3 ms·
Ignoring the holes in your historical retelling of events, these examples do not fit my criteria as all three listed benefited from outside support from large p
by classicsnoot 10y ago
Ignoring the holes in your historical retelling of events, these examples do not fit my criteria as all three listed benefited from outside support from large powers (India::Russia/Britain, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia::China, and Egypt::Russia/USA). As such, my point still stands...
- wz1000 10y agoNo nation can exist in a vacuum. Your "criteria" excludes pretty much every country in the world. Even then, USSR-India cooperation was mostly limited to military matters, like when the Soviets sent a carrier during the '71 war of independence for Bangladesh to keep the Americans from joining in. India(under Nehru) and Egypt(under Nasser) actually founded the Non-Aligned Movement to avoid being pawns in the games of the US and USSR. This move confused and antagonized the Americans(if you are not our friend, you must be our enemy), which was why they had much closer ties with the Soviets. Nehru even rejected a permanent seat in the UNSC because of the NAM. You can hardly find two countries that did their best not to depend on foreign influence and benefactors. Of course in Egypt, after Nasser's downfall and the destruction of any hope for sovereign, secular Arab nationalism, the US gladly stepped in and took control of the pieces. The consequences of that are for all to see.