文献一覧: 森まり子 (著者)

4 0 0 0 OA ウッドロウ・ウィルソンと18~19世紀英米の政治思想 ―民主主義と専制、古代ギリシア、オスマン帝国をめぐって―

著者: 森まり子
出版者: 跡見学園女子大学
雑誌: 跡見学園女子大学文学部紀要 = JOURNAL OF ATOMI UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF LITERATURE (ISSN:13481444)
巻号頁・発行日: no.58, pp.71-105, 2023-03

本稿はウッドロウ・ウィルソンと18~19世紀英米の政治思想との関連を考察するものである。以下要約に代えて目次を掲げる。はじめに一本稿の問題意識とウィルソンの青年期の思考の概観(一)ウィルソンの知的経歴 ―概略(二)ダヴィドソン・カレッジとプリンストン・カレッジ時代に吸収した思想(三) ギリシア古典に影響されたウィルソンの「民主主義」像とオスマン帝国観 ―概略二民主主義と専制に対するウィルソンの考え方 ―フランス革命観三古代ギリシアの勉強がウィルソンに与えた影響 ―民主主義と専制への考え方(一)ヘロドトスの『歴史』 ①民主制の特色 ②自由・平等・民主制の価値と自由を守る戦い ③ヨーロッパとアジアの二分法(二)ウィリアム・スミスの『ギリシア史』 ①古代ギリシアの民主主義と愛国主義(スミス執筆部分) ② コンスタンティノープル陥落、オスマン帝国治下のギリシア、ギリシア独立戦争(フェルトン執筆部分) (ⅰ)コンスタンティノープルの陥落 (ⅱ)オスマン帝国治下のギリシア (ⅲ)ギリシア独立戦争四ウィルソンとオスマン帝国 ―東方問題とグラッドストンの人権外交をめぐって(一)ウィルソンのグラッドストンへの傾倒(二)グラッドストン「ブルガリアの恐怖と東方問題」の概要終わりに

http://id.nii.ac.jp/1612/00004241/

3 0 0 0 OA 建国期のイスラエル内閣閣議議事録史料紹介と予備的考察(二) : 『暫定政府会合議事録』第1巻(1948年5月16日~5月30日)に見るイスラエル国家の性格及び諸制度をめぐる論争とアラブ問題

著者: 森まり子
出版者: 東京大学東洋文化研究所
雑誌: 東洋文化研究所紀要 (ISSN:05638089)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.167, 2015-03

This paper gives an introduction to The Proceedings of the Provisional Government Meetings Vol.1., 16 to 30 May 1948 and gives a review of its main contents, primarily, the Arab question. As a follow-up of my previous paper published in this journal in March 2014, it is also intended to be a preliminary step toward revisiting the formative years of Israel, this time focusing on the critical two weeks after the Declaration of Independence on 14 May 1948, during which the state authority was formed, various institutions founded, and most importantly, the ideals and future directions of the new-born state seriously discussed. A close examination of the proceedings clarifies that, at least during these two weeks, both the possibility of Israel’s becoming a “civil state” embracing Arab citizens who would return after the war and the possibility of the establishment of the Arab state within the boundaries determined by the United Nations Partition Resolution on 29 November 1947 were still considered realistic. At least at the level of the cabinet meetings until the end of May 1948, with an alternative of a “civil state” still alive and the institutional orientation of the state largely undecided, the Zionist ideal model of a “Jewish state” was not so self-evident as the conventional wisdom suggests. Judging from this situation, it can be concluded that there was no systematic policy to expel the Palestinians at least at the level of the cabinet until the end of May, even when taking into consideration the deleted portions of the proceedings. The reason is as follows: although there was a long-standing aspiration to create an ethnically pure “Jewish state” among some Zionists, including Ben-Gurion, an expulsion policy was no more than a politically unfeasible option within the coalition government at that time, where the argument for Jewish-Arab coexistence in the “civil state” based on the assumption of the return of the refugees, and the argument for parliamentary democracy open to Arab citizens, were sufficiently effective to block the adoption of such an extreme policy by voting.

2023-06-04 10:57:03
3 + 2 Twitter

http://hdl.handle.net/2261/56588

2 0 0 0 OA 建国期のイスラエル内閣閣議議事録史料紹介と予備的考察(一) : 『人民執行部議事録一九四八年四月一八日~五月一三日』に見る統治権力確立過程とアラブ問題

著者: 森まり子
出版者: 東京大学東洋文化研究所
雑誌: 東洋文化研究所紀要 (ISSN:05638089)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.165, pp.124-204, 2014-03-26

This paper gives an introduction to The People’s Administration―The Protocols, 18 April to 13 May 1948, which is part of the Proceedings of the Israeli Cabinet Meetings, and gives a review of its main contents, primarily, the Arab question. It is intended to be a preliminary step toward revisiting the formative years of Israel. The debate over these years among the New Historians has tended to be channeled into a single controversial question―whether there was an Israeli policy of expulsion of the Palestinians or not. This paper is part of an attempt to replace this politically and emotionally charged approach with an unbiased, social-scientific one by re-examining the Cabinet proceedings and putting the Israeli policies toward the Palestinians in the broader context of the cabinet’s entire priorities at that time. The detailed review of the protocols brings into relief the controversial issues which would thereafter determine the fate of the Palestine conflict: the Israeli-UN relations, the borders and the name of the state, the return of refugees, and the rights of the Arabs remaining in Israel. The protocols show that in the People’s Administration there was a variety of opinions and dissents on Ben-Gurion’s policy of rejecting the return of the Arabs. In sum, in the Israeli cabinet on the eve of the First Arab-Israeli War, there existed, contrary to the conventional wisdom of students of the Middle East, sufficient moderate diplomatic realism to block the unanimous adoption of an extreme decision to expel the Palestinians.