著者

岡部 三郎

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

no.12, pp.53-67, 1960

著者

首藤 素子

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

no.70, pp.168-174, 1982

著者

川島 真

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2014, no.175, pp.175_100-175_114, 2014

---

This article traces the historical contexts of international politics study from the 19th century to the present in China, and explores the background and possibilities of 'China model.' The China model has been argued in the academic circle in China after the latter half of the 1990s, in order to interpret Chinese foreign policy more clearly and efficiently under its own historical and cultural contexts.<br>It was the 19th century when China started to make contact with the international law and diplomacy. At first, Chinese officials recognized them as tools and device to negotiate with western countries. In the beginning of the 20th century, the Chinese government utilized concepts of modern international relations,such as sovereignty, independent and mutual principle of equality and mutual benefit, to protect and maintain its existence as a nation. Such behavior was succeeded by the PRC, such as the five principles for peace. However, the PRC kept a distance with western concepts of international politics, and began to import a series of Marxist theories and concepts it from the Soviet Union. After the Cultural Revolution, the PRC gradually resumed to receive western theories and concepts of international politics.<br>Thus, the PRC basically kept the <i>basso continuo</i> of Chinese diplomacy, such as importance of sovereignty,independent and mutual principle of equality and mutual benefit, but its main theories and concepts were from Marxist studies. After new western studies were gradually imported to China, the basic situation did not change very much. After the 1990s, the so-called rising of China, it needed to interpret and explain its policy to the world more efficiently. At that time, Chinese scholars realized that it was difficult to do so by utilizing Marxism and new western studies. Therefore, many started to explore new ways, and promoted the China model with historical and cultural contexts in China to interpret its own foreign policy. However, the arguments regarding this new model were losing its objective and their bearings.

著者

添谷 芳秀

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

no.116, pp.114-129,L12, 1997

---

This article examines the role of ASEAN in the new order building process in the Asia-Pacific region within the context of U. S. overall policy toward the region after the end of the Cold War.<br>Today's Asia-Pacific region is in the middle of a protracted transitional period from the end of the Cold War to a new order which will eventually replace the Cold War order but has yet to take shape. The process is characterized by a dual structure of flux: a shifting balance of power among major powers, and the increasing capacity of ASEAN countries to influence the order building process at the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). Seen this way, ARF embodies a restructuring of relations between external powers and smaller ASEAN countries.<br>In this context, U. S. Asia-Pacific policy under the Clinton administration was presented as a comprehensive one, emphasizing bilateral alliances and U. S. forward deployed forces, on the one hand, and multilateral security cooperation at ARF, on the other. A catalyst of this comprehensive approach was a long-term concern about an emerging China, in which the importance of ASEAN has steadily grown.<br>ASEAN countries clearly recognize that they cannot affect the final result of the balance of power game among big powers. Nonetheless, as long as today's transitional process continues, ASEAN can play a role in engaging external powers in their initiatives at ARF. For ASEAN to succeed in this, some extent of institutionalization of the ARF process is inevitable. With ARF covering the entire Asia-Pacific region, the "ASEAN-way" of building a Southeast Asian community by informal gradualism now faces an important turning point.

著者

片岡 信之

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

no.93, pp.147-160,L16, 1990

---

Sufficient attention has not paid to the reproduction of labor in the literature of the capitalist world-system. But recently we can see a growing recognition of the fact that the availability of appropriate labor power is of primary importance for the accumulation of capital in a particular region. For example, international labor migration as one of the various forms of 'the global labor supply system' has attracted the increasing interest of international economics students.<br>This paper, inspired by this trend, attempts to analyze what I call 'the mechanisms of externalizing the cost of labor reproduction' in the capitalist world-system. The relative cheapness of available labor, in addition to its quantity and quality, constitutes one of the essential requirements of an appropriate labor supply. Labor has been made cheap by imposing part of the reproduction cost upon the so-called 'non-capitalist' spheres.<br>On such mechanism is the 'functional dualism' between the capitalist sector and the rural subsistence economy in peripheral economies. The process of disintegration in the rural subsistence sector has been constrained, since this sector assumes the costs reproducing new generations of workers and absorbs those that have become redundant in the capitalist sector. This 'subsidy' paid by the subsistence sector is translated into the extremely low wages which characterize the peripheral economies.<br>Marxist feminism has emphasized the similar mechanism between the market and the home in center economies. Wage is only a monetary cost of reproduction and requires a lot of unpaid domestic work to accomplish a reproduction of labor meeting the hard demand of center economies. This non-monetary 'subsidy' overwhelmingly assumed by women helps lower the wage level relatively.<br>The present restructuring of the world economy called 'the new international division of labor' can be seen also as a restructuring of 'the mechanisms of externalizing the cost of labor reproduction.' The rural subsistence enclaves in the Third World are diminishing and the expanding informal sector in 'hyper-urbanized' cities functions as a substitute for the rural sectors. The penetration of transnational corporations caused and/or facilitated this transformation, indirectly through the cultural change of Third World societies, and directly through the employment of rural young women into TNCs' 'world market factories.'<br>Most women in these factories are fired around the age of 24. After that they tend to emigrate to developed countries where more and more cheap labor is needed because of the 'informalization' now under way in the process of industrial restructuring, or disappear into the informal sector of Third World cities.<br>Women have always disproportionately assumed the burden of externalized reproduction costs and the restructurings of these mechanisms have historically pivoted on women. This is true in the latest global restructuring which is at the same time a restructuring of the international political economy. Marxist feminism has much to offer concerning this.

