網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

This discussion of keywords suggests that we need a more subtle and expansive notion of ideology-one that includes more than the formal ideology that the party utilized as an organizational glue and mobilization guide-if we are to move toward a richer understanding of CCP external relations. The network of ideas that make up an informal ideology is a complex, unstable amalgam drawn from a wide variety of sources and varying significantly from individual to individual. Some party leaders had experienced formative brushes with anarchism. Others had reacted strongly against disturbing urban conditions that made capitalism the main foe. Yet others constructed from their rural roots a populist outlook. Each borrowed from a rich, complex intellectual tradition, drew from distinct regional roots, and learned from diverse political experience as youths. A more penetrating grasp of Chinese policy depends ultimately on exploring the enormous diversity of thinking that shaped its course.

The negotiation of these and other points of difference between historians and political scientists will redefine the agenda for CCP foreign-policy studies and in the process help recast a field already in the midst of important change as a result of the revival of CCP studies in China. Historians taking a more prominent place in the field will be advancing a new constellation of questions and methods. The response by political scientists will doubtless vary with those of a descriptive bent finding it easy, while those devoted to theory may well find the transition awkward. How much this interaction across disciplinary lines will lead to a new mix of concerns and approaches and how much historians and political scientists will turn their back on each other, effectively creating a schism in the field, remains to be seen. Whatever the outcome outside of China, party historians within China are for their part likely to maintain a largely autonomous community interacting selectively with foreigner counterparts. Thus this trend toward a more historical picture of CCP external relations, at work in both the United States and China, is not likely to lead to a new monolithic field. And perhaps this outcome, marked by national and disciplinary diversity, is to be welcomed if it proves. conducive to the wide-ranging inquiry and lively discussions associated with a field in renaissance.

1. The observations that follow draw in part on Jin Liangyong, "Jianguo yilai jindai Zhongwai guanxishi yanjiu shuping" [A review of post-1949 research on the history of modern Sino-foreign relations], Jindaishi yanjiu, 3 (1985), 193-214; Wang Xi and Wang Bangxian, "Woguo sanshiwu nianlai de ZhongMei guanxishi yanjiu" [Research on the history of Sino-American relations in our country over the last thirty-five years], Fudan xuebao 5 (1984), 73-76; Tao Wenzhao, "ZhongMei guanxishi yanjiu shinian huigu" [Looking back on a decade of research on the history of SinoAmerican relations], in Xin de shiye: ZhongMei guanxishi lunwenji [New fields of vision: a collection of articles on the history of Sino-American relations] (Nanjing: Nanjing daxue, 1991), 282-307; a fairly extensive reading in party history periodicals; and conversations with Chinese colleagues working on the CCP's foreign relations.

2. Yao Xu, “KangMei yuanChao de yingming juece❞ [The brilliant decision to resist America and aid Korea], Danghshi yanjiu 5 (1980), 5-14. A new generation of scholarship heralded by Yao's work did greatly improve on earlier thin and domestically oriented accounts such as Hu Zhongchi, KangMei yuanChao yundong shihua [An informal history of the resist-America aid-Korea

campaign] (Beijing: Zhonghua qingnian, 1956), which had its own, even more pronounced patriotic premises. 3. These tendencies are evident in Ding Shouhe and Yin Shuyi, Cong wusi qimeng yundong dao makesi zhuyi de chuanbo [From May Fourth enlightenment to the propagation of Marxism] (rev. ed.; Beijing: Sanlian, 1979), esp. 88-108; Lu Mingzhuo, “Li Dazhao zai wusi yundong shiqi de fandi sixiang" [Li Dazhao's anti-imperialist thought during the period of the May Fourth movement], in Jinian wusi yundong liushi zhounian xueshu taolunhui lunwenxuan [A selection of articles from a scholarly conference in commemoration of the sixtieth anniversary of the May Fourth movement], ed. Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan jindaishi yanjiusuo (Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue, 1980), 2: 151-63; and Zhu Jianhua and He Rongdi, "Shilun Li Dazhao de fandi sixiang" [An exploration of Li Dazhao's anti-imperialist thought], in Li Dazhao yanjiu lunwenji [A collection of research papers on Li Dazhao], ed. Han Yide and Wang Shudi (2 vols.; Shijiazhuang: Hebei renmin, 1984), 2: 515-29.

4. Pei-yi Wu, The Confucian's Progress: Autobiographical Writings in Traditional China (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990), offers a suggestive introduction to this genre.

