A Continent Erupts: Decolonization, Civil War, and Massacre in Postwar Asia, 1945-1955

by Ronald H. Spector

The war against Japan officially ended on September 2, 1945, but in Asia the fighting never really stopped. Civil war, communal violence, and insurgency engulfed almost all of Asia, from India to the Pacific Ocean, within weeks of the famous surrender ceremony aboard the USS Missouri. By early 1947, full-scale wars were raging in China, Indonesia, and Vietnam, with growing guerrilla conflicts in Korea and Malaya. A decade after the Japanese surrender, almost all of the countries of South, East, and Southeast Asia that formerly had been colonies of the European powers or conquests of the Japanese had become independent nations—after clashes that resulted in the deaths of at least 2.5 million combatants and millions of civilians.

With A Continent Erupts, acclaimed military historian Ronald H. Spector provides, for the first time, a comprehensive military history and analysis of these little-known but decisive conflicts that changed the shape of Asia.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Asia, China, World History, War, Military Fiction

560 pages, Hardcover

First published August 23, 2022

About the author

Professor Spector received his B.A. from Johns Hopkins and his MA and Ph.D. from Yale.
He has served in various government positions and on active duty in the Marine Corps from 1967-1969 and 1983-1984, and was the first civilian to become Director of Naval History and the head of the Naval Historical Center. He has served on the faculties of LSU, Alabama and Princeton and has been a senior Fulbright lecturer in India and Israel. In 1995-1996 he was Distinguished Visiting Professor of Strategy at the National War College and was the Distinguished Guest Professor at Keio University, Tokyo in 2000.

Reviews

[Caleb Fogler · Rating 4 out of 5]

A Continent Erupts tells the stories of chaos and struggles for liberation across Eastern and Southeastern Asia during the decade after the second World War. Spector explores the international politics and events of the Chinese Civil War through the rise of communist China, the resistance to French domination in Vietnam and Dutch colonialism in Indonesia, the Korean Civil War, and the roles of the Soviet Union and the United States during these uprising.

Spector gives his readers an in-depth understanding of the people and events of this region during the post war era. From everything like the rise of Kim il-Sung and detailed logistics of the diversity of the French Foreign Legion’s rations for their multi-National units in Vietnam, to the balancing act of the Truman administration of battling communism in Europe and Asia. It’s truly remarkable the amount of detail the author is able to provide.

My main criticism of this work is the organization of the content. The author often jumps back and forth between countries and characters which made the overall story hard to follow for me. And while the ground level view of personnel and characters was very interesting and exciting, it made it hard to remember most of the key players outside of big names like Mao, Stalin and Truman.

Overall a very enjoyable book for anyone interested in military history, Cold War history, or modern Asia history.

[Simon Mee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Soldiers vowed to fight harder and civilians willingly enlisted in the various public health campaigns initiated by the Chinese government. For the first time, millions in China—including UN prisoners of war—were inoculated. Chinese citizens were educated in disease prevention and encouraged to adopt measures that improved sanitation. Public health in China was enhanced. Thus the “Germ Warfare” campaign, unlike almost all the other fantasy wars waged by Communist propagandists and American “psychological warfare” practitioners, ironically had some positive results.

A Continent Erupts covers most of the East Asian liberation wars from 1945-55 (the Malayan Emergency is baffingly excluded until the Epilogue) and, while very conflict orientated, is an excellent example of taking the time to explain not just what happened, but the how and why.

While explicitly a military history, Spector (mostly) keeps the narrative from devolving into one small unit battle after another, the only real failure being two of the chapters on the Korean War (I am a bit more forgiving of the coverage French actions in Indochina as they tend to be tied to broader points). It is understandable from an American standpoint to walk the through the trials and tribulations of Task Force Faith, but it jars tonally with the rest of the book and goes over ground that is well covered. Which is a slight shame, because there are at least two conflicts that Spector really shines with elsewhere.

The Chinese Civil War, which is under-covered in terms of how the Nationalists blew what appeared to be overwhelming advantages, receives detailed coverage from more than a military history standpoint. I would emphasise how valuable this is, as the relatively popular Mao makes it all about the Americans imposing ceasefire that gave the Communists time to recover in Manchuria. Spector is far more clear-eyed about the deep faults in the Nationalist government, something that contemporary American observers are shown to be aware.

