![]() ![]() There are some good reasons to resist this temptation, including the linguistic and archival challenges of researching across wildly diverse countries and continued disagreement over basic questions of periodization, perspective, and method. Though scholars continue to produce sophisticated country-focused studies, and to take advantage of recent methodological turns to explore the environment, gender, migration, development, and the circulation of goods and culture, few historians have aimed for broad synthetic accounts that center politics and interstate diplomacy, as Ang Cheng Guan does in Southeast Asia’s Cold War: An Interpretive History. Recent historiography on the Cold War in Southeast Asia resists easy categorization. Introduction by Brad Simpson, University of Connecticut 27Ĭreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License. Author’s Response by Ang Cheng Guan, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.Montesano, ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, Singapore. Review by Jürgen Haacke, London School of Economics and Political Science.Review by Mattias Fibiger, Harvard Business School 9.Review by Kenton Clymer, Northern Illinois University.Introduction by Brad Simpson, University of Connecticut.Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press, 2018. ![]() Southeast Asia’s Cold War: An Interpretive History. ![]() Roundtable and Web Production Editor: George FujiiĪng Cheng Guan. Roundtable Editors: Thomas Maddux and Diane Labrosse ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |