Search results

Davies reviews 'Political Opposition in Industrialising Asia' edited by Garry Rodan.

Southeast Asia has been poorly treated by the world's press. For over a decade, while the Vietnam war raged, the region provided by far the greatest amount of foreign news in the rich countries of North America, Europe, Japan, and Australia. Every news agency, TV station, and newspaper that could afford it maintained a bureau in Saigon and other regional centers. While most headlines were captured by the hostilities in Indochina, editors mindful of the "domino theory" paid great attention too to the situation in neighboring countries.The result was that the region quickly acquired an "image" of violence, political instability, communal unrest, intraregional disputes, and a capacity for coups and countercoups rivaled only by Latin America. The "image" was implanted in the mind of the man in the street in New York, Washington, London, Tokyo, Sydney, Paris, and Frankfort, but also found its way into the investment calculations of those cities' bankers and industrialists—those whose decisions affected the levels of investment in and trade with Southeast Asia.

While all remained fairly quiet on the international front in Asia during 1976, it was a year of internal convulsions for many of the region's governments. Of the great powers, only the Soviet Union remained unshaken. The U.S. suffered one of its quadrennial "lame duck" run-ups to a Presidential election (with Henry Kissinger almost entirely preoccupied with diplomacy in the Middle East and Africa). China suffered the deaths of its two highest leaders, Premier Chou^En-lai on January 8, and Chairman Mao Tse-tung on September 9. Mao's demise was followed almost immediately by an amazing power struggle, which led to the swift downfall of his widow and three other members of the Politburo.