The cumulative result of these social and economic developments—a hobbled economy, a dysfunctional system of public finance, a corrupt and predatory Nationalist bureaucracy, rural agricultural distress, and uncontrolled inflation—meant that even as Chiang prepared for his final offensives to crush the Communists, his regime was being progressively undermined through the demoralization, alienation, and hostility of larger and larger elements of the population in both the cities and the countryside

Another highlight is the fight for independence in Indonesia, which is rarely covered in any detail. The time Spector spends here not only covers the events, but also how the seeds were sown for future conflicts in the archipelago. Spector has interesting points to make about decolonisation, with my only disagreement being over how he considers it ironic that the decolonisation wars involved colonial sourced troops and shifting local alliances – both things that I would personally expect to see.

Americans, both in Indonesia and Washington, now began to see the Dutch as an obstacle to the establishment of a truly anticommunist national government that might serve as a bulwark against the dangerous spread of Soviet and Chinese subversion in Asia.

From a global perspective, the decisions of the Soviet Union and America get fair weight, which actually means we get more from America, as Cold War paranoia took hold. Eisenhower comes off somewhat less wise and deliberately disengaged than from what I have read elsewhere – and I am sympathetic to that portrayal as he had John Foster Dulles in his cabinet. The decisions of the Americans make the decisions of other colonial powers and their local allies make more sense in this book – albeit who exactly drove who between the French and Americans can always be debated.

According to historian Bernard Fall, the Ohled Nail “would travel with units in the combat zone ... and some girls died heroically serving as emergency nurses under fire.” Fall also claimed that on one occasion, a French officer recommended two Ohled Nail women for the Croix de Guerre.

This is a really good book for understanding (in part) how decolonisation arose and played out in East Asia. While it does not directly deal with the philosophical underpinings of the liberation movements, a lot of the catalysts were military based (such as the success of Japan against other colonial powers). A Continent Erupts is a good starting point, and delves deeper than other histories of the period.

[Heinz Reinhardt · Rating 3 out of 5]

Having thoroughly enjoyed Mr. Spector's 'Eagle Against the Sun', I was looking forward to this one. Billed as a military history of the period, I was expecting to read a relatively detailed study of the Chinese Civil War (a rarity in English, and though I studied Mandarin for four years, that was a dozen years ago in college, and I haven't actually kept up with it), some on the French-Indochina War, the Korean War, and to learn more about the various conflicts resulting from the messy decolonization process.
Well, I got some of that.
Having already taken graduate level courses in modern Asian political history, and Modern Chinese Geostrategic history, much of the political and diplomatic tit for tat that the author details in these pages wasn't entirely new to me. And I have a bit of an interest in modern Asian history, so I am not exactly a neophyte in terms of the subject matter. However, admittedly, my three stars mid-card review is due to my own subjective hopes, and expectations.
I had hoped to get more detail on the back and forth struggle of armies in the Chinese Civil War, the Viet Minh's struggle with the French, and of course the Korean War, as well as learn more about the Dutch, and British counterinsurgency operations in Indonesia, and Malaysia. (I had also thought maybe a little discussion on India, and their very messy road to independence, and the breaking away of what is now Pakistan, but alas, no, not to any real depth). The author certainly discussed all of the above, but only from an orbital satellite type perspective, and only in very brief snippets.
The books focus is on the halls of power, especially the Americans, and how the changing situations in Asia impacted America's stumbling rise to global empire.
Not that there weren't lessons to be learned.
First and foremost, this book is a deeply researched, thoroughly sourced, hard pushback against the ever-present mantra of: 'it's all the West's fault'.
As Spector makes clear, the natives had far more agency than the current propaganda line (helpfully touted by a certain Geostrategic rival of the US, currently engaged in an attritional struggle somewhere in the former Soviet Union, though I won't purposefully throw stones...) most often makes out. They were also far more fractious than they would like to admit as well. In Indonesia alone there were multiple factions, and far more Indonesians died at their own hands when a Communist revolt caused a war of one upmanship utilizing atrocities against their Muslim neighbors (Muslims and Communists don't always get along that well, after all) and vice versa. All, of course, taking place within the broader context of the Dutch attempting to restore their colonial overlordship. Which, thanks to American political pressure, and financial threats, was doomed to failure.
There are numerous lessons such as the above to be gleaned within the pages of this genuinely well written book.
Simply that for my own expectations, I was a tad let down.
Your mileage may vary. If you're not overly familiar with the time period, have not studied it in an analytical fashion, or are just curious, then this is a great book to pick up and study. But be warned, it's not a military history as it is advertised as.
Recommended.

[Alex Stern · Rating 4 out of 5]

Never before has an author captured the extreme violence and political upheaval of East and Southeast Asia like in this all-encompasing narrative history. As chapters jump between the urban fighting of Indonesian cities, the tense skirmishes of Korean mountains, the sweeping battles of Chinese countrysides, and the guerrilla warfare of Vietnamese jungles, the reader can begin to understand the degree to which war had ravaged the continent amidst independence movements, religious separatists, and Cold War tensions.

[Larry Roberts · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very interesting and informative book! I've read quite a lot on Vietnam and the Korean War and China, but seeing in this book the interplay between their post WWII struggles gave me new perspectives. I especially appreciated how all three set the stage for the USA's direct involvement in Vietnam.

[CLH · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ronald Spector’s A Continent Erupts: Decolonization, Civil War, and Massacre in Post-War Asia, 1945-1955 aims to summarize a decade’s worth of violence and conflict that followed the collapse of the Japanese Empire in 1945. A recurring theme of the book, rarely clearly articulated, is the ricocheting consequences of the Japanese occupation. The series of Japanese triumphs in 1941 and 1942, in which Japanese forces overran massive swathes of colonial territory, shattered the myth of European invulnerability and inspired many anti-colonial militants. Many understocked guerrilla movements were initially dependent on leftover Japanese equipment and armaments: for the nationalists in Indonesia, who managed to acquire around 50,000 Japanese rifles, 3,000 machine guns, and 100 million rounds of ammunition, and the Viet Minh, which assigned spears to their frontline troops until 1950, Japanese weapons were vital. The stream of names – ranging from guerrillas to army commanders, from village administrators to future presidents, and from the Korean War to the Indonesian War of Independence – who transitioned from the Imperial Japanese Army or associated militias to guerrilla organizations is almost overwhelming. The use of Japanese soldiers as garrison troops by the Allies in the immediate aftermath of the war’s end is a historical curiosity of which I was unaware.

Although Spector uses these ex-collaborators primarily to offer individual anecdotes, there are also hints of the institutional legacy of Japanese rule: for example, the retention of Korean officers of the Japanese-led police force post-war ensured the continuity of “old traditions of routine brutality, torture and corruption.” Spector details the ruthlessness of Syngman Rhee’s government at some length: the repression at Cheju-do, the purge of suspected Communist sympathizers as the Korean People’s Army stormed south, the violent suppression of resistance in poorly-managed POW camps. One of the most memorable vignettes is the depiction of the British unit who, frustrated and disgusted by its ally, who are engaging in mass executions as they eat breakfast, threatens to start shooting at them. Kim Il-Sung, hardly innocent of butchering defenseless citizens, earns and receives his own share of criticism —outmaneuvering and executing his domestic opponents, ordering the purge of captive South Koreans as his army retreated north, and terrorizing former POWs who returned home.

Spector, an American, takes pain to avoid ideological bias. He pays as much, if not more, attention to American atrocities in the Korean War as North Korean ones, in particular the massacre of several hundred refugees under a bridge in late 1950 and the systematic bombing of largely civilian infrastructure in North Korea which began in 1951. The racism of GIs who believes that no “gook” could threaten them is discussed as well.