5. The earliest Chinese version appears to be Waiguo jizhe xibei yinxiangji [A foreign reporter's impressions of the northwest] (Shanghai: Dingchou bianyishe, 1937). A partial copy is in the Wang Fu Shih collection, University Archives, University of Missouri, Kansas City. Hu Yuzhi translated one of the early versions, perhaps this one. Snow's account was also published under the title Xixing manji [Notes on a journey to the west] and Mao Zedong zizhuan [Mao Zedong's autobiography]). For details on the production of the autobiography, see Zhonggong zhongyang wenxian yanjiushi and Xinhua tongxunshe, comps., Mao Zedong xinwen gongzuo wenxuan [A selection of Mao Zedong works on journalism] (Beijing: Xinhua, 1983), 37-38; Wu Liping, comp., Mao Zedong yijiusanliunian tong Sinuo de tanhua [Mao Zedong's 1936 talk with Snow] (Beijing: Renmin, 1979), 1, 6-9; and Qiu Ke'an, Sinuo zai Zhongguo [Snow in China] (Beijing: Sanlian, 1982).

Appearing in 1937 along with the Snow account

was the first, perhaps rudimentary collection of Mao's essays. For evidence on the existence of such a collection, see Mao Zedong ji [Collected writings of Mao Zedong], ed. Takeuchi Minoru (10 vols.; Tokyo: Hokubosha, 1971-72; Hong Kong reprint, 1975), 5: 232.

6. This and the paragraph that follows draw on Xu Quanxing and Wei Shifeng, chief authors, Yanan shiqi de Mao Zedong zhexue sixiang yanjiu [Studies on Mao Zedong's philosophical thought during the Yanan period] (Xian: Shaanxi renmin jiaoyu, 1988), chap. 11 (written by Xu); and Thomas Kampen, “Wang Jiaxiang, Mao Zedong and the 'Triumph of Mao Zedong-Thought' (1935-1945)," Modern Asian Studies 23 (October 1989), 716-22.

7. Xiao San's Mao Zedong tongzhi de qingshaonian shidai [Comrade Mao Zedong's boyhood and youth] (originally published 1948; rev. and exp. ed., Guangzhou: Xinhua, 1950).

8. Zhang Min et al., “Sannian zhunbei' de diernian" [The second year of the "three years of preparation"], Dangde wenxian 2 (1989), 79; Mao Zedong xuanji [Selected works of Mao Zedong] (4 vols.; Beijing: Renmin, 1952-60); Li Rui, Mao Zedong tongzhi de chuqi geming huodong [Comrade Mao Zedong's initial revolutionary activities] (Beijing: Zhongguo qingnian, 1957).

9. Quotes from Joint Publications Research Service, Selections from Chairman Mao, no. 90 (JPRS no. 49826; 12 February 1970), 66, 80. For guidance through the thicket of this Cultural Revolution material, see Timothy Cheek, "Textually Speaking: An Assessment of Newly Available Mao Texts," in The Secret Speeches of Chairman Mao: From the Hundred Flowers to the Great Leap Forward, ed. Roderick MacFarquhar et al. (Cambridge: Harvard University Council on East Asian Studies, 1989), 78-81; and Cheek, "The 'Genius' Mao: A Treasure Trove of 23 Newly Available Volumes of Post-1949 Mao Zedong Texts," Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs, 19-20 (January-July 1988), 337-44. 10. Mao Zedong xuanji [Selected works of Mao Zedong], vol. 5 (Beijing: Renmin, 1977); Mao Zedong zhuzuo xuandu [A reader of works by Mao Zedong], comp. Zhonggong zhongyang wenxian bianji weiyuanhui (2 vols.; Beijing: Renmin, 1986). More revealing than the public "resolution on certain historical issues concerning the party since the founding of the PRC" ["Guanyu jianguo yilai dangde ruogan lishi wenti de jueyi"] is the limited circulation treatment of sensitive issues raised by this reappraisal, in Zhonggong zhongyang dangshi yanjiushi “Zhonggong dangshi dashi nianbiao" bianxiezu, Zhonggong dangshi dashi nianbiao shuoming [Elucidation of "A chronology of major events in CCP history"] (Beijing: Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao, 1983; "internal circulation").

11. The comments that follow draw on Paul A. Cohen, Discovering History in China: American Historical Writing on the Recent Chinese Past (New York: Columbia University Press, 1984); William T. Rowe, "Approaches to Modern Chinese Social History," in Reliving the Past: The Worlds of Social History, ed. Olivier Zunz (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1985), 236-96; my own "Meiguo guanyu Zhongguo duiwai guanxishi yanjiu wenti yu qianjing" [The study of the history of Chinese foreign relations in the United States: problems and prospects], trans. Yuan Ming, Lishi yanjiu [Historical studies] 3 (1988), 150-56 Philip C. C. Huang, "The Paradigmatic Crisis in Chinese Studies: Paradoxes in Social and Economic History," Modern China 17 (July 1991), 299-341; and Judith B. Farquhar and James L. Hevia, “Culture and

Postwar American Historiography of China," positions

1 (Fall 1993), 486-525. For a helpful evaluation of the literature on imperialism accompanied by suggestions on fruitful modes of inquiry, see Jürgen Osterhammel, "Semi-Colonialism and Informal Empire in TwentiethCentury China: Towards a Framework of Analysis," in Imperialism and After: Continuities and Discontinuities, ed. Wolfgang J. Mommsen and Osterhammel (London: Allen and Unwin, 1986), 290-314.

12. See e.g., Susan Naquin and Evelyn S. Rawski, Chinese Society in the Eighteenth Century (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987), which begins by stressing the importance of relating the actions of the state to "the lives of even ordinary citizens" (xi). 13. Bin Yu, "The Study of Chinese Foreign Policy: Problems and Prospect," World Politics 46 (January 1994), 235-61, offers a detailed, critical appraisal of this large body of writing. See also Friedrich W. Wu, "Explanatory Approaches to Chinese Foreign Policy: A Critique of the Western Literature," Studies in Comparative Communism 13 (Spring 1980), 41-62; and Samuel S. Kim, “China and the World in Theory and Practice," in China and the World: Chinese Foreign Relations in the Post-Cold War Era, ed. Kim (3rd rev. ed.; Boulder, Colo.: Westview, 1994), 3-41. Both Kim, China and the World; and Thomas W. Robinson and David Shambaugh, eds., Chinese Foreign Policy: Theory and Practice (Oxford, Eng.: Oxford University Press, 1994), offer a sampling of the kinds of work now being done by political scientists. Harry Harding, "The Evolution of American Scholarship on Contemporary China," in American Studies of Contemporary China, ed. David Shambaugh (Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, 1993), 14-40, helps put this particular body of political science work in the broader context of the general social science literature on China.

14. Wu's 1980 survey, "Explanatory Approaches," tied progress in the field to better theory and methodology, as did Michael Ng-Quinn's "The Analytical Study of Chinese Foreign Policy," International Studies Quarterly 27 (June 1983), 203-24. More recently James N. Rosenau, “China in a Bifurcated World: Competing Theoretical Perspectives," in Chinese Foreign Policy, eds. Robinson and Shambaugh, 524-51, has offered a somewhat defensive presentation along the same lines. Bin Yu, "The Study of Chinese Foreign Policy," 25659, is considerably more reserved about the prospects for the theoretical enterprise.

15. For an early, vigorous argument for putting Mao at the center of the policy process, see Michel Oksenberg, "Policy Making under Mao, 1948-68: An Overview," in China: Management of a Revolutionary Society, ed. John M. H. Lindbeck (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1971), 79-115. Frederick C. Teiwes, "Mao and His Lieutenants," Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs 19-20 (January-July 1988), 1-80, and Roderick MacFarquhar, The Origins of the Cultural Revolution (New York: Columbia University Press, 1974), with their stress on personality and sensitivity to sources, are good examples of the application of this approach. Both are concerned mainly with domestic politics, but their findings have considerable import for foreign policy. 16. One distinguished China-watcher has proposed careful examination of past forecasting as a way of highlighting possible future interpretive problems as well as identifying past successes. Allen S. Whiting, "Forecasting Chinese Foreign Policy: IR Theory vs. the Fortune Cookie," in Chinese Foreign Policy, eds. Robinson and Shambaugh, 506-23. This proposal tellingly omits historical reconstruction of the very events analysts were trying to read. Without a fresh,

well-documented picture of those events it is hard to imagine measuring with any confidence the accuracy of contemporary readings.

17. This point is developed in chapters 5 and 6 of Hunt, The Genesis of Chinese Communist Foreign Policy. 18. Zhonghua renmin gongheguo waijiaobu and Zhonggong zhongyang wenxian yanjiushi, comps., Zhou Enlai waijiao wenxuan [Selected diplomatic writings of Zhou Enlai] (Beijing: Zhongyang wenxian, 1990), 25-27; comments by Chai Chengwen on Pu Shouchang's role as Zhou's translator on this occasion, in Renwu 5 (1992), 18. [Ed. note: For an English translation, see Sergei N. Goncharov, John Lewis, and Xue Litai, Uncertain Partners: Stalin, Mao, and the Korean War (Stanford, CA: University Press, 1993), 276-278.] For the understandably perplexed reaction of China-watchers, see U.S. Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States, vol. 7 (Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976), 906, 912-13.

19. The oft-cited authority is Andrew Nathan, “A Factionalism Model for CCP Politics," China Quarterly 53 (January-March 1973), 34-66.

