The Experts below are selected from a list of 312 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Seema Agnihotri - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Critical Reflection on the Role of Education as a Catalyst of Peace-building and Peaceful Coexistence
Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2017Co-Authors: Seema AgnihotriAbstract:Human being since its evolution is continuously struggling to combat inherent prowess of violence and conflict as a part of biological species which is falling in an ambivalent position in the ecosystem. It was realized long years back that only Peaceful Coexistence can ensure the prolonged journey of humanity without any turmoil. But this realization and its implementation have always been a herculean task for those who tried to do it through different forms. In fact, they have to sacrifice their lives also for doing the same. The prevailing long history of wars, revolts, conflicts all across the world are the glaring examples in this regard which have tried to subvert the desire for peace among the peace loving people in a very indifferent manner. In due course of human evolution, various modes were taken to instill the significance of peace in the humanity. Religion, music, painting, folktales, architecture, etc. are used prominently to spread the message of peace by highlighting the repercussion of violence in different forms. But it has been seen that the impact of all these modes were not as pervasive as desired. Despite of their intensive usages in different cultural settings in its own specific ways, the intensity of violence and conflicts could not be minimized and the climax can be seen in the form of two world wars which have been fought within such a short span of time. Immediately after the wars, the search for another mode was started and it was found that education can be that mode through which the goal of peace can be achieved and sustained for a long period of time through adoption of correct strategies and techniques. In the course of due deliberations, proper frameworks have been created in the education systems of different countries of the world to minimize the occurrence of violence along with promoting peace. This paper is attempting to highlight those efforts and to critically present the case for the effectiveness of education as a catalyst for peace building through the model. The paper got concluded by emphasizing on the changing aims of education revolving around to gain true peace through different channels.
Mark Moyar - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
triumph forsaken Peaceful Coexistence 1956 1959
2006Co-Authors: Mark MoyarAbstract:“ there are only two ways ,” said nikita khrushchev to the delegates, “either Peaceful Coexistence or the most destructive war in history. There is no third way.” Speaking to the Twentieth Congress of the Soviet Communist Party in February 1956, Khrushchev was announcing the new foreign policy line that the Soviet Union would pursue, by and large, until Khrushchev's exit in 1964. The policy of Peaceful Coexistence, part of a sweeping repudiation of Stalinism, rejected the old notion that defeating capitalism required international confrontation and war. Because nuclear weapons had convinced both sides that a war of the superpowers would mean suicide, Khrushchev, like Eisenhower, had come to the conclusion that the struggle between socialism and capitalism would be resolved by Peaceful competition in the economic sphere. “Our certainty of the victory of communism is based on the fact that the socialist mode of production possesses decisive advantages over the capitalist mode of production,” Khrushchev explained in his speech. Khrushchev's desire for peace among the major powers did not, however, translate into a desire for peace within countries. Although the working class in some capitalist countries could take power Peacefully, through the electoral process, Khrushchev believed that the working class in other countries would have to rise up and destroy the capitalist government by force. In accordance with the new policy of Peaceful Coexistence, the Soviets told the North Vietnamese that they should not take up arms against South Vietnam.
-
Triumph Forsaken: Peaceful Coexistence: 1956–1959
Triumph Forsaken, 1Co-Authors: Mark MoyarAbstract:“ there are only two ways ,” said nikita khrushchev to the delegates, “either Peaceful Coexistence or the most destructive war in history. There is no third way.” Speaking to the Twentieth Congress of the Soviet Communist Party in February 1956, Khrushchev was announcing the new foreign policy line that the Soviet Union would pursue, by and large, until Khrushchev's exit in 1964. The policy of Peaceful Coexistence, part of a sweeping repudiation of Stalinism, rejected the old notion that defeating capitalism required international confrontation and war. Because nuclear weapons had convinced both sides that a war of the superpowers would mean suicide, Khrushchev, like Eisenhower, had come to the conclusion that the struggle between socialism and capitalism would be resolved by Peaceful competition in the economic sphere. “Our certainty of the victory of communism is based on the fact that the socialist mode of production possesses decisive advantages over the capitalist mode of production,” Khrushchev explained in his speech. Khrushchev's desire for peace among the major powers did not, however, translate into a desire for peace within countries. Although the working class in some capitalist countries could take power Peacefully, through the electoral process, Khrushchev believed that the working class in other countries would have to rise up and destroy the capitalist government by force. In accordance with the new policy of Peaceful Coexistence, the Soviets told the North Vietnamese that they should not take up arms against South Vietnam.