Spector opens the book with the analogy of the “500-pound gorillas” – the United States and the Soviet Union, who can shake the earth. This argument, although established early, is not well-developed over the following chapters, as Spector documents their comparative disinterest in the region. Outside of the US in Korea, neither nation engaged great resources in Asia during this period. The readers sees much of the relationship between the United States and its colonial allies, often sharper than one might expect: the stubborn French efforts to keep its colonial empire a chasse gardé, dismissive of Washington’s advice but dependent on its war chest; the dogged Dutch attempts to reacquire the resources of the West Indies, to which American pressure delivered the coup de grâce, although defeat had already become inevitable. Some of Washington’s Asian allies merit the same detailed treatment: American frustration with Chiang is tracked though several emissaries, ambassadors, and counsels (Wedemeyer, Marshall, Stuart) although the relationship with Rhee – as recalcitrant and stubborn as the French and the Dutch – is neglected in comparison.

The comparable absence of the Soviets from the narrative is unsurprising. As Odd Arne Westad detailed in The Global Cold War, Stalin lacked much faith or interest in the socialist elements of the anti-colonial efforts in Asia. Europe drew most of his attention, and his rigid commitment to a strictly orthodox Marxist view of development — namely, one which believes that socialism can only emerge in capitalist countries — led him not to offer strong support to guerrilla movements in nations where capitalism remained in its infancy. Of course, capability was a significant issue — the two “gorillas” in the late 1940s and early 1950s were really only 1.5, and even that is generous, as the American economy in 1950 was about as large as all of Europe and the USSR put together.

Colonized populations were not a monolith, and Spector thankfully takes pains to pull them apart. He tracks ideological differences, which can largely be simplified to “nationalists vs communists,” and resulted in civil wars in Indonesia and South Korea. Where other differences emerge, however, Spector sometimes only provides a cursory treatment. Most obviously, Spector discusses certain Vietnamese ethnic groups and religious organizations who opposed the Viet Minh but repeatedly fails to explain why, only writing, for example, that highlanders had centuries of ethnic antagonism with lowlanders. This is an unsatisfactory explanation that fails to indicate how and why that conflict persisted throughout colonial rule. He is more thorough with regards to religious organizations like the Cao Dai and the Hoa Hao, detailing French concessions and the promise of local autonomy.

Spector also describes, at some length, the contribution of colonial soldiers to the French war effort. He seems fairly sharp on the motivations of some of them, movingly recounting the testimony of rural Moroccans, who, impoverished by French colonial policy, felt that joining the French army was the most reliable course. In French West Africa, a sergeant’s wages were 10 times those of the average worker. This evidence is anecdotal and not particularly systematic, but still fascinating. It put in sharp relief the absence of such testimonies for the Vietnamese soldiers who fought for the French.

I have thus far neglected to discuss the Chinese Civil War. I had not realized the degree to which the CCP was on the ropes early after WW2, forced to abandon its long-standing capital after suffering a series of reverses. Spector is sharply critical of how the Nationalists augmented their numbers, listing a number of techniques by which they impressed civilians, and arguing that these methods produced a hollow army (he also devotes time to how economic mismanagement, corruption, and brutality eroded the foundations of its support). However, he fails to explain how the Communists overcame the same weakness. Although he notes that Communist soldiers were no more willing (much-welcomed land reform made peasants more invested in their own plots, not more inclined to leave them on an uncertain mission) and sometimes tricked into continuing their service after World War 2, he leaves uncertain how the CCP was able to maintain their cohesion, only noting that their political officers were attentive to their soldiers’ views. This may have produced how the CCP’s leaders became aware of this problem, but it does not explain how they overcame it.

Although it was an article of faith on the right that China had been lost by the willing connivance of Communist sympathizers at the highest echelons of the government. Spector makes clear the sincere frustration of many high-ranking officials. State’s Policy Planning Staff believed that Chiang’s government – predatory and incompetent – was “more likely to be indulged than corrected by further infusions of American aid.” The CIA lamented that “we cannot give the will to fight and the desire to become good soldiers.” Truman concluded that “aid to Chiang’s regime would be pouring sand into a rat hole.” If anything, those looking for communist spies would do better to look at the Nationalists themselves. Communist spies among the KMT included the assistant chief of staff of the army, the chief of the War Planning Board, and at least three division commanders who defected with their troops at key moments. Those who were not were more than willing to let the Communists destroy their rivals and then bargain for their own survival.