20. A glance at the literature on the CCP will reveal numerous instances of works stressing factional struggle on the basis of highly circumstantial evidence. Derek J. Waller, The Kiangsi Soviet: Mao and the National Congresses of 1931 and 1934 (Berkeley: University of California Center for Chinese Studies, 1973), sees a clear split between Maoists and Russian Returned Students in the early 1930s, with the latter increasingly dominant over the former in the factional struggles. Richard C. Thornton, The Comintern and the Chinese Communists, 1928-1931 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1969), interprets the Li Lisan period in strong factional terms with leaders of each faction driven by a quest for personal power. James ReardonAnderson, Yenan and the Great Powers: The Origins of Chinese Communist Foreign Policy, 1944-1946 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980), and Steven I. Levine, Anvil of Victory: The Communist Revolution in Manchuria, 1945-1948 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987), see factions defining the policy alternatives for the CCP in 1945-1946. Reardon-Anderson argues for a Mao-Zhou bloc favoring negotiations with the Nationalists, while the ultimately victorious military leaders wanted a resort to force. For his part, Levine sees differences in strategy in the northeast base area in factional terms. Donald S. Zagoria, “Choices in the Postwar World (2): Containment and China,” in Caging the Bear: Containment and the Cold War, ed. Charles Gati (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1974), 10927, puts Mao and Zhou at the head of a nationalist group, while Liu emerges as the leader of the internationalists. The tendency to find factions persists in the studies of the post-1949 period. See for example Uri Ra'anan's and Donald Zagoria's treatments of Beijing's response to the Vietnam War in 1965-1966 in China in Crisis, vol. 2, ed. Tang Tsou (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968), 23-71 and 237-68, as well as Michael Yahuda's response, "Kremlinology and the Chinese Strategic Debate, 1965-66,” China Quarterly 149 (January-March 1972), especially 74-75. Yahuda rejects easy factional explanations, while stressing the interaction between "foreign and domestic politics." 21. For a thoughtful critique of this approach, now much in vogue, see Bin Yu, "The Study of Chinese Foreign Policy," 244-56. Warren I. Cohen, “Conversations with Chinese Friends: Zhou Enlai's Associates Reflect on Chinese-American Relations in the 1940s and the Korean War," Diplomatic History 11 (Summer 1987), 283-89, suggests that historians are not immune

to the lure of the experts with "inside" information. 22. These points are treated more fully by Jürgen Osterhammel, "CCP Foreign Policy as International History: Mapping the Field," and by Odd Arne Westad, "The Foreign Policies of Revolutionary Parties: The CCP in Comparative Perspective," both in Toward a History of the Chinese Communist Foreign Relations, 1920s-1960s: Personalities and Interpretive Approaches, ed. Michael H. Hunt and Niu Jun (Washington: Asia Program, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, n.d.).

23. See on some of the recent trends, Lynn Hunt, ed., The New Cultural History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989); John E. Toews, "Intellectual History after the Linguistic Turn: The Autonomy of Meaning and Irreducibility of Experience,” American Historical Review 92 (October 1987), 879-907; and Bryan D. Palmer, Descent into Discourse: The Reification of Language and the Writing of Social History (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1990). 24. Levine, Anvil of Victory; John W. Garver's Chinese-Soviet Relations, 1937-1945: The Diplomacy of Chinese Nationalism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988); Odd Arne Westad, Cold War and Revolution: Soviet-American Rivalry and the Origins of the Chinese Civil War, 1944-1946 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993).

25. For good examples of this notable interpretive proclivity among Chinese scholars, see Hao Yufan and Guocang Huan, eds., The Chinese View of the World (New York: Pantheon, 1989); Hao Yufan and Zhai Zhihai, "China's Decision to Enter the Korean War: History Revisited,” China Quarterly 121 (March 1990), 94-115; He Di, "The Evolution of the People's Republic of China's Policy toward the Offshore Islands," in The Great Powers in East Asia, 1953-1960, ed. Warren I. Cohen and Akira Iriye (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990), 222-45; and Chen Xiaolu's, “China's Policy Toward the United States, 1949-1955," Jia Qingguo, "Searching for Peaceful Coexistence and Territorial Integrity," and Wang Jisi, “An Appraisal of U.S. Policy toward China, 1945-1955, and Its Aftermath," all in Sino-American Relations, 1945-1955: A Joint Reassessment of a Critical Decade, ed. Harry Harding and Yuan Ming (Wilmington, Del.: Scholarly Resources, 1989), 184-97, 267-86, 289-310. For a discussion of the impact of U.S. international-relations approaches on Chinese scholars, marked by this single, signal success, see Wang Jisi, "International Relations Theory and the Study of Chinese Foreign Policy: A Chinese Perspective,” in Chinese Foreign Policy, eds. Robinson and Shambaugh, 481-505.

26. For perhaps the best known example, see Alexander L. George and Richard Smoke, Deterrence in American Foreign Policy: Theory and Practice (New York: Columbia University Press, 1974), chap. 7.

27. I have developed this point in more detail in “Beijing and the Korean Crisis, June 1950-June 1951," Political Science Quarterly 107 (Fall 1992), 475-78. 28. For a helpful discussion of "the rationality model," see Kenneth Lieberthal and Michel Oksenberg, Policy Making in China: Leaders, Structures, and Processes (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988), 11-14. 29. W. R. Connor, "Why Were We Surprised?" American Scholar 60 (Spring 1991), 175-84. Moshe Lewin, The Gorbachev Phenomenon: A Historical Interpretation (rev. ed.; Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991); Lewin, "Russia/USSR in Historical Motion: An Essay in Interpretation,” Russian Review 50 (July 1991), 249-66; and Stephen F. Cohen, Rethinking the Soviet Experience: Politics and History since 1917 (New

York: Oxford University Press, 1985), are notable efforts at moving Soviet history beyond a thin, simple, and strongly judgmental "totalitarian" model associated with the Cold War. An elaborated, well-grounded alternative appears to await the completion of a new generation of historical research.

30. Paul A. Cohen, "The Post-Mao Reforms in Historical Perspective," Journal of Asian Studies 47 (August 1988), 518-40, highlights the dangers of a heavy reliance on an abstract Leninist party model to the neglect of long-term historical patterns.

31. For an effort at teasing out an informal foreignpolicy ideology that might be applicable to China, see my own Ideology and U.S. Foreign Policy (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987) and my follow-up essay, “Ideology,” in “A Roundtable: Explaining the History of American Foreign Relations," Journal of American History 77 (June 1990), 108-115. Clifford Geertz's "Ideology as a Cultural System," in Ideology and Discontent, ed. David E. Apter (London: Free Press, 1964), 47-76, is a classic still worth reading. 32. George Lakoff, Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), 92-93. 33. For an extended argument for the importance of internal categories and outlooks to the understanding of Chinese values, see Thomas A. Metzger, Escape from Predicament: Neo-Confucianism and China's Evolving Political Culture (New York: Columbia University Press, 1977). Andrew J. Nathan makes a contrary case in favor of what he calls "evaluative universalism," those externally based judgments that not only are legitimate but also can stimulate better understanding. Nathan, "The Place of Values in CrossCultural Studies: The Example of Democracy and China," in Ideas Across Cultures: Essays on Chinese Thought in Honor of Benjamin Schwartz, ed. Paul A. Cohen and Merle Goldman (Cambridge: Harvard University Council on East Asian Studies, 1990), 293-314. For instructive exercises in paying serious attention to language in the Chinese context, see Michael Schoenhals, Doing Things with Words in Chinese

Politics (Berkeley: University of California Institute of

East Asian Studies, 1992), and Frank Dikötter, The Discourse of Race in Modern China (London: Hurst, 1992).

34. The approach is thoughtfully discussed in James Farr, "Understanding Conceptual Change Politically," in Political Innovation and Conceptual Change, ed. Terrence Ball et al. (Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 24-49, and is applied in Daniel T. Rodgers, Contested Truths: Keywords in American Politics Since Independence (New York: Basic Books, 1987); and in Raymond Williams, Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society (New York: Oxford University Press, 1976).

Michael H. Hunt is Everett H. Emerson Professor of History at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. This essay was adapted from a chapter of his forthcoming book, The Genesis of Chinese Communist Foreign Policy (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996), and also appeared, in slightly different form, in Michael H. Hunt and Niu Jun, eds., Toward a History of Chinese Communist Foreign Relations, 1920s-1960s: Personalities and Interpretive Approaches (Washington, DC: Asia Program, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, [1993]).

CCP FOREIGN RELATIONS
continued from page 129

have had their major writings published. The Mao collection (discussed below) is the best known, but the list extends to those who played a prominent role briefly in the midand late 1920s (such as Qu Qiubai and Peng Shuzhi), the group that accompanied Mao to the top (such as Liu Shaoqi, Wang Jiaxiang, Deng Xiaoping, Peng Dehuai, and Chen Yun), party intellectuals (such as Chen Hansheng and Ai Siqi), notable public supporters (such as Song Qingling), and even that party black sheep, Wang Ming. These volumes appear variously as wenji (collected works), wenxuan variously as wenji (collected works), wenxuan (selected works), xuanji (selections), and in several cases junshi wenxuan (selected works on military affairs). Generally these collections, especially the ones published in the early decades of the PRC, are less revealing early decades of the PRC, are less revealing on foreign affairs than the more recent materials. The collected works for a few of the best known party figures can be found in

translation.

For an early introduction to these various materials, see Michael H. Hunt and Odd Arne Westad, "The Chinese Communist Party and International Affairs: A Field Report on New Historical Sources and Old Research Problems," China Quarterly 122 (Summer 1990), 258-72. Steven M. Goldstein and He Di offer an update in "New Chinese Sources on the History of the Cold War," Cold War International History Project Bulletin 1 (Spring 1992), 4-6. Fernando Orlandi, "Nuove fonti e opportunità di ricerca sulla storia della Cina contemporanea, del movimento comunista internazionale e della guerra fredda" (Rome: working paper, Centro Gino Germani di Studi Comparati sulla Modernizzazione e lo Sviluppo, 1994), offers the most recent, wide ranging survey of the new literature. Susanne WeigelinSchwiedrzik, "Party Historiography in the People's Republic of China," Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs 17 (January 1987), 78-113, stresses the highly political nature of the party history establishment. CCP Research Newsletter, edited by Timothy Cheek, and the twice-monthly Zhonggong dangshi tongxun [CCP history newsletter] are both essential for keeping current with new publications and research projects.