Kang Min-ju - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The 1954 Sino-Indian Agreement and the Sino-Indian Border Dispute:——A Review of the 50 Years since the Adoption of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence
Contemporary China History Studies, 2004Co-Authors: Kang Min-juAbstract:The Sino-Indian Agreement signed in 1954 was a point at issue in the Sino-Indian border dispute in the 1950s and 1960s. The Indian government argued that this Agreement solved all the outstanding issues between the two countries, including the border dispute. In its view, the Agreement constituted the treaty basis for the boundary it had advocated in the middle sector and the inclusion of the five principles of Peaceful Coexistence in the Agreement was a proof that the Chinese government endorsed the Indian stand. The Chinese government held, on the other hand, that the 1954 Agreement and the inclusion of the five principles in it had nothing to do with the question of Sino-Indian border, still less to indicate China's recognition of the Indian-proposed boundary in any section. The views of the Chinese government tally with historical facts. The Indian government's stand and its refusal to renew the 1954 Sino-Indian Agreement were designed to impose the boundary it stood for on China, which seriously impaired the relations between the two countries.
Dai De-zheng - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
On the "True" Causes of Ten Years’ Sino-Soviet Debate and the Effect of Debating "Peaceful Coexistence"
Journal of China Executive Leadership Academy Pudong, 2008Co-Authors: Dai De-zhengAbstract:Sino-Soviet debate was caused by complex factors. The debate on Peaceful Coexistence between the two countries had great impact on the later disintegration of USSR. It was the motivation that boosted new China into a new period of diplomacy and it also had sophisticated influence on international society. As a socialist country,the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence can be used as a fundamental but not the only principle to handle international relations. Meanwhile,independence and self-reliance should be the basic principle; peace and development should be the theme,purpose,goal,task and approach,strengthening the unity and cooperation between developing countries should be the basic diplomatic point,and reform and opening-up should be the basic state policy. These problems are significant in that they not only decide whether socialism will live or die,but also are related to the global peace,development,progress,harmony and wonderfulness.
Liselotte Odgaard - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Maritime Security in East Asia: Peaceful Coexistence and Active Defense in China’s Diaoyu/Senkaku Policy
Journal of Contemporary China, 2016Co-Authors: Liselotte OdgaardAbstract:AbstractThe origins and role of the concepts of Peaceful Coexistence and active defense in Chinese foreign policy are investigated and applied to China’s policy toward the Diaoyu/Senkakus. The dominant moderate conceptual strategic thinking encourages Beijing to aim for the establishment of a modus vivendi with Washington and Tokyo that involves a de facto presence of China alongside both the US and Japan. However, Beijing’s signaling is complicated by radical voices that undercut Coexistence.
-
Peaceful Coexistence strategy and china s diplomatic power
The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 2013Co-Authors: Liselotte OdgaardAbstract:Diplomatic power and influence, Coexistence-style, concerns the ability to determine the framework governing international security management. It requires a programme for international order that devises methods on how to manage the use of force, jurisdiction over peoples and territory and international agreements. China’s diplomatic strategy is based on its constitutional concept of Peaceful Coexistence. This concept has been translated into a programme for order that involves governmental consent, United Nations’ (UN) authorisation and approval from regional or functional UN-based organisations as a requirement for using force; effective control and respect for the legal equality of states as a precondition for exercising jurisdiction over peoples and territory; and absolute sovereignty as a basis for the validity of international agreements. The dominant element of Beijing’s strategy is Coexistence diplomacy, which has allowed China to become a maker of international order.
-
Peaceful Coexistence Strategy and China’s Diplomatic Power
The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 2013Co-Authors: Liselotte OdgaardAbstract:Diplomatic power and influence, Coexistence-style, concerns the ability to determine the framework governing international security management. It requires a programme for international order that devises methods on how to manage the use of force, jurisdiction over peoples and territory and international agreements. China’s diplomatic strategy is based on its constitutional concept of Peaceful Coexistence. This concept has been translated into a programme for order that involves governmental consent, United Nations’ (UN) authorisation and approval from regional or functional UN-based organisations as a requirement for using force; effective control and respect for the legal equality of states as a precondition for exercising jurisdiction over peoples and territory; and absolute sovereignty as a basis for the validity of international agreements. The dominant element of Beijing’s strategy is Coexistence diplomacy, which has allowed China to become a maker of international order.