Spector adds levity to his narrative by either inventing or reporting witty characterizations of certain characters. Contemporaries were unkind to Rhee (“a mischievous and untrustworthy blowhard”), Nationalist general Chin I-Lun (“an intellectual virgin—he hasn’t had an idea yet), Kim Il-Sung (“a fat, dissipated looking, pasty creature”), and Charles Willoughby, whose boss said “There have been two great intelligence officers in history ... Mine is not one of them.” Spector clearly enjoys his own one-liners, which he uses to introduce Admiral Thiery d’Argenlieu (“in politics he stood slightly to the right of Louis XIV”), Lou Boxheng (“Unlike many high-ranking Communists and cadres, Lou possessed both a skeptical temperament and a pronounced sense of humor”), Hu Lian (“a well-established reputation for aggressiveness and daring, something quite rare in the Nationalist Army”), Edward Almond ("among the mediocrities and placeholders of the Tokyo staff, Almond's dim bulb shone brightly"), and no less a personage than Dwight D. Eisenhower (“Like the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland, Eisenhower was capable of believing six impossible things before breakfast”).

A clever and interesting book, whose gaps do not meaningfully detract from the author’s achievement.

[Mikey B. · Rating 5 out of 5]

The author examines de-colonization in Asia at the end of the Second World War. He looks at China, Indonesia, Korea, and Vietnam from several perspectives – nationalism, communism, the persistence of the colonial powers (England, France, Netherlands, and Japan), and the emergence of the two new superpowers – the United States and the U.S.S.R.

In all four countries vicious civil wars ensued after the Japanese surrender on September 2, 1945. In each country there were different groups based on ethnicities, religion, location, and those who were collaborators with the colonial rulers… who aspired to become the new rulers. Some were communist, some not. It was contentious and brutal; animosities exist to this day. Into this mix the colonial powers persisted in trying to maintain their long exploitative reign.

The colonialists asked the Americans for help by constantly waving the threat of communism to promote their cause. Aid poured into Vietnam, Korea, and Indonesia with piles of military hardware along with advisors.

To Harry Truman’s credit he refused, after a time, to give more aid to Chiang Kai-shek and his corrupt regime. He said that American money was just “going down a rat’s hole”. Truman then, erroneously came to be blamed, for handing over China to communism. It was the inept leadership of Chiang Kai-shek that made it possible for Mao’s communists to take over.

However, the U.S. came to be persuaded, partly through the insidious campaign of Joe McCarthy, to give military assistance to Vietnam and Korea. The U.S. saw a world-wide communist conspiracy everywhere and became stuck in this paradigm, being unable to perceive the role that nationalism, and unwilling to understand the different forces at play in Vietnam, Korea, and Indonesia. The West saw communism as a monolithic blanket, set to take over the world. In the 1950s the French in Vietnam had only to whisper the word “communism” to the Americans – and millions of dollars and military equipment would be lavished on them.

If the Americans had paid more attention to what was really occurring to the French in Vietnam – or examined what happened to the Dutch in Indonesia, then the tragic escalation in Vietnam in the 1960s could well have been averted. Eisenhower must share some of the responsibility, for he was an advocate of the domino theory and communist prevention.

This book is enlightening in that it covers not only the events in Asia, but also the U.S., Europe and the U.S.S.R. which all interacted together in the Cold War. And as the author tragically illustrates the Cold War was a real war in these Asian countries.

Perhaps there is a little too much, for me, on military movements, more so on Korea (as in this division cut-off or moved…) which I find ponderous. I would have liked more on Indonesia – a region I know little of.

[Daniel Hubbell · Rating 2 out of 5]

First and foremost, Ronald Spector's A Continent Erupts is a military history. If you made it 99% of the way through the dust jacket and missed that word on the bottom of last sentence, then congratulations, this review is for you! If you're like me, I don't think I can recommend this one. Check out Timeghost History or Real Time History on Youtube or Nebula instead, as they've got the same information on each of these wars, but better presented.

