Non-English Sources

I recall one History professor lamenting the lack of the non-English sources in the production of History. Based on anecdotal evidence this is true. This phenomenon is a great loss to any attempts at faithful reproduction of the past. One finds that the Chinese (confirmed by my Chinese Language colleague) and French interpretation of events more often than not differ from English world. Indeed, it was the French that came up with a more holistic (and interdisciplinary) historical study through the Annales School.  

My attempts to overcome this has led me to read a Chinese translation of the French book - Quand la Chine change le monde - (based on my French translation) When China changes the world. There are a few other Chinese books on Chinese economy on my desk. I hope to read them soon.

Chen Weilun -History Blogger     

[Comment] Book review - Afgantsy by Rodric Barithwaite (2011)

Late in 2011, I read the review about the above book from Newsweek magazine (12 Sep 2011 issue). The focus is on the proxy conflict of Afghanistan which the USSR invaded in 1979.

Written by the former British ambassador to the former Soviet Union (1988-1992; crossed referenced to 4 other sources including publisher Oxford University Press website), the book reduces the persuasiveness of US triumphalism (especially the Reagan subset) in ending the Cold War. It also brings a more complete picture as it relies Russian sources that were not translated into English as well as the author's first experience of the Soviet leadership.

The Soviets had already wanted to withdraw before US President Reagan and the US Central Intelligence Agency's decision to support the locals and foreign jihadis against the Soviets. In this sense, US actions prolonged and delayed the end of the Cold War - a brilliant counter argument to US triumphalism. The Soviets found it more difficult to pull out since they were in effect fighting for the reputation of Communism. They failed miserably in setting up or assisting a viable communist state like Cuba.

Another point adds strength to the Revisionist or Post-Revisionist school of thought in the Origins of the Cold War. Security fears; "..poor judgement, flawed intelligence and disastrous friends.."  were factors that drove the USSR into Afghanistan. It seems that the US or at least the "hawks" - the aggressive decision makers never gave peace enough of a chance. The West did not recognise consciously or unconsciously the desire for Soviet safety.

Finally, the book can suggest how Afghanistan broke the Soviet Union's back. Of the 620,00 troops, approximately 75% were hospitalised for diseases from hepatitis to malaria. This was on top of conscripts suffering at the hands of older soldiers. Yet, there was no honour for the surviving Soviet army. Only in 2009 was there remembrance of the deceased soldiers. The 'evil empire' label (from Reagan) on the USSR caused significant damage to the image of Communism and decreased the legitimacy of the Soviet leadership. My father told me Soviet mothers cried for their sons who were called 'invaders'. Their sons died, but not in the defence of the Mother Russia. The Islamic republics within the USSR were clamouring for independence. It was all down hill from then. Gorbachev, the young Soviet leader, was driving a car (USSR) with no brakes towards a cliff....

Chen Weilun - History Blogger