| Book Review | The American Historical Review, 106.5

You have not been recognized as a subscriber to the AHR online. About 259 words from this article are provided below; about 515 words remain.

If you are a individual member of the American Historical Association, you may:: • login here if you have already registered for online access.; • Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.
• Set up your online account for the first time. AHA members can go to the AHA individual membership section to locate their member numbers.
If you are not a member of the American Historical Association, you can:: • Join the AHA and receive many member benefits including print and electronic issues of the American Historical Review.
• Purchase a research pass to gain two hour access to the entire History Cooperative web site. You will have full access to current issues of the American Historical Review (104.3-present). Note: the Research Pass does not provide access to JSTOR's holdings of the American Historical Review.
Instititutions can:: • Subscribe to this journal and receive print and electronic issues.
• Activate your existing subscription so that we recognize your IP number ranges.

| Book Review | The American Historical Review, 106.5 | The History Cooperative

Book Review

Comparative/World

Alexander Pantsov. The Bolsheviks and the Chinese Revolution 1919–1927. (Chinese Worlds.) Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. 2000. Pp. xii, 324. $23.95.

It has been almost half a century since Harold Isaacs, Isaac Deutscher, Conrad Brandt, and Robert North wrote their now classic studies of the role the Soviet Union played in the formation and development of the early Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The thoughtful and comprehensive work under review updates these earlier writings, taking advantage of new interviews with Chinese and Russian informants and, most importantly, the recently opened Soviet archives. Like his predecessors, Alexander Pantsov emphasizes the differences between Leon Trotsky and Joseph Stalin, showing how their schism affected the first years of the Chinese Revolution. Pantsov's sensitivity to theoretical issues and his intimate acquaintance with the debates and politics within the Soviet government help refine many previous interpretations. 1

His most surprising finding is on Stalin. Most writers have blamed Stalin for squashing whatever chances existed that the CCP's early revolutionary strategy could have been successful. Stalin was thought to have callously sacrificed the Chinese Revolution in order to protect Russian interests and to prevent his Soviet critics from gaining the upper hand in the debates against him. He pushed the CCP into remaining in the alliance with the Nationalist Party (KMT) even after Chiang Kai-shek's March 1926 coup removed his Communist allies from leadership positions in the nationalist organization. Trotsky was usually thought to have opposed the idea of having the CCP join the United Front from the alliance's inception. . . .

There are about 515 more words in this article. Please log in (or, if you are not yet an authorized user, please go to the User Setup page) to gain full access rights. Or if you're already logged in register your subscription.