The immediate aftermath of WWII triggers a period some historians have, sans irony, dubbed "The Long Peace". By every definition that era came to an end with Russia's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine in 2022, but like Robert Gerwaith's superior Vanquished did for WWI, A Continent Erupts dives into the postcolonial wars and collapse of empire which immediately followed WWII.

Spector spends about a third of the book's length covering a lot of the social and political impacts across Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, and China, to the extent necessary to lay the foundation for the wars he's interested in discussing. It is worth emphasizing how tightly fenceposted these wars are. Spector spends little time on Malaya, and literally none on the Philippines, Singapore or Burma. This is a little baffling given that Malaya had an extensive communist insurgency especially. Since Spector notes he spent the better part of a decade researching this book he may have decided he had to call it quits somewhere.

Instead the rest of Spector's book goes to a detailed discussion of each war on a more or less linear timeframe. Continent is chock a block full of anecdotes from soldiers, many of which are fascinating or disturbing. The number of Waffen SS who joined the French Foreign Legion in Vietnam, for instance, says a lot about the attitudes postwar France had towards its colonies. But the rhythm of Spector's writing is very predictable. The average page will set the scene for a given battle by mentioning one or two places that aren't on any map in the book (there are four, and their patchiness is maddening), toss in two or three anecdotes from that battle, then we do it again on the next page. If it's a really important engagement like the Huaihai campaign, then we repeat this drill for a few pages. It's accurate, well researched, anecdotally compelling, and for anyone without a degree or a burning interest in military minutiae utterly exhausting. I thought I was that guy but I'm clearly coming up short here!

[Blair · Rating 4 out of 5]

“A Continent Erupts” is a book about the bloody conflicts that erupted across East Asia at the end of World War II.

These conflicts continued after the end of World War II largely because of the power vacuums left by the defeated Japanese, and by the failure of the European powers to quickly regain control over their former colonies.

This book covered the vacancies of power and subsequent civil wars in China, Vietnam, and Korea as well as the war against the former Dutch colonial occupiers in Indonesia.

What I most liked about the book was the context it gave into why Asia continued to battle long after the hostilities between the Allied Nations and Japanese ended with the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan. The former European colonies of Asia had seen an Asia power – Japan – defeat the Europeans rapidly, and in many battles, before themselves being overwhelmed.

The nationalists in the various colonies and occupied territories in East Asia wanted freedom and independence and thought they could push back on their former masters just the way the Japanese did. They saw opportunities to escape their European masters and they largely succeeded in freeing themselves as independent nations.

I also liked details of the conflicts because they filled in some “missing pieces” in my knowledge of Asia. While I knew that Sukarno was the first President of Indonesia and that his country had freed themselves form the Dutch, I wasn’t sure who Hatta was (the first Vice President of the Republic of Indonesia) – as the main airport in Jakarta is now called Soekarno-Hatta.

One of the main streets in Indonesia is also called Sudirman – named after the first commander of the Indonesian Armed Forces in their battle for freedom from the Dutch colonists. This book helped me with these details.

There was nothing I disliked about the book. But I thought it could have explained why it didn't cover the post World War II period of Malaya, Burma, and India. That said, the book was already long at nearly 450 pages, and the author had to draw a line somewhere.

I also felt that the book could have used a few maps to give reference to the geographical features of the battles following World War II.

This was a great book and one that I’d recommend for anyone interested in post War Asian history.

[Randy · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent history of China and Southeast Asia from after World War II ends until the mid-1950’s. There is so much information in here – the author presents a pretty balanced account of the civil wars and colonialism post WWII – excesses and failures on both sides. If you believe you have a “good” understanding of the history there but have never read any detailed accounts like this book, I urge you to read this book. Be prepared though, the book is lengthy and is likely to take a lot of reading time to digest everything.

I came away with such an enhanced understanding that changed some of my views on American and other foreign involvements in Korea (before and during the Korean War) and Vietnam (pre-US 1960’s involvement – the US Vietnam war is not covered, although the precursor years are covered.) Worst of all, the details of the deaths and casualties on every side will sadden you as it did me. The tales of vengeance and revenge that occurred before and after changes in control of areas will shock you. Perhaps not enough attention has been given to the human loss involved in what seemed like constant civil wars, fomented by foreign powers (this includes the US and France, but also China and the Soviet Union), partly because the focus in other countries (US and Europe) was on the end of WWII and recovery from the traumas of the early 1930s through 1945.

