This book is the first full-length study of the 1947 drawing of the Indo-Pakistani boundary in Punjab. It uses the Radcliffe commission, headed by Sir Cyril Radcliffe , as a window onto the decolonisation and independence of India and Pakistan. Examining the competing interests that influenced the actions of the various major players, the book highlights British efforts to maintain a grip on India even as the decolonisation process spun out of control. It examines the nature of power relationships within the colonial state, with a focus on the often-veiled exertion of British colonial power. With conflict between Hindus , Muslims and Sikhs reaching unprecedented levels in the mid-1940s , British leaders felt compelled to move towards decolonization. The partition was to be perceived as a South Asian undertaking, with British officials acting only as steady and impartial guides. Radcliffe's use of administrative boundaries reinforced the impact of imperial rule. The boundaries that Radcliffe defined turned out to be restless divisions, and in both the 1965 and 1971 wars India and Pakistan battled over their Punjabi border. After the final boundary, known as the 'Radcliffe award', was announced, all sides complained that Radcliffe had not taken the right 'other factors' into account. Radcliffe's loyalty to British interests is key to understanding his work in 1947. Drawing on extensive archival research in India, Pakistan and Britain, combined with innovative use of cartographic sources, the book paints a vivid picture of both the partition process and the Radcliffe line's impact on Punjab.
to decolonize this relationship, and arguably has at times in history attempted to do so, Xi Jinping's CCP appears to be establishing a model for modern China, which does not recognize the strategies of decolonization or multiculturalism as options. As James Leibold ( 2019 ) has convincingly suggested, Xi Jinping has embraced an inherently assimilationist approach to nation-building in today's PRC that is based on fusing Han culture with the entire nation of the PRC. As a result, the state is embarking on an overall drive to assimilate non-Han peoples into a Han
agreements that mandated international organizations consult the OAU when operating in the African region. African states sought to embed themselves in the UN to enhance their influence and also craft the agenda where it suited their principles and regional interests. In practice this meant using the UN to condemn colonial and white-minority regimes to achieve total liberation while simultaneously keeping internal disputes within and amongst independent African states off the UNSC agenda.
The African Group played a critical role in keeping apartheid and decolonization
theoretical framework on norm creation that could potentially be applied to other regional organizations. As an overview of the existing literature will show, norm creation is often assumed to have arisen at the international or domestic levels. However, it is important to show how norms are created and promoted by Global South regional organizations that are often understood to predominantly be the recipients of norms, in order to understand how those regions emerged from decolonization struggles and sought to contribute and continue to contribute to the ideas that govern
The taming of nature into the twenty-first century
for powerful and independent international bodies to forge cooperation and address pressing global challenges.
Proponents of functionalism might have seen decolonization in the mid-twentieth century as the international community's failure to implement Woolf's technocratic solution to the ‘African problem’. After all, the 1856 Danube Commission had shown that an independent and outcome-focused body could effectively tackle international problems by giving weight to science and expertise over power politics. If only international diplomats had had
Brazil’s ambiguous entrance into the Global War on Terror
Camila de Macedo Braga and Ana Maura Tomesani
their liberal roots. In turn, all areas outside of it, at least in
part, have come to be loosely associated with the “global
South,” with their formal inclusion in the global economic
order presented as work in progress.
After the decolonization processes in the 1960 and
1970s, the Bretton Woods systems embraced the task of promoting
liberal institutional development within
damage continuing atrocities were doing to Africa’s regional interests. Support for decolonization and racial equality were the issues where there was absolute consensus amongst African leaders in 1963 because there was a strong belief that the remnants of these systems on the continent were a fundamental threat to Africa’s security and values. When Africa’s inability to address human rights and conflict began to impact its ability to achieve the region’s fundamental goal of eradicating colonial and racial regimes, a larger cadre of leaders began to take seriously the
of the need to reform and adapt to changing regional and international dynamics and presents the most coherent, albeit broad, outline of a policy response. It briefly outlines the achievements of the OAU’s first three decades but focuses on the work that still needed to be done.
The principle achievements of the OAU as perceived by the Secretary General were contributions to the decolonization of several countries and ongoing work to dismantle the apartheid system. 4 Colonial and white-minority regimes were coming to an end in Africa by 1990, but there were
Integration, Decolonization, and the Challenge from the Global South 1957–1986 . Oxford : Oxford University Press .
Farah , D.
Babineau , K.
( 2019 ). “ Extra-regional actors in Latin America ”. PRISM
8 ( 1 ), 96–113 .
The end of World War II heralded in a new international era. However, most states in Africa entered this era as colonies of the major powers without a voice or equal rights in the international system, and the next twenty years would be a struggle for independence. The independence of the Gold Coast in 1957 kicked off a wave of decolonization in sub-Saharan Africa, with most states achieving independence by the mid-1960s. The OAU was created in May 1963 soon after many African states gained independence. The choice to construct a regional organization was