and where they were placed abroad. But the article took on a decidedly anti-Soviet tone, a reflection of PRC-Soviet relations at the end of the 1970s. Within the article, illustrated tables indicated Soviet superiority over the United States both in the numbers of ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles) and submarine-launched missiles and in the annual production of conventional weapons. The article also noted:
Facts have repeatedly borne out that it was conventional arms, not nuclear arms that the Soviet Union used when it threatened the Middle East with force, stirred up armed conflicts on the Indian subcontinent, instigated mercenaries to invade Angola and Zaire and when it started the fires of war in the Horn of Africa. 77
Yet, while denouncing the ends of the superpowers (and increasingly, those of the Soviet Union in particular) and eyeing those ends suspiciously, if not enviously, the PRC nonetheless became all the more compelled to take on the very methods they criticized. By the end of the 1970s, the PRC began a much more concerted effort to join the ranks of powers exercising greater influence through arms transfers.
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Book title: Chinese Arms Transfers:Purposes, Patterns, and Prospects in the New World Order. Contributors: R. Bates Gill - Author. Publisher: Praeger Publishers. Place of publication: Westport, CT. Publication year: 1992. Page number: 73.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.