[Izzy · Rating 3 out of 5]

A continent erupts: decolonization, civil war, and massacre in post-war Asia 1945-5 by Ronald H Spector
who also wrote Eagle against the Sun: the American war with Japan, and In the ruins of empire: the Japanese Surrender and the battle for post war Asia; much of this book is written from a military perspective, and it is each theater is described separately even though the struggles were going on rather simultaneously in China, VietNam, Korea, indonesia, Malaya and Korea;
I may have missed a discussion of Malaya; there are several chapters addressing the civil war in China, its inflection point, and then inevitable end game; the Dutch effort to reestablish its hegemony in its Indies seems to have failed from nearly the very start and that country was independent soon after the Philippines; there is considerable attention to the american led wars in Korea and in South VietNam, as well as to the French war in North VietNam.
As in Europe in 1914, Europe in 1938-39, so in Asia, starting with the Japanese takeover of Manchuko, none of the imperialists could have predicted the end results… the description of their inevitabiity, and the lack of major impact of the US on the end result, despite the expenditure of considerable amounts of its treasure is spelled out in great detail….

[Chris Jaffe · Rating 3 out of 5]

As a kid, I loved military history. I gradually outgrew it as a bit of a dead end. It's still interesting if you don't know much about a conflict, but once you know the basics, reading more about it just beomes repetitive. (Other parts of history get more interesting when you move from what happened to why it happened, but military history goes in reverse).

This is essentially a military history of post-WWII conflicts in China, Korea, Vietnam, and Indonesia. It reads less like a single cohesive narrative and more like a series of mini-histories. It's four short histories sprinkled together into one. The author knows his material, so I'll give it three stars, but I'm tempted to give it two. I would've found it more interesting if he really dove into one conflict, or at least spent more time (any time?) providing links between these. For that matter, I'm not sure why India was left out. OK, it was a transference to independence that was peaceful - but then all hell broke loose with hundreds of thousands (maybe a million?) deaths immediately afterwards with partition. That's decolonication and massacre -and arguably a civil war.

[Austin Barselau · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ronald Spector’s “A Continent Erupts” is a crisp review of various theaters in Asia where colonization met its demise during the 1940s and 1950s. Spector, a frequent publisher of military histories, displays great adroitness at moving fluidly between tactical descriptions of battle maneuver and larger strategic phenomena in these conflicts, which include the Chinese Civil War, Korean War, civil unrest in Indonesia, and French occupation of Vietnam. However, the book is limited by several shortcomings, including its limited and arbitrary temporal scope that neglects a more complete picture of decolonization efforts (including American involvement in the Vietnam war) on the continent. Spector also does a mediocre job tying the different conflicts together to draw collective conclusions, and the book thus reads more narrowly as an anthology of loosely connected military histories, rather than a cogent and chronological dissertation on how the conflicts were similar. While his archival sources are mostly English-language secondary sources, Spector does a praiseworthy job examining the civil eruptions in postwar Asia that are mostly unknown to the West.

[Allen Yang · Rating 5 out of 5]

Post-WWII Asia was a mess of Japanese soldiers, administrators and civilians deployed across the vast region, Allied POWs and displaced refugees all trying to return home (or sometimes not). Add to the mix the local guerilla/independence groups in each country, attempting to assert their power in the vacuum left after the Japanese defeat. Then try to figure out how to accommodate/resist the returning colonial powers (Dutch East Indies, French Indo-China, American Philippines). Oh and the Russians making their grabs for territory and political control. Did I mention the Chinese - Communists and Nationalists? What.A.MESS!
This book runs thru each country's post-WWII turmoil, internal wars, power struggles and diplomatic negotiations (or lack thereof). One of my favorite passages from the chapters on Korea: "On August 10, the two sides may have established a diplomatic record of some sort by staring across the table at each other in complete silence for two hours and eleven minutes."

