The Soviet bloc sent arms backing leftists and nationalists in Africa and Southeast Asia. Many of which gained independence from their European colonizers. While the Soviet Union had its own motives, namely weakening the West's influence, does it deserve credit for the indepence of many 3rd world nations?
2007-06-05 11:05:35 · 3 answers · asked by Brandon 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
In fact, they had a lot of impcat, but they don't desreve any cridet. Their major concern was to take a stand against the colonization countries in the West, but that was for their own interests. Africa and Asia people were the real heros.
2007-06-11 15:06:34 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
with the exceptions of the French fighting to hold both Algeria and Vietnam, local opposition had little to do with Western Nations de-colonizing the world. Especially in Englands case, they just said by good luck see you around you[re on your own.......in other words they just gave up and left . Armed local opposition had very little bearing on it...........
2007-06-05 19:55:04 · answer #2 · answered by yankee_sailor 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
How can nations that have one military coup after another or years of civil war be considered independent?
When a nation has stable government and doesn't need aid from other nations, has industrial growth...then the argument can be made. Too many African nations lack such stability.
.
2007-06-05 18:10:34 · answer #3 · answered by ? 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