Wronged by Empire: Post-Imperial Ideology and Foreign Policy in India and China

Studies in Asian Security

by Manjari Chatterjee Miller

Although India and China have very different experiences of colonialism, they respond to that history in a similar way―by treating it as a collective trauma. As a result they have a strong sense of victimization that affects their foreign policy decisions even today. Wronged by Empire breaks new ground by blending this historical phenomenon, colonialism, with mixed methods―including archival research, newspaper data mining, and a new statistical method of content analysis―to explain the foreign policy choices of India and two countries that are continuously discussed but very rarely rigorously compared. By reference to their colonial past, Manjari Chatterjee Miller explains their puzzling behavior today. More broadly, she argues that the transformative historical experience of a large category of actors―ex-colonies, who have previously been neglected in the study of international relations―can be used as a method to categorize states in the international system. In the process Miller offers a more inclusive way to analyze states than do traditional theories of international relations.

Genres: Asia, International Relations

192 pages, Hardcover

First published August 28, 2013

Reviews

[Benemint · Rating 3 out of 5]

I don't want to make a judgement on his methodology and simplicity of his argument. He is a political scientist and I think he does due diligence in order to "generalize" his argument. But at the same time, IF he could have added more critical analysis of the difference between the rhetoric that postcolonial states use and their mindset (which could still be very neorealist or something else), I would have appreciated this book more. It also reminded me of how difficult it is to bridge history and political science especially today (used to be very easy).

[Conrad Barwa · Rating 2 out of 5]

Packed full of interesting details this study is handicapped by two major deficiencies; firstly methodological it has an extremely shallow and narrow base relying heavily on selected quantitative analysis of newspaper articles and pieces. Statistically, the sampling method, model and results are very weak and far too insubstantial to support the claims made in the book. This is compounded by a lack of any deep fieldwork or examination of primary source material on a satisfactory basis. Secondly, theoretically, there is a complete absence of class as an analytic variable on its impact on the trauma caused by colonialism. Especially, given the class basis of colonial rule in India there is an absence of understanding of why colonialism might not have been quite the traumatic event claimed by the author given that most Indians even in directly ruled provinces never even laid eyes on an European.

[Mayank Bawari · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonky methodology but good analysis of the gripe against colonialism of the past and present

[Rachel Williams · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author presents an interesting lens to look through historic events and present standpoints though. Using psychology to examine history is always fun and interesting; the one thing I will say is that some of her data collection seems a bit limited. Overall interesting read. I’ve used the word interesting too much. Damn.