著者

伊藤 融

出版者

一般財団法人 アジア政経学会

雑誌

アジア研究 (ISSN:00449237)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.53, no.3, pp.43-56, 2007-07-31 (Released:2014-09-30)

参考文献数

35

---

In May 1998, India and Pakistan carried out a series of nuclear tests and declared themselves “nuclear powers” — a move that shocked the international community and added a newdimension to the rivalries between these two neighbors. This article will attempt to analyze what led both to this nuclearization and what kind of influence it had on the whole world as well as on the region.From a strategic viewpoint, India had pushed ahead with its nuclear program in order to counter the threat of China, not of Pakistan, whereas Pakistan’s program was aimed at reducing the threat posed by India. That is to say, the power imbalance in the region (China > India > Pakistan) encouraged these two countries to go nuclear. India and Pakistan have faced increased security-related concerns since the collapse of the alliance structure that built up during the Cold War. In addition to these security interests, rising nationalism in the midst of globalization has created a political trend that has encouraged nuclearization.Now, in retrospect, we can ask the question: which side has benefited most from nuclearization?Regionally, Pakistan seems to have seized more advantages militarily and diplomatically, especially regarding the Kashmir issue. Globally, however, nuclearization has helped India to rise in the world: most major powers, including the United States, cannot help regarding and treating India as a global player. In contrast, the international community regards Pakistan with suspicion in the wake of revelations about the “nuclear black market.”In fact, this nuclearization, which drew international concern about the risk of nuclear war, has not only contributed to sustaining the ongoing peace process since 2003, but has also created aninternational environment in which each side stops short of resorting to war even in times of crisis. “Rising India” will also hesitate to draw a sword. Unfortunately, however, it is difficult to conclude that a stable“ nuclear peace” has been established between India and Pakistan considering their geopolitical and strategic characteristics, lack of a relationship of mutual trust, persistent cross-border terrorism, and the fragile state foundations of Pakistan.

著者

伊藤 融

出版者

国際安全保障学会

雑誌

国際安全保障 (ISSN:13467573)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.47, no.1, pp.102-106, 2019-06-30 (Released:2022-03-14)

著者

伊藤 融

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2004, no.136, pp.62-78,L9, 2004-03-29 (Released:2010-09-01)

参考文献数

39

---

The aim of this essay is to analyze the principle of India's foreign policy, mainly on security. In general, its policy has been illustrated in terms of idealism/realism paradigm. That is to say, Jawaharlal Nehru pursued idealistic policies such as Non-Alignment Movement, whereas Indira Gandhi changed India's policies into more realistic one's, whose lines A. B. Vajpayee also takes over. This essay challenges such dominant discourse and proposes alternative approaches to India's foreign policy.Firstly, most of the observers exclusively focus on the attitude of political leaders or the trend of the times without taking the different fields into account. Turning our attention to the difference of policy fields, we will easily find historical continuity and political consensus in India's foreign policy. Outside the region, India has consistently demanded the revision of global structure and regime. At the same time, inside the region, it has opposed to any change of the situation as its own superpower. In other words, it has adopted both ‘extraregional revisionism’ and ‘intraregional status quo’ as guides to foreign policy-making since its independence.Secondly, more importantly, idealism/realism discourse is devoid of the consideration of India's ‘nation-state’ itself which differs entirely from that of Western ideal type. Political leadership in India has never been able to take the unity of the ‘nation-state’ for granted because of its own diverse and plural society as well as the existence of cross-border ethno-religious identities. India's ruling elite has been exposed to the internal threat and has been obliged to counter it first of all. That is why its foreign policy has been worked out and carried out not only based on its geopolitical strategic interest but also constrained by the recognized vulnerability of ‘nation-state’. Successive Governments of India have endeavored to approximate to the ideal of ‘nation-state’ or at least prevent it from breaking up completely. It is this type of realism against the vulnerability of ‘nation-state’ recognized by every political leader that has affected the decision-making in India.

著者

伊藤 融

出版者

国際安全保障学会

雑誌

国際安全保障 (ISSN:13467573)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.43, no.1, pp.8-22, 2015-06-30 (Released:2022-04-01)

著者

伊藤 融

出版者

国際安全保障学会

雑誌

国際安全保障 (ISSN:13467573)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.35, no.2, pp.77-95, 2007-09-30 (Released:2022-04-20)

著者

吉田 修 北川 将之 上田 知亮 石坂 晋哉 油井 美春 長崎 暢子 志賀 美和子 木村 真希子 舟橋 健太 中溝 和弥 田辺 明生 三輪 博樹 伊藤 融 小川 道大 小西 公大 近藤 則夫 森 悠子 和田 一哉 佐藤 仁美

出版者

広島大学

雑誌

基盤研究(A)

巻号頁・発行日

2012-04-01

---

20人弱の日本のインド政治・社会研究者がインドにおける州への分権化・自治の進展について共同・分担して分析を行った。その研究結果は2014年度アジア政経学会西日本大会で発表するとともに同学会誌『アジア研究』第62巻第4号に特集として掲載され、インド政治が一国家の枠内にありながら州を単位とした比較政治の対象でもありうること、また政治的に進展した分権化が全国レベルでの緩やかな統合を可能にしていることが、インド研究の政治学全体への貢献として提示できることが示された。この成果はインドの「社会経済変化研究所」で国際セミナーを開催することでインド国内にもインパクトを与え、今後の国際共同研究に道を開いた。