著者

山中 仁美

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2014, no.175, pp.175_14-175_26, 2014

---

This article explores how the theories and concepts of 'nationalism' were incorporated into the newly introduced study of International Relations (IR) in Britain, arguing that scholars' theoretical attempts to limit the 'hostility of nationalism' eventually gave way to the empirical reality of international politics during the inter-war period. It will focus on a report by a research group at the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House), whose official aim was to provide a 'scientific examination' of the contemporary developments of nationalism that had dominated Europe since the end of the nineteenth century and were believed to 'threaten the very future of civilisation'.<br>During the inter-war years, nationalism was heavily criticised as being a regressive political ideology deemed to be a decisive factor of war. Its dramatic growth became a major issue for the IR academics who were studying the bankruptcy of internationalism. They decided to initiate a collective, comprehensive, and scientific study of nationalism within the newly established London think tank. The debate adopted an early modernist and functionalist approach to the concept of nation and national identity with a historical perspective on the stages of nationalism as an account of the economic and social developments of the nation and nationality. At first, the members of the research group sought to provide a theoretical perspective on the limitation of nationalism. As the international situation became increasingly tense, however, they came to accept the concept of nation and nationalism as a fact, no longer assuming that nation states would disappear nor that nationalism should be condemned as the sole cause of discontent and instability.<br>The group's theoretical studies were highly responsive to the challenges of a deteriorating international environment and theory was gradually reconciled with the empirical reality of international politics. This will defend a historically sensitive approach to the classification of international theories during this period of crisis, avoiding reducing a broader political and social debate to the ahistorical utopian-realism dichotomy of the 'First Great Debate'. Special attention needs to be paid to a wide variety of institutional settings and collective studies that gave rise to the substantive debates on international affairs in inter-war Britain marking a sharp contrast with the situation in the US where IR debates mainly took place in the academic circles of Political Science.

著者

西村 邦行

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2014, no.175, pp.175_41-175_55, 2014

---

Scholars of international studies in Japan have repeatedly reflected on their excessive susceptibility to the Western academia; they have rigorously "imported" theories from America and Britain whereas they have failed to develop their own. However, few researchers have exemplified how this "importation" has actually been played out. Given that the Japanese recipients of Western theories have not shared academic and other contexts with their original bearers, it is possible that the "importation" have led to idiosyncratic interpretations of these theories.<br>This article examines in which context and in what way Japanese scholars in the middle-war and the early post-war periods read the works of E. H. Carr, the oft-claimed pioneer of Western international relations theory. In the Anglophone international studies academia, scholars have usually labeled Carr realist who had rejected interwar liberal internationalism. His first readers in Japan did not embrace such view. They, in fact, did not read Carr exclusively as international theorist. Carr, for early Japanese scholars, was an empiricist social thinker who attempted to transcend the modern ways of (both domestic and international) politics.<br>Among Carr's writings, the one that first won the heart of Japanese scholars was not<i> The Twenty Years' Crisis</i>, the now acclaimed classic of international relations theory, but <i>Conditions of Peace</i>, its more utopian-oriented sequel. They, in addition, virtually ignored the book's second part, in which Carr provided his prescriptions for the new world order; they rather focused on the first part, in which he discussed the limits of modern political thought. Finishing <i>Conditions of Peace</i>, furthermore, they moved on to <i>The Soviet Impact on the Western World</i>, yet another book on the crisis of the modern European political system. Only after this series of reception, <i>The Twenty Years' Crisis</i> caught a spotlight. As a result, Japanese scholars read the book not so much as an advocacy of power politics as a stepping stone for the future governance of the still antagonistic relationship among states.<br>Thusly, early Japanese recipients of Carr read his works against the backdrop of their own concern about the deadlock of modernity. This insight provides us an alternative way to approaching the history of Japanese international studies.

