反殖民主义与民族自决

IF 0.1 Q3 HISTORY
Michelle D. Paranzino
{"title":"反殖民主义与民族自决","authors":"Michelle D. Paranzino","doi":"10.1163/24683302-bja10040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe 1982 Falklands/Malvinas conflict pitted two of the most foundational principles of postwar international relations—anti-colonialism and self-determination—against each other, creating dilemmas for the great powers and smaller states alike in determining where to place their loyalties. The British consistently upheld the self-determination of the islanders, while portraying the war as a struggle between the forces of democracy and those of dictatorship. Though the United States strove for the appearance of neutrality, support for the United Kingdom resulted in the effective abandonment of the anti-colonialism of the Monroe Doctrine. The Soviet Union viewed the war as an anachronistic return to open imperialist aggression, and backed the fiercely anti-communist military junta in Argentina, even as it waged what was viewed as a “third world war” against the transnational forces of Marxism-Leninism. Meanwhile, the countries of the Western Hemisphere polarised into Latin American demands for decolonisation and the devotion of the Anglophone Caribbean to the principle of self-determination. This division was reflected in the debates and resolutions of the Organization of American States, the Non-Aligned Movement, and the United Nations.","PeriodicalId":40173,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Military History and Historiography","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anti-Colonialism Versus Self-Determination\",\"authors\":\"Michelle D. Paranzino\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/24683302-bja10040\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe 1982 Falklands/Malvinas conflict pitted two of the most foundational principles of postwar international relations—anti-colonialism and self-determination—against each other, creating dilemmas for the great powers and smaller states alike in determining where to place their loyalties. The British consistently upheld the self-determination of the islanders, while portraying the war as a struggle between the forces of democracy and those of dictatorship. Though the United States strove for the appearance of neutrality, support for the United Kingdom resulted in the effective abandonment of the anti-colonialism of the Monroe Doctrine. The Soviet Union viewed the war as an anachronistic return to open imperialist aggression, and backed the fiercely anti-communist military junta in Argentina, even as it waged what was viewed as a “third world war” against the transnational forces of Marxism-Leninism. Meanwhile, the countries of the Western Hemisphere polarised into Latin American demands for decolonisation and the devotion of the Anglophone Caribbean to the principle of self-determination. This division was reflected in the debates and resolutions of the Organization of American States, the Non-Aligned Movement, and the United Nations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40173,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Military History and Historiography\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Military History and Historiography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/24683302-bja10040\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Military History and Historiography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24683302-bja10040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1982年的福克兰群岛/马尔维纳斯群岛冲突使战后国际关系的两项最基本原则——反殖民主义和自决——相互对立,给大国和小国在决定效忠地点时都带来了困境。英国人一贯支持岛民的自决权,同时将战争描述为民主力量和独裁力量之间的斗争。尽管美国努力表现出中立,但对英国的支持导致了门罗主义反殖民主义的有效放弃。苏联认为这场战争是帝国主义公开侵略的不合时宜的回归,并支持阿根廷强烈反共的军政府,尽管它对马克思列宁主义的跨国势力发动了被视为“第三次世界大战”。与此同时,西半球国家分化为拉丁美洲对非殖民化的要求和加勒比英语国家对自决原则的忠诚。这种分歧反映在美洲国家组织、不结盟运动和联合国的辩论和决议中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Anti-Colonialism Versus Self-Determination
The 1982 Falklands/Malvinas conflict pitted two of the most foundational principles of postwar international relations—anti-colonialism and self-determination—against each other, creating dilemmas for the great powers and smaller states alike in determining where to place their loyalties. The British consistently upheld the self-determination of the islanders, while portraying the war as a struggle between the forces of democracy and those of dictatorship. Though the United States strove for the appearance of neutrality, support for the United Kingdom resulted in the effective abandonment of the anti-colonialism of the Monroe Doctrine. The Soviet Union viewed the war as an anachronistic return to open imperialist aggression, and backed the fiercely anti-communist military junta in Argentina, even as it waged what was viewed as a “third world war” against the transnational forces of Marxism-Leninism. Meanwhile, the countries of the Western Hemisphere polarised into Latin American demands for decolonisation and the devotion of the Anglophone Caribbean to the principle of self-determination. This division was reflected in the debates and resolutions of the Organization of American States, the Non-Aligned Movement, and the United Nations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信