scholarly journals Mongolia’s Diplomatic Efforts to Join the United Nations and the Changes in the Position of the Great Powers

2021 ◽  
pp. 15-27
Author(s):  
Ulambayar Denzenlkham
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Korean War ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Korean War ◽  
History Of ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Republic

This article discusses Mongolia’s 15 years of diplomatic efforts to join the United Nations, the main factors that influenced it, and the changing policies and positions of the Soviet Union, the Kuomintang of China, the United States, and other great powers. Although the Mongolian People’s Republic was able to join the United Nations in 1946, it was influenced by the Soviet Union’s communist position. Since 1946, Chiang Kai-shek’s Chinese policy and position have been a major obstacle. The history of the Republic of China, which existed on the mainland between 1912 and 1949, was the history of the struggle for power between the warlords, the history of the struggle between the Kuomintang and the Communists. In the nearly 40 years since the founding of the Republic of China in 1912, neither the warlords nor the Kuomintang have been able to exercise their sovereignty on the mainland, but they are keen to see Outer Mongolia as part of their territory. The Kuomintang was expelled from the mainland in 1949, shortly after 1946. During the Korean War, initiated by Kim Il-sung, Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong, Mongolia stood firmly behind North Korea, providing both moral and material support. It has not been mentioned anywhere that this resulted in Mongolia’s efforts at the UN being postponed for many years. When Communist China entered the Korean War, the Kuomintang, which fully supported the US-led UN military operation (peacekeeping), not only continuously provoked at the Security Council of the United Nations, but also presented false documents about the MPR - described as “a Chinese territory seized by the Soviet Union” - sending troops to North Korea.The United States, which has recognized the status quo of the Mongolian People’s Republic, has made it clear that it has played an important role in the country’s admission to the United Nations. Thus Mongolia’s attempt finally succeeded and it became the 101st state to join the United Nations. As a consequence, Mongolia’s independence has been approved by a recognize of Western powers and it began to emerge out of its isolation, participate in decision of global issues, and cooperate with the international community. However, not only did this opportunity not be fully exploited, but due to the Cold War, Mongolia became a hotbed of ideological competition between the socialist and capitalist systems at the United Nations, the speakers’ rostrum Nevetheless,Post-Cold War, a whole new era of cooperation between Mongolia and the United Nations began.

The New United Nations and the Revision of the Charter

1954 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans J. Morgenthau
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Korean War ◽  
The United States ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Korean War ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
Do So

The conflict between the United States and the Soviet Union has prevented the United Nations from becoming the international government of the great powers which the Charter intended it to be. That conflict has paralyzed the Security Council as an agency of international government. In the few instances when it has been able to act as an agency of international government, it has been able to do so either, as in the beginning of the Korean War, by the accidental and temporary absence of the Soviet Union or, as on the Indonesian issue, by a fortuitous and exceptional coincidence of interests.

The Role of the Mongolian People’s Republic in the Korean War

2018 ◽  
pp. 97-130
Author(s):  
Denzenlkham Ulambayar
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Korean War ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
Central Intelligence Agency ◽  
Intelligence Agency ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Archival Documents ◽  
The Korean War ◽  
History Of

Since the 1990s, when previously classified and top secret Russian archival documents on the Korean War became open and accessible, it has become clear for post-communist countries that Kim Il Sung, Stalin and Mao Zedong were the primary organizers of the war. It is now equally certain that tensions arising from Soviet and American struggle generated the origins of the Korean War, namely the Soviet Union’s occupation of the northern half of the Korean peninsula and the United States’ occupation of the southern half to the 38th parallel after 1945 as well as the emerging bipolar world order of international relations and Cold War. Newly available Russian archival documents produced much in the way of new energies and opportunities for international study and research into the Korean War.2 However, within this research few documents connected to Mongolia have so far been found, and little specific research has yet been done regarding why and how Mongolia participated in the Korean War. At the same time, it is becoming today more evident that both Soviet guidance and U.S. information reports (evaluated and unevaluated) regarding Mongolia were far different from the situation and developments of that period. New examples of this tendency are documents declassified in the early 2000s and released publicly from the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in December 2016 which contain inaccurate information. The original, uncorrupted sources about why, how and to what degree the Mongolian People’s Republic (MPR) became a participant in the Korean War are in fact in documents held within the Mongolian Central Archives of Foreign Affairs. These archives contain multiple documents in relation to North Korea. Prior to the 1990s Mongolian scholars Dr. B. Lkhamsuren,3 Dr. B. Ligden,4 Dr. Sh. Sandag,5 junior scholar J. Sukhee,6 and A. A. Osipov7 mention briefly in their writings the history of relations between the MPR and the DPRK during the Korean War. Since the 1990s the Korean War has also briefly been touched upon in the writings of B. Lkhamsuren,8 D. Ulambayar (the author of this paper),9 Ts. Batbayar,10 J. Battur,11 K. Demberel,12 Balảzs Szalontai,13 Sergey Radchenko14 and Li Narangoa.15 There have also been significant collections of documents about the two countries and a collection of memoirs published in 200716 and 2008.17 The author intends within this paper to discuss particularly about why, how and to what degree Mongolia participated in the Korean War, the rumors and realities of the war and its consequences for the MPR’s membership in the United Nations. The MPR was the second socialist country following the Soviet Union (the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics) to recognize the DPRK (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) and establish diplomatic ties. That was part of the initial stage of socialist system formation comprising the Soviet Union, nations in Eastern Europe, the MPR, the PRC (People’s Republic of China) and the DPRK. Accordingly between the MPR and the DPRK fraternal friendship and a framework of cooperation based on the principles of proletarian and socialist internationalism had been developed.18 In light of and as part of this framework, The Korean War has left its deep traces in the history of the MPR’s external diplomatic environment and state sovereignty