著者

野口 和彦

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

no.153, pp.175-185, 2008

著者

酒井 哲哉

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

no.116, pp.172-176, 1997

著者

James Llewelyn

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2009, no.156, pp.156_69-89, 2009-03-30 (Released:2011-09-10)

参考文献数

90

---

In the early postwar period as instability across Southeast Asia threatened to engulf the region, Japan and Great Britain frequently took divergent approaches vis-à-vis regional geopolitical developments. Indonesia's belligerent policy of militarily and politically confronting Malaysia from 1963-66 can be seen as a clear case in point where Japan and Britain saw a potentially dangerous crisis in a starkly different light, quickly becoming a point of contention between diplomatic officials in Tokyo and London.While Britain responded forcefully in military terms to the increasingly bellicose Sukarno by massing troops along the Malaysian side of the Borneo border, Japan saw such a hard-line approach as fraught with danger. Diplomatic officials in Tokyo saw this risky approach by Britain as not only risking war in a region strategically vital for Japan, but also as probably hastening Indonesia's leftward drift towards communist China. Moreover, Japanese officials were aware that too much external pressure on Indonesia may cause the nation to politically implode, a scenario seen as bringing the Indonesian communists to power (the PKI) and thus threatening Japan's substantial commercial investments in this country. Due to these high stakes involved for Japan, it decided to pursue a sustained policy of mediation between the key disputants.During this period of Indonesian Confrontation (‘Konfrontasi’), Japan also exasperated Britain by continuing to trade with Indonesia and by providing financial aid and investment. The Commonwealth countries that had come to Malaysia's defence (Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand) all periodically expressed the hope that Japan would use its growing commercial influence to bring pressure to bear on Indonesia to peacefully accept Malaysia. Japan however, seeing its future economic relationship with Indonesia as a key priority resisted these calls to use its aid as leverage to modify Indonesia's belligerent stance towards its smaller neighbour. This led to British officials in particular to criticize Japan over what they perceived as an overly conciliatory approach toward Indonesia.Undoubtedly, their markedly divergent policy approaches towards this Southeast Asian crisis did not help the warming of Anglo-Japanese postwar relations. Fortunately however, both sides saw enough utility in the broader relationship to not allow this issue to adversely affect bilateral relations. This ostensibly led to a grudging mutual acceptance that both Japan and Britain would frequently see the Southeast Asian region in a different light.Therefore, despite their disagreements over how to deal with Sukarno and contain Confrontation, the relationship survived intact with no permanent damage being done. This was graphically shown by the first high-level meeting between Japan and Britain shortly after the conclusion of Confrontation, where both sides had the good grace to barely raise the issue and instead focus on the many commonalities in their respective world views.

著者

半澤 朝彦

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2001, no.126, pp.81-101,L12, 2001-02-23 (Released:2010-09-01)

参考文献数

66

---

This paper reveals the ‘hidden’ United Nations' role in bringing about the ultimate demise of the Britain's formal Empire. The UN from the late 1950s onwards, with a significant increase in African membership, became a stronghold of international critics of colonialism. Contrary to the conventional image that the UN did not play much role in Britain's decolonization, newly-released archival evidence clearly shows that the dramatic downfall of international legitimacy of colonialism and the ever imminent possibility of UN intervention into UK's most sensitive colonial possessions such as Kenya and Central African Federation were constantly a real source of concern for Britain's top policy makers during the early 1960s. Though UK's sensitivity was not admitted openly, the UN anti-colonialism should be considered as one of the most decisive factors that precipitated Britain's sweeping decolonisation after 1960.The article starts with the review of postwar UK-UN relations with particular reference to the British attitude towards the rising anti-colonialism at the UN. Britain's basic policy to keep the UN hands off her colonies did not have to change until the end of the 1950s largely because Article 2 (7) of the UN charter, the domestic jurisdiction clause, effectively barred interference into the affairs of her dependent territories. The static picture changed dramatically in 1960, when the South African racial problem shook the traditional, strict interpretation of the domestic jurisdiction clause and the famous UN Resolution 1514 on colonialism was adopted by an overwhelming majority. The British then recognized the need to seriously cope with the unwelcome development at the UN and tried to secure as much cooperation as possible from her major allies such as the US. However, the prospect of UN intervention into UK's most sensitive colonies was so imminent that the only viable course left to Britain was to inevitably ‘jettison’ her remaining colonies, small or large, as quickly as