanish irregulars and civilians harassed the troops of Napoleon while he was trying to control the country and to expel the English from the Iberian Peninsula. Literally, it meant 'small war', and the man who participated in waging such a war was called a guerrillero; but he also called himself a partido, or a partisan. That is how the terms guerrilla and partisan became interchangeable. In the meantime, through the generations, rebels used to crown themselves with honorable names, whereas the incumbents tended to degrade them. For instance, during the last war, Russian irregulars called themselves partisans or 'fighters of freedom'; yet the Germans termed these same partisans Banditen or bandits. By the same token, Mao Tse-tung and Chin Peng and their 'liberation fighters' were labeled as 'bandits' by the Chinese Nationalists and the British, respectively. There, has been a tendency to refer to all forms of sustained disorder and rebellion, from bandits to devoted political revolutionaries, as guerrilla activity. Remarked Valeriano and Bohannan: 'Probably no areas of military thought and practice are so plagued with semantic and definitional difficulties (and misconceptions)'.1 Guerrilla warfare, like regular warfare, started in a very simple and primitive way. Slowly yet steadily, it proceeded toward its present form along with the advancing political thinking, science, and technology7. The first guerrilla war recorded in Chinese history, was around 3,600 B.C. when
{"title":"Guerrilla Warfare","authors":"Baljit Singh, Kobayashi Mei","doi":"10.1177/0974928419650302","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0974928419650302","url":null,"abstract":"Since World War II guerrilla warfare has attracted world-wide attention. Some twenty countries have undergone extensive guerrilla activities. Almost half of -the population on the earth has been involved in this struggle. Millions of lives have been sacrificed and billions of dollars spent. Indeed guerrilla warfare is one of the most serious concerns of our time. Just what is guerrilla warfare? Who may be called a guerrilla? • Historically, the term guerrilla originated in Spain during the Peninsular War (1808-14) when the Spanish irregulars and civilians harassed the troops of Napoleon while he was trying to control the country and to expel the English from the Iberian Peninsula. Literally, it meant 'small war', and the man who participated in waging such a war was called a guerrillero; but he also called himself a partido, or a partisan. That is how the terms guerrilla and partisan became interchangeable. In the meantime, through the generations, rebels used to crown themselves with honorable names, whereas the incumbents tended to degrade them. For instance, during the last war, Russian irregulars called themselves partisans or 'fighters of freedom'; yet the Germans termed these same partisans Banditen or bandits. By the same token, Mao Tse-tung and Chin Peng and their 'liberation fighters' were labeled as 'bandits' by the Chinese Nationalists and the British, respectively. There, has been a tendency to refer to all forms of sustained disorder and rebellion, from bandits to devoted political revolutionaries, as guerrilla activity. Remarked Valeriano and Bohannan: 'Probably no areas of military thought and practice are so plagued with semantic and definitional difficulties (and misconceptions)'.1 Guerrilla warfare, like regular warfare, started in a very simple and primitive way. Slowly yet steadily, it proceeded toward its present form along with the advancing political thinking, science, and technology7. The first guerrilla war recorded in Chinese history, was around 3,600 B.C. when","PeriodicalId":43647,"journal":{"name":"India Quarterly-A Journal of International Affairs","volume":"1 1","pages":"285 - 310"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"1965-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89353842","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1965-04-01DOI: 10.1177/0974928419650202
Surjit Mansingh
{"title":"India and the Hungarian Revolution","authors":"Surjit Mansingh","doi":"10.1177/0974928419650202","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0974928419650202","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43647,"journal":{"name":"India Quarterly-A Journal of International Affairs","volume":"44 1","pages":"138 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"1965-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74350972","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1965-04-01DOI: 10.1177/0974928419650203
J. Wilczynski
TRADITIONALLY, trade between Australia and China has hardly ever been of much importance to either country. In pre-communist days China took about 1 per cent of Australian exports and supplied an even smaller proportion of Australian imports. For almost a decade after the communist takeover, trade between the two countries dwindled to a trickle. But then in the late 1950's China entered the Australian wool market, and in 1960 she began her rather spectacular wheat purchases. In odd years she has also bought large quantities of barley, oats, tallow and iron and steel. China now takes 6 per cent (or about Aj£70 na. annually) of Australian exports, but supplies less than I per cent (A£5 m.) of Australia's import needs. Contrary to what one might be inclined to think, this trade, however small in absolute terms, carries significant consequences. On the one hand, Australia has risen to the position of the third most important supplier of China's import needs. On the other, China is now the fifth most important customer for Australian exports; she has been the number one buyer of Australian wheat for three years, and in the last two years she absorbed one half of Australian wheat export. She also takes one third of Australia's export of tallow, and occasionally about the same proportion of barley and oats. China has a virtual monopoly in supplying Australia with tung oil (for certain types of paints), bristles, certain textiles (such as pillow cases). Besides, this trade involves considerable political implications. The purpose of this article Jus to highlight the dilemmas which this trade poses to Australia. Time and again there are waves of public criticism in Australia concerning the 'China trade'. The following arguments have been marshalled against trading with China.
{"title":"Australia's Trade with China","authors":"J. Wilczynski","doi":"10.1177/0974928419650203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0974928419650203","url":null,"abstract":"TRADITIONALLY, trade between Australia and China has hardly ever been of much importance to either country. In pre-communist days China took about 1 per cent of Australian exports and supplied an even smaller proportion of Australian imports. For almost a decade after the communist takeover, trade between the two countries dwindled to a trickle. But then in the late 1950's China entered the Australian wool market, and in 1960 she began her rather spectacular wheat purchases. In odd years she has also bought large quantities of barley, oats, tallow and iron and steel. China now takes 6 per cent (or about Aj£70 na. annually) of Australian exports, but supplies less than I per cent (A£5 m.) of Australia's import needs. Contrary to what one might be inclined to think, this trade, however small in absolute terms, carries significant consequences. On the one hand, Australia has risen to the position of the third most important supplier of China's import needs. On the other, China is now the fifth most important customer for Australian exports; she has been the number one buyer of Australian wheat for three years, and in the last two years she absorbed one half of Australian wheat export. She also takes one third of Australia's export of tallow, and occasionally about the same proportion of barley and oats. China has a virtual monopoly in supplying Australia with tung oil (for certain types of paints), bristles, certain textiles (such as pillow cases). Besides, this trade involves considerable political implications. The purpose of this article Jus to highlight the dilemmas which this trade poses to Australia. Time and again there are waves of public criticism in Australia concerning the 'China trade'. The following arguments have been marshalled against trading with China.","PeriodicalId":43647,"journal":{"name":"India Quarterly-A Journal of International Affairs","volume":"539 1","pages":"156 - 166"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"1965-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80211845","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：