1.非米州地域と国連に関するブラジル外交の考察ブラジルは、軍政下の1970年代ですら米国の意向に反してアンゴラ左派政権の独立を承認するなど、戦後60年間、文民政権であるか軍事政権であるかを問わず、プラグマティックな外交を独自に進めてきた。こうした実利外交は、開発/工業化という国家目標に基づくものであり、途上国のリーダーを自認しながら、先進国主導の世界秩序形成に自国の参加を求める両面的なものである。ルーラ政権は、反米左派政権の国々とは同調せずに、成長著しいブラジルの経済力を他の途上国で展開することも企図しており、脱イデオロギー的な姿勢を維持している。世界秩序への関心は、ハイチ等PKOへの積極参加など国連安保理改革に顕著であるが、戦間期に国際連盟の常任理事国入りを要求しながらも実現せずに、国際連盟を早期に脱退した史実もある。途上国のリーダーの座を維持しながら、豊富な資源と巨大な市場を梃子に、欧州など先進国との戦略的提携関係を構築することが世界秩序形成に参加する条件となろう。2.ブラジル外交と地政戦略の連関に関する考察20世紀のブラジルでは地政学的な戦略思考が外交と内政に影響を及ぼしてきた。内陸の人工都市ブラジリア遷都や「未来の大国」の標語は地政学思考と開発主義の理念の結合であった。旧来の自然地理学的な地政学は衰退したが、近年の地域主義の台頭や文明・文化論への関心の高まりから、地政戦略/地政文化的な視点は、ブラジル外交の特質を考えるうえでー助となろう。つまり、多国間主義を通してブラジルを軸に南米地域の結束が強化されることは、多極化する世界秩序における南米の地域大国ブラジルの地位を向上させるという考え方が、政権の左右を問わず、継続的に存在するのである。[付記]平成20年度の本研究計画は、研究代表者の退職によって中断されることになった。
1 0 0 0 OA ブラジル外交と「保護する間の責任」
- 著者
- 澤田 眞治
- 出版者
- 一般財団法人 日本国際政治学会
- 雑誌
- 国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)
- 巻号頁・発行日
- vol.2018, no.194, pp.194_62-194_78, 2018-12-25 (Released:2019-05-16)
- 参考文献数
- 86
In 2011, in the aftermath of the collapse of Gaddafi regime in Libya promoted by the aerial bombardment of NATO, President Rousseff of Brazil proposed “Responsibility while Protecting” (RWP) in UN General Assembly. Brazil submitted the detailed concept note of RWP constituted of numerous proposals that are to complement “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P): among them, to place the three pillars of R2P under the strict political subordination and chronological sequencing, to impose strict conditions on the use of force, and to establish a proactive mechanism of monitoring and evaluation of military activities by Security Council so as to assure accountability.The principles of “non-interference” and “non-use of force” had been long-held diplomatic traditions of Brazil as they were in other Latin American countries. However, in the 21th century, under Lula da Silva’s administration, Brazil expressed a new attitude of “non-indifference” in addition to the traditional non-interference and participated in United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH), with the view to promote its presence as a candidate of new permanent member of Security Council. Nonetheless, Brazil was skeptical about R2P, assuming it as a new form of right of interference and maintaining traditional idea of “sovereignty as shield”. RWP was the way to reconcile the traditional idea and Brazil’s new role in UN as an emerging power.Brazilian proposal of RWP had major repercussions in international community because the overthrow of Libyan government had caused considerable concerns about R2P among emerging powers and developing countries. They concern for possible “misuse” of R2P as a tool to achieve regime change with armed force reflecting particular interest of the West. The implementation of R2P became the focus of controversy between the supportive West and skeptical South. While the West criticized RWP preferring to keep operational flexibility of military activities in implementing R2P, the emerging powers, especially South Africa and India, and some developing countries supported RWP to prevent selective invocation of R2P and misuse of the mandate. Failing to reach consensus, Brazil virtually withdrew RWP proposal.Almost as if to inherit this proposal, in 2012 China proposed “Responsible Protection” (RP) similar to RWP. However, in contrast to Brazilian RWP invented to bridge the gap between the supporters and the skeptics of R2P, Chinese RP is like a “long wall” or seawall to guard the cohesion of skeptical countries against R2P from the erosion by global tides of the idea of ‘sovereignty as responsibility’.RWP was an important attempt where non-Western country had played a significant role as a norm-shaper in international norm-making process in which the West had been dominant. Brazilian efforts to bridge the global gap would continue to give instructions in global norm-making on humanitarian issues and intervention.