Sino-Lao relations in world politics since 1954: The theory and practice of peaceful coexistence
Author(s):
Vang, Pobzeb
Format:
Thesis
Degree granted:
Ph.D.
Publisher:
Ann Arbor : University of Denver, 1996.
Pages:
385
Language:
English
Abstract:
Sino-Lao relations from 1954 through 1995, in the context of world politics, and with particular emphasis on the theory and practice of the five principles of peaceful coexistence, is the subject of this work. In chapter one the historical setting for Sino-Lao relations is presented. The physical, social, and cultural geography of Laos and Indochina is discussed. Chapter one provides a context for Sino-Lao relations and their entanglement in the Cold War and triangular politics. Chapter two contains an examination and analysis of the theory and practice of the five principles of peaceful coexistence. The development of the Soviet concept of peaceful coexistence is examined and compared with the development of the five principles of peaceful coexistence as put forth by China and India at the Bandung Conference. In chapter three Sino-Lao relations between 1954 and 1964 are presented and placed in the context of Lao domestic politics and the triangular politics of the United States, the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China. Chapter four continues the examination of Sino-Lao relations for the years 1964 through 1995. Again the Sino-Lao relationship is placed in the context of changing triangular politics, including Nixon's move away from Truman's containment policy. Chapter five contains a discussion and an analysis of the connection between the five principles of peaceful coexistence and the actual conduct of relations between the People's Republic of China and Laos. In chapter six there is a summary of the information presented and conclusions regarding the theory and practice of Sino-Lao relations. The five principles of peaceful coexistence may be used by two nations with good relations that are not interfering with other big power relationships, such as Sino-U.S. relations. In fact, the driving force behind the conduct of foreign relations seems to be national self-interest and power. When members of the international community determine that the potential costs of resolving a problem such as Bosnia, Rwanda or the Hmong refugees in Thailand are greater than the probable benefits of resolution, they do not act. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)