There are in Chinese several major guides to party history literature. Zhang Zhuhong, Zhongguo xiandai gemingshi shiliaoxue [A study of historical materials on China's con

temporary revolutionary history] (Beijing: Zhonggong dangshi ziliao, 1987), is broadly cast but omits limited circulation source materials and journals. A draft version of the Zhang volume containing more citations to restricted ("internal circulation") materials appeared in Dangshi ziliao zhengji tongxun 7-12 (1985). A partial English translation, prepared by Timothy Cheek and Tony Saich, has appeared in Chinese Studies in History 23 (Summer 1990), 3-94, and Chinese Studies in Sociology and Anthropology 22 (Spring-Summer 1990), 3-158. Zhang Jingru and Tang Manzhen, eds., Zhonggong dangshixue shi [A history of CCP historical studies] (Beijing: Zhongguo renmin daxue, 1990), traces the field's development, including notably its opening up in the 1980s.

Party history journals are a treasure trove, offering fresh documentation, revealing articles, and news of conferences and pending publications. A number of the chief journals underwent a confusing set of title changes in the late 1980s, and most are restricted in their circulation. They are as a result difficult for researchers outside of China to keep straight and use systematically. Of these journals Dangde wenxian [Literature on the party] (published by Zhongyang wenxian yanjiushi and Zhongyang dang'anguan, 1988-; "internal circulation") and its earlier incarnation, Wenxian he yanjiu [Documents and research] (published by Zhongyang wenxian yanjiushi, 1982-87; "internal circulation"), deserve singling out for their fresh documentation as well as helpful articles.

Rise of an International Affairs Orthodoxy (1921-1934)

CCP views on foreign affairs emerged during the late Qing and early Republic out of a complex intellectual setting. This background is nicely suggested by a large body of literature: Charlotte Furth, ed., The Limits of Change: Essays on Conservatives Alternatives in Republican China (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1976); Hao Chang, Chinese Intellectuals in Crisis: Search for Order and Meaning (1890-1911) (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987); Don C. Price, Russia and the Roots of the Chinese Revolution, 1896-1911(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1974); James Pusey, China and Charles Darwin (Cambridge: Harvard University Council on East

Asian Studies, 1983); Mary B. Rankin, Early Chinese Revolutionaries: Radical Intellectuals in Shanghai and Chekiang, 1902-1911 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971); Benjamin I. Schwartz, In Search of Wealth and Power: Yen Fu and the West (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1964); Harold Z. Schiffrin, Sun Yat-sen and the Origins of the Chinese Revolution (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1970); Li Yu-ning, The Introduction of Socialism into China (New York: Columbia University East Asian Institute, 1971); Martin Bernal, Chinese Socialism to 1907 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1976); Arif Dirlik, Anarchism in the Chinese Revolution (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991); Peter Zarrow, Anarchism and Chinese Political Culture (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990); Chow Tse-tsung, The May Fourth Movement: Intellectual Revolution in Modern China (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1964); Lin Yü-sheng, The Crisis of Chinese Consciousness: Radical Antitraditionalism in the May Fourth Era (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1979); Vera Schwarcz, The Chinese Enlightenment: Intellectuals and the Legacy of the May Fourth Movement of 1919 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986); and Benjamin I. Schwartz, ed., Reflections on the May Fourth Movement: A Symposium (Cambridge: Harvard University East Asian Research Center, 1972).

Writings from the People's Republic of China offer such a constricted treatment of the CCP's May Fourth background that they are of only limited use. Broader perspectives are available in documentary collections such as Wusi aiguo yundong [the May fourth patriotic movement], comp. Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan jindaishi yanjiusuo jindai ziliao bianjizu (2 vols.; Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue, 1979); and Shehui zhuyi sixiang zai Zhongguo de chuanbo [The propagation of socialist thought in China] (3 vols.; Beijing: Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao keyan bangongshi, 1985). The latter is but one of a number of documentary collections that have been compiled in China over the last decade on ideological transmission and formation around the time of May Fourth.

An accumulation of research spanning several decades offers good insight on the founding of the CCP and subsequent partybuilding. See in particular Arif Dirlik, The

Origins of Chinese Communism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989); Lawrence Sullivan and Richard H. Solomon, "The Formation of Chinese Communist Ideology in the May Fourth Era: A Content Analysis of Hsin ch'ing nien,” in Ideology and Politics in Contemporary China, ed. Chalmers Johnson (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1973); Hans J. van de Ven, From Friends to Comrades: The Founding of the Chinese Communist Party, 1920-1927 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991); Michael Y. L. Luk, The Origins of Chinese Bolshevism: An Ideology in the Making, 1921-1928 (Hong Kong: Oxford University Press, 1989); Marilyn A. Levine, The Found Generation: Chinese Communists in Europe during the Twenties (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1993); and Benjamin Yang, From Revolution to Politics: Chinese Communists on the Long March (Boulder, Colo.: Westview, 1990). Benjamin I. Schwartz, Chinese Communism and the Rise of Mao (originally published 1951; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966), is a classic that still commands attention.