[Boston64329 · Rating 5 out of 5]

I like to read history which doesn't mean I like history. This book clearly illuminates a decade showing human ego and frailties, national pride and political influences on foreign involvement. I'm referring to France, Britain, the U.S., U.S.S.R., China (both Nationalist and Communists), Viet Minh and whichever government you choose for South Vietnam.
I think most U.S. citizens would be surprised to know the very early U.S. involvement in Vietnam. We might not be aware of the loss of U.S. and other service personnel lives in Vietnam and Korea due to ego and loyalties of some of our military leadership which lead to some very wrong tactical and strategic decisions which ultimately lead to the loss of many lives.

[Stuart Miller · Rating 3 out of 5]

An examination of events in Vietnam, Indonesia, China and Korea from 1945-1955, beginning with the Japanese surrender and ending--appropriately enough--with the French catastrophe at Dien Bien Phu. While there is a large chunk of military history, Spector also covers the political developments as well and convincingly illustrates the ineptitude--both military and political--that characterized the policies of the Western powers during the period and lead to the massive deaths of both soldiers and civilians. Those looking for information on the situation in Malaya in this period will, however, need to look elsewhere.

[Daniel Waddell · Rating 5 out of 5]

Would absolutely recommend this book if you like any of the following:
1. Geopolitics
2. Military history
3. Asian history

This book does an excellent job of telling the story of conflicts often not discussed in the West with engaging yet informative prose. I think this book does an excellent job of centering the post war conflicts in Asia from the belligerents perspective and paints a good picture of how these conflicts lead to the world we see today.

[Cynthia Herzog · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book reviews the conflicts following WWII between the Dutch and Indonesia, the French and Vietnamese, the Chinese civil war and the Korean War. Although I knew something of these years in China, Vietnam and Korea, I knew nothing about this time in Indonesia and other southeast Asian countries. What made this book particularly interesting for me was learning more about how what was going on in one area of Asia was impacting what was happening in others.

[Jay Clement · Rating 4 out of 5]

37-2025. This history of post WW II wars for independence in Southeast Asia filled a large deficit in my historical knowledge. Fascinating and detailed look at continuing warfare starting immediately at the conclusion of the Second World War and ending at the inception of the American war involvement in Vietnam. I learned so much, and now at least am moderately conversant with the Korean Conflict, Indonesian independence, and the Chinese revolution led by Mao. Well done.

[Steve Moran · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really good survey accounts of the events in China, Vietnam, and Korea. I enjoyed learning about Indonesia but thought there could be more about other places. The author only mentioned Malaysia in the epilogue while it seems like a chapter may have been in order. Also, one of my persistent complaints for many history books; more maps please.

[Ashish Vyas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting, detailed and complicated history of independence struggle, post colonial transition of asian countries, esp indonesia, vietnam, korea and china in 1945-1955 time, which gives us insight of the coldwar time geopolitics, role of america in them, how it shaped the region politics and world order. Must read.

[Julian Pritchard · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good. This book discusses the military conflicts in East and Southeast Asia at the beginning of the Cold War, on the Korean Peninsula, Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam, explaining the motives of the U.S., France, the USSR, China, and local nationalists.

[Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well written and informative. Although it covers well thread areas of military history (Korea and Indochina) it provides a new perspective on the region and time frame.

[Ron Maskell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting read and tough to get through the carnage but still a good read to see what went on.

[Austin · Rating 4 out of 5]

More of a military history than the political one I had been anticipating, but a comprehensive and thoroughly researched volume nonetheless!

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great summary linking together the conflicts and relevant background for many current issues

[Kevin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was filled with a surprising amount of typos, but its information is so detailed and engaging that they don’t detract too much from the overall experience.

[Nick Harriss · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very good book that covers the independence, political and Cold War struggles in China, Korea, Vietnam and Indonesia in the decade after World War 2. I had a decent knowledge of the issues in Korea and to a lesser degree in Vietnam during this period, but the coverage on China and Indonesia was largely new to me. It has a good balance of political and military commentary, both internally and in relation to outside powers who were involved, and approaches the issues from a historical perspective rather than from a particular political perspective. Well worth reading.