A Closed Book? British Intelligence and East Asia, 1945–1950
This article focuses on British intelligence in China, Japan, and Korea from the end of the Second World War to the outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950. It seeks to ascertain whether the collection of secret intelligence and its subsequent interpretation provided an accurate picture of Soviet and local communist intentions in East Asia. Since the war against Japan began, the region was largely an American responsibility and remained so after 1945 when they occupied Japan, Korea below the 38th parallel, and sent forces to China. Much of the intelligence effort for East Asia also devolved upon the Americans. Yet, the British retained an intelligence interest there not least because of their extensive commercial assets in China and the region's proximity to Britain's imperial position in Southeast Asia. That interest gathered pace after growing Communist threats inside China and Korea. However, the available intelligence resources for the Far East as a whole were scarce, making it difficult to piece together a clear picture of fast moving events in East Asia.
Recasting the Imperial Far East: Britain and America in China, 1945–1950. By Lanxin Xiang. [Armonk, NY and London: M.E. Sharp, 1995. 260 pp. Hard cover $65.00, ISBN 1-56324-459-4; paperback $25.00, ISBN 1-56324-460-8.]
But to disagree with the notion of Russia's outsider status in Asia is not to deprive this collection of research essays of meaning and value. Both the examination of the major changes in Russian policy since the collapse of the Soviet Union in relation to China, Japan, North and South Korea and the implications of Russian ties with the United States are made by competent scholars. The book itself provides trustworthy information based on a thorough study of Russian material, the statements of diplomats and mass media publications. Well-organized, the book is divided into five parts, with the focus of the research work on the problem of Russian-Chinese relations and their influence on the situation in Asia and the rest of the world. The analysis made by the contributors to this book provides an understanding of the complicated way post-Soviet foreign policy is shaped. Examining the activity of Russian diplomacy in the Far East, the authors also indicate the connection between domestic politics and foreign policy. One can agree that, both before the collapse of the Soviet Union and after, the main goal for Russia was to maintain friendly relations with the West, especially the U.S. But this does not mean that the problem of restoring normal relations with China was neglected by Russian leaders. Both Gorbachev and Yeltsin made significant steps away from confrontation and towards co-operation with China. While there was debate between so-called Atlantists and Eurasianists and the Western orientation did have some impact on the Russian foreign policy Moscow simultaneously undertook to improve relations with China. It seems clear that it was not Eastern expansion of NATO but pragmatic economic and political interests that motivated Moscow's Chinese policy. As for the role of the U.S. after the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, some authors insist that it has become the sole protector and guarantor of peace and security in Asian countries, safeguarding them from an alleged danger of Russian or Chinese aggression. But this idea is the fruit of a rich imagination, and such arrogant attitudes to Russia and China may foster nationalistic antiAmerican feelings in both countries. My criticisms do not negate my high estimation for this important and useful book. It could be recommended for reading to any student of the contemporary problems of the development of Far Eastern countries and their relations with Russia. The contributors to this book have raised many issues which are still in a state of flux and require further discussion in the context of the changing role of Russia in Asia.
Training and maintaining the performance of dogs (Canis familiaris) on an increasing number of odor discriminations in a controlled setting
Abstract The number of substances detector dogs are trained to detect varies depending on the mission of the agency they serve. No studies have been conducted concerning how training multiple odor discriminations affects detection performance and refresher training requirements. This study used a controlled field setting to examine the effects of training dogs to detect multiple substances on their subsequent detection performance and refresher training requirements. Dogs were first trained to detect a single odor. Their detection performance was tested 10 days later and refresher training was then given to bring their performance back up to a predetermined standard. Following refresher training, detection of a new substance was trained, and approximately 10 days later the detection of both trained substances was tested. This sequence of testing, refresher training, and new odor training continued every 10 days until the dogs had been trained and tested on 10 odors. The detection of previously learned odors did not decrease as the number of substances trained increased. In fact, the amount of training required to refresh detection performance and to train new odor discriminations tended to decrease as more odor discriminations were trained.