There is good material on early party leaders. See in particular Maurice Meisner, Li Dazhao and the Origins of Chinese Marxism (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967); Huang Sung-k’ang, Li Ta-chao and the Impact of Marxism on Modern Chinese Thinking (The Hague: Mouton, 1965); Li Dazhao wenji [Collected works of Li Dazhao], comp. Yuan Qian et al. (2 vols.; Beijing: Renmin, 1984); Lee Feigon, Chen Duxiu: Founder of the Chinese Communist Party (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983); Duxiu wencun [A collection of writings by (Chen) Duxiu] (originally published 1922; 2 vols.; Jiulong: Yuandong, 1965); and Zhang Guotao, The Rise of the Chinese Communist Party: The Autobiography of Chang Kuo-t'ao (2 vols.; Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1971-72).

The variant views on imperialism in the 1920s emerge from A. James Gregor and Maria Hsia Chang, "Marxism, Sun Yat-sen, and the Concept of 'Imperialism'," Pacific Affairs 55 (Spring 1982), 54-79; Herman Mast III, "Tai Chi-t'ao, Sunism and Marxism During the May Fourth Movement in Shanghai," Modern Asian Studies 5 (July 1971), 227-49; Edmund S. K. Fung, "The Chinese Nationalists and the Unequal Treaties 1924-1931," Modern Asian Studies 21 (October 1987), 793-819; Fung, "Anti-Im

perialism and the Left Guomindang," Modern China 11 (January 1985), 39-76; and P. Cavendish, "Anti-imperialism in the Kuomintang 1923-8," in Studies in the Social History of China and South-east Asia, ed. Jerome Ch'en and Nicholas Tarling (Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University Press, 1970), 23-56.

To form a more precise impression of CCP views on imperialism, turn to contemporary materials, notably prominent party journals such as Xiangdao zhoubao [The guide weekly] (1922-27) and the collections of Central Committee documents (noted above). Evidence on the general attractiveness of anti-imperialism as a tool of political mobilization can be found in Wusa yundong shiliao [Historical materials on the May 30 (1925) movement], comp. Shanghai shehui kexueyuan lishi yanjiusuo, vol. 1 (Shanghai: Shanghai renmin, 1981); Sanyiba yundong ziliao [Materials on the March 18 (1926) movement], comp. Sun Dunheng and Wen Hai (Beijing: Renmin, 1984); and Sanyiba can'an ziliao huibian [Materials on the March 18 (1926) massacre], comp. Jiang Changren (Beijing: Beijing, 1985).

The CCP's relationship to the Communist International (Comintern) in the 1920s and early 1930s is, despite limited, fragmentary evidence, the subject of a good range of studies. The central work is C. Martin Wilbur and Julie Lien-ying How, Missionaries of Revolution: Soviet Advisers and Nationalist China, 1920-1927 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1989), a much expanded version of C. Martin Wilbur and Julie Lienying How, eds., Documents on Communism, Nationalism, and Soviet Advisers in China, 1918-1927: Papers Seized in the 1927 Peking Raid (New York: Columbia University Press, 1956). The following are more specialized but no less important: Tony Saich, The Origins of the First United Front in China: The Role of Sneevliet (Alias Maring) (2 vols.; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1991); Jane L. Price, Cadres, Commanders, and Commissars: The Training of the Chinese Communist Leadership, 1920-1945 (Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1976); M. F. Yuriev and A. V. Pantsov, "Comintern, CPSU (B) and Ideological and Organizational Evolution of the Communist Party of China,” in Revolutionary Democracy and Communists in the East, ed. R. Ulyanovsky (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1984); and Alexander Pantsov, "From Students to Dissidents: The Chinese

Trotskyists in Soviet Russia," trans. John Sexton, Issues and Studies (Taibei), vol. 30, pt. 1 (March 1994), 97-126, pt. 2 (April 1994), 56-73, and pt. 3 (May 1994), 77-109. Once standard accounts still deserving attention include Allen Whiting, Soviet Policies in China, 1917-1924 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1954); and Dan N. Jacobs, Borodin: Stalin's Man in China (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981).

There are some revealing memoirs on the early CCP-Soviet relationship. Yueh Sheng, Sun Yat-sen University in Moscow and the Chinese Revolution: A Personal Account ([Lawrence]: University of Kansas Center for East Asian Studies, 1971); and Wang Fan-hsi, Chinese Revolutionary: Memoirs, 1919-1949, trans. Gregor Benton (Oxford, Eng.: Oxford University Press, 1980), are notable for their treatment of study in Moscow and its personal impact. Otto Braun, A Comintern Agent in China, 1932-1939, trans. Jeanne Moore (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1982), is colored by a strong anti-Mao animus.