4. From colony to competing states

2020 ◽  
pp. 69-86
Author(s):  
Michael J. Seth
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Korean War ◽  
The United States ◽  
Republic Of Korea ◽  
Political Systems ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Korean War ◽  
Japanese Colonial ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Second World

As the Second World War came to an end, most Koreans hoped that their nation would be an independent and prosperous state. ‘From colony to competing states’ shows that, instead, events took an unexpected turn. Korea became both free of Japanese colonial rule and simultaneously partitioned into two occupation zones by the United States and the Soviet Union. From these zones, two separate states were created: the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; two societies with different leaderships, political systems, and geopolitical orientations. When North Korea attempted to reunify the country in 1950, foreign powers again intervened resulting in the Korean War, a costly conflict that left the peninsula still divided.

scholarly journals Bellicose Peace: China’s Peace Signature Campaign and Discourses about “Peace” in the Early 1950s

Modern China ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 250-280
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Forster
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Atomic Bomb ◽  
Korean War ◽  
World Peace ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Korean War ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Cold War

In the early 1950s, China engaged in several military actions, most notably in the Korean War. Nevertheless, the World Peace Council, an international organization sponsored by the Soviet Union, praised the country as a “fortress for the protection of world peace” in 1954. This hinged upon a very specific, bellicose understanding of “peacefulness,” which did not mean the rejection of war, but war against the “right” enemy. I discuss this understanding, its function within the international community, its embeddedness in international political thinking, and its promulgation among the Chinese population, using the example of a campaign in 1950 to collect signatures on a World Peace Council–authored appeal against the atomic bomb. Self-promotion as a peaceful nation in the bellicose sense served a variety of purposes for the young People’s Republic of China (PRC), most importantly the goal to instill bloc thinking in the PRC’s population and to gain prestige within the new international order of the Cold War.

IV. Collective Enforcement of Peace and Security

1945 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 970-981 ◽  
Author(s):  
William T. R. Fox
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
The United Nations

The Security Council of the United Nations will, from the first day of its existence, include in its membership all of the great powers. The Council, backed by the united will of the five powers with permanent seats in that body, will act, if it acts at all, with an authority which no organ of the League of Nations ever possessed. In the League Council, there was no time during which all of the great powers participated. Only two of them, France and the United Kingdom, were League members throughout its period of activity. Some may believe that too high a price, or a higher price than was necessary, was paid to insure the participation of the Five Powers, and especially the United States and the Soviet Union, in the United Nations Organization. The price was paid largely in provisions of its Charter relative to the maintenance or restoration of international peace and security which circumscribe carefully the situations in which the Security Council can take action.

http://habibiaislamicus.com/index.php/hirj/article/view/192

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 33-38
Author(s):  
Mamnoon Ahmad Khan ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
United Nations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Jammu And Kashmir ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Western Block ◽  
The United Nations

This research paper examines the attitude of People’s Republic of China towards Kashmir conflict. Chinese leaders have been evolving their own strategy towards the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Chinese concentration was focused basically to oppose the United States and the United Kingdom in the United Nations. Even when the Soviet Union began to favour the Indian stand, China remained neutral. China cooperated with Pakistan in every field including the Kashmir issue but the United States, Soviet Union and the Western block opposed Chinese efforts in the United Nations. That’s why China remained unsuccessful in resolving the Kashmir dispute.

