Review: Asia: Conflict Unending
| Date | 01 December 2002 |
| Published date | 01 December 2002 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002070200205700413 |
| Subject Matter | Review |
Reviews
Okinawan
acquiescence
to
American
rule'
(p
61).
But
a
visit
to the
island
by
Prime
Minister
Sato
Eisaku
in
August
1965
led
to
an
increased
flow
of
Japanese
funds to
Okinawa
and
helped to
spark
dis-
cussions
that
eventually
returned
the
Ryukyus
to
Japan.
Unlike
the
Pentagon,
the
Department
of
State
tended to
argue
that
the
formal
retention
of
Okinawa
jeopardized
the
American-Japanese
relationship.
Officials
believed
the
United
States
could
continue
to
hold
on
to
its
bases
after
the
island
was
re-incorporated
into
Japan
as
a
prefecture.
This
position
eventually
prevailed.
Prime
Minister
Sato
and
President Richard
Nixon
issued
a
joint
communiqu6
in
November
1969
announcing
that
the
reversion
would
be
complete
by
1972.
In
the
final
agreement, the
Americans
retained
their
bases
and
could
con-
sult
the
Japanese
government
about stationing
nuclear weapons
on
the
island
in
the event
of
an
emergency.
In
the
mid-1990s,
a
Japanese
diplomat
revealed
that
the
1969
communiqu6
contained
a
secret
agreement,
purported
to
have
granted
the
United
States
the
right
to
activate
its
nuclear
storage
facilities
in
Okinawa
'without
delay.'
Sarantakes's
well-researched
and
thoughtful
analysis
of
a
relatively
neglected
topic
underscores
the
influential
role
of
the
United
States
military
in
shaping
American
foreign
policy decisions
in
the
first
two
postwar
decades.
His
book
makes
a
fine
contribution
to
our
under-
standing
of
the
character
of
America's
postwar
informal empire
in
the
pacific.
CONFLICT
UNENDING
India-Pakistan tensions
since
1947
Sumit
Ganguly
New
York:
Columbia
University
Press,
2001,
18
7pp,
us$18.50,
ISBN
0-231-12369-8
Ganguly
provides
a
succinct
analysis
of
the
four
Indo-Pakistani
Wars
between
1947
and
1999.
He
argues
that
conflict
between
India
and
Pakistan
was
a
consequence
of
competing
ideologies
related
to
Indian
and
Pakistani
concepts
of
state-building. Indian
politicians
conceived
their
nation
as
a
secular
entity
based
on
civic
nationalism,
whereas
for
Pakistani
leaders
their
country
was
an Islamic
state
that
would
serve
the
needs
of
all
Muslims
in
South
Asia.
From
the
outset
of
independence,
both
countries
believed
they had legitimate interests
in
Kashmir,
a
majority
Muslim
area
that
had
joined
the
Indian
federation
in
the
654
INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL
Autumn
2002
To continue reading
Request your trial