Among a substantial collection of general surveys in Chinese on the CCP and the Comintern, the standouts are Xiang Qing, Gongchan guoji he Zhongguo geming guanxi shigao [Draft history of the relations between the Comintern and the Chinese revolution] (Beijing: Beijing daxue, 1988); Yang Yunruo and Yang Kuisong, Gongchan guoji he Zhongguo geming [The Comintern and the Chinese revolution] (Shanghai: Shanghai renmin, 1988); and Yang Kuisong, Zhongjian didai de geming: Zhongguo geming de celüe zai guoji beijing xia de yanbian [Revolution in the intermediate zone: The development of China's revolutionary strategy against an international background] (Beijing: Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao, 1992), the freshest and most detailed treatment. All three accounts carry the story into the 1940s-down to the dissolution of the Comintern and beyond.

Treatment of the CCP approach to national minorities and its support for foreign liberation movements, an important issue as early as the 1920s, can be found in June T. Dreyer, China's Forty Millions: Minority Nationalities and National Integration in the People's Republic of China (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1976); Walker Connor, The National Question in Marxist

Leninist Theory and Strategy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984), chaps. 4, 8-10; Frank S.T. Hsiao and Lawrence R. Sullivan, "A Political History of the Taiwanese Communist Party, 1928-1931," Journal of Asian Studies 42 (February 1983), 269-89; and Hsiao and Sullivan, "The Chinese Communist Party and the Status of Taiwan, 19281943," Pacific Affairs 52 (Fall 1979), 44667.

The Emergence of a Foreign Policy (1935-1949)

The CCP's handling of the United States and the Soviet Union during the Pacific War and into the early Cold War period has been the subject of roughly three decades of serious scholarship. The appearance of new documentation has rendered much of that literature obsolete and compromised interpretations advanced as recently as the late 1980s. Several major works drawing on the fresh source materials have already appeared. John W. Garver's Chinese-Soviet Relations, 19371945: The Diplomacy of Chinese Nationalism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988) stresses the CCP's policy of maneuver and places Mao alongside Jiang Jieshi [Chiang Kai-shek] as a nationalist whose outlook drove him into "rebellion" (274) against Moscow. Odd Arne Westad's Cold War and Revolution: Soviet-American Rivalry and the Origins of the Chinese Civil War, 1944-1946 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993), sets Mao's policy in an impressively international context and pictures as largely abortive his efforts to make the great powers serve his party's cause in the immediate aftermath of World War II.

Also drawing on new material are shorter studies: John W. Garver, "The Origins of the Second United Front: The Comintern and the Chinese Communist Party," China Quarterly 113 (March 1988), 29-59; Garver, "The Soviet Union and the Xi'an Incident,” Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs 26 (July 1991), 147-75; Michael M. Sheng, "Mao, Stalin, and the Formation of the Anti-Japanese United Front, 1935-37," China Quarterly 129 (March 1992), 149-70; Sheng, "America's Lost Chance in China? A Reappraisal of Chinese Communist Policy Toward the United States Before 1945," Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs 29 (January 1993), 135-57; Sheng, "Chinese Communist Policy Toward the United States and

the Myth of the 'Lost Chance', 1948-1950," Modern Asian Studies 28 (1994), 475-502; and Chen Jian, "The Ward Case and the Emergence of Sino-American Confrontation, 1948-1950," Australian Journal of Chinese Affairs 30 (July 1993), 149-70.

A number of studies prepared without benefit of the recently released documentation are still worth attention. James ReardonAnderson, Yenan and the Great Powers: The Origins of Chinese Communist Foreign Policy, 1944-1946 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980), stirred up debate by minimizing ideological constraints on CCP policy and by arguing for a "lost chance” at the end of the Pacific War when the CCP was frustrated in its attempt to avert Sino-American hostility and to minimize dependence on the Soviet Union.

This interpretative challenge was quickly taken up by several contributors to Uncertain Years: Chinese-American Relations, 1947-1950, ed. Dorothy Borg and Waldo Heinrichs (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980), 181-278, 293-303. See in particular my own "Mao Tse-tung and the Issue of Accommodation with the United States, 1948-1950," Steven M. Goldstein's response, "Chinese Communist Policy Toward the United States: Opportunities and Constraints, 1944-1950," and Steven I. Levine's two commentaries. Goldstein revisited the debate in "Sino-American Relations, 1948-1950: Lost Chance or No Chance?" in Sino-American Relations, 19451955: A Joint Reassessment of a Critical Decade, ed. Harry Harding and Yuan Ming (Wilmington, Del.: Scholarly Resources, 1989), 119-42.

These Goldstein accounts emphasize policy constraints imposed by formal party ideology. They as well as his "The Chinese Revolution and the Colonial Areas: The View from Yenan, 1937-41," China Quarterly 75 (September 1978), 594-622, and his "The CCP's Foreign Policy of Opposition, 1937-1945," in China's Bitter Victory: The War with Japan, 1937-1945, ed. James C. Hsiung and Steven I. Levine (Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, 1992), 107-134, draw from his "Chinese Communist Perspectives on International Affairs, 1937-1941" (Ph.D. thesis, Columbia University, 1972), a pioneering effort at systematic treatment based largely on party press and other public pronouncements available to researchers at the time.

Levine's own major statement, Anvil of

« 上一頁繼續 »