Soviet Aid to the Spanish Republic in 1936–1939: Modern Conservative Versions

2021 ◽  
pp. 134-142
Author(s):  
Mikhail V. Novikov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Great Powers ◽  
Soviet Leadership ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Gold Reserve ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Military ◽  
The Impact

The subject of the study is some modern conservative versions of the history of the Soviet Union’s military assistance to the Spanish Republic in 1936–1939. The aim of the article is to attempt a critical analysis of the new and revived versions of the motives of Soviet intervention in the Spanish conflict, of the involvement of the Soviet leadership in large-scale terror against civilians in the republican zone, of the degree of influence of the Soviet leadership and Soviet representatives in Spain on the governmental structure of the Spanish Republic, of the anti-fascist character of the war. The study has established the inconsistency of the versions about Soviet aid as a means of promoting the world revolution in Spain and as an attempt to draw the democratic and fascist states into a major war between themselves through the Spanish conflict, about the possibilities of Stalin in 1936 to manipulate the great powers. It has been proved that conservative historians exaggerate the degree of influence of Stalin and Soviet political representatives in Spain on the military-political leadership of the republic. The impact of the so-called “instruments” of Soviet influence in the Spanish Republic is also exaggerated. The first of the instruments is considered to be the relocation of part of the gold reserve to Moscow, which, allegedly, allowed the Soviet control over the finances of the republic to be established. The second is the activities of Soviet military advisers; the third is the Communist Party of Spain, which was part of the Comintern, and was considered as an obedient tool in the hands of Moscow. It was and still is traditional to attribute responsibility for unleashing large-scale terror against civilians in the republican zone to Stalin, which does not correspond to reality as convincingly proved by the British historian P. Preston in his famous work The Spanish Holocaust. The scale of terror was exaggerated in the republican zone and, accordingly, understated in the Francoist zone. The study shows the failure of attempts to distort the anti-fascist nature of the war waged by the Spanish Republic relying on the support of the Soviet Union, Mexico, the progressive public of most civilized countries of that time, as well as attempts to present the regimes of Hitler, Mussolini and Franco in 1936–1939 as quite respectable. The new and updated critical versions of the Soviet aid to the Spanish Republic considered in the article are the result of the neoconservative wave in western historiography, which influenced representatives of both the classical historical school and the adherents of postmodernism.

From Two Camps to Three Worlds: The Party Worldview in PRC Textbooks (1949–1966)

2013 ◽  
Vol 215 ◽  
pp. 682-702 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miin-ling Yu
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Cultural Revolution ◽  
Korean War ◽  
Class Struggle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Republic Of China ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Korean War ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Maoist China

AbstractThe worldview as reflected in the textbooks of the People's Republic of China during 1949–1966 centred on Party-led nationalism, anti-imperialism and anti-colonialism. This article emphasizes both the continuities and changes in nationalist ideology during the Republican and Maoist periods. First, textbooks in Maoist China presented the imperialist powers as shifting away from Britain, Russia and Japan under the KMT government and towards the United States (since 1949) and the Soviet Union (since the 1960s), and emphasized class struggle. Second, the CCP had far greater control over the production of textbooks than the KMT. In this sense, the CCP truly carried out “partified” (danghua) education, a goal shared by the KMT which it never had the ability to achieve. In addition, “the language of Cultural Revolution” appeared with the outbreak of the Korean War. In other words, the education that cultivated revolutionary successors began in the early 1950s.

The 13th of December 1981 in the political history of Poland: view through 35 years

2017 ◽  
pp. 369-378
Author(s):  
Vladislav Strutynsky
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
Trade Union ◽  
Political Conflict ◽  
Grassroots Organizations ◽  
Martial Law ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Polish Society ◽  
History Of ◽  
National Salvation ◽  
The Republic

By analyzing one of the most eventful periods of the modern history of Poland, the early 80s of the XX century, the author examines the dynamics of social and political conflict on the eve of the introduction of martial law, which determines the location of the leading political forces in these events in Poland, that were grouped around the Polish United Labor Party and the Independent trade union «Solidarity», their governing structures and grassroots organizations, highlighting the development of socio-political situation in the country before entering the martial law on the 13th of December and analyzing the relation of the leading countries to the events, especially the Soviet Union. Also, the author distinguishes causes that prevent to reach the compromise in the process of realization different programs, that were offered to public and designed by PUWP and «Solidarity» and were “aimed” to help Polish society to exit an unprecedented conflict. This article provides a comparative analysis of the different analytical meaningful reasons, offered by historians, political scientists, lawyers, and led to the imposition of martial law in the Republic of Poland. The author also analyses the legality of such actions by the state and some conclusions that were reached by scientists, investigating the internal dynamics of the conflict and the process of implementation of tasks, that Polish United Workers’ Party (which ruled at that time) tried to solve with martial law and «Solidarity» was used as self-determination in Polish society. Keywords: Martial law, Independent trade union «Solidarity», inter-factory strike committee, social-political conflict, Polish United Workers’ Party, the Warsaw Pact, the Military Council of National Salvation

Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 399-413
Author(s):  
Rizal Abdul Kadir
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
United Nations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Caspian Sea ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The Caspian Sea ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The United Nations

After twenty-two years of negotiations, in Aktau on August 12, 2018, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Iran, Russia, and Turkmenistan signed the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea. The preamble of the Convention stipulates, among other things, that the Convention, made up of twenty-four articles, was agreed on by the five states based on principles and norms of the Charter of the United Nations and International Law. The enclosed Caspian Sea is bordered by Iran, Russia, and three states that were established following dissolution of the Soviet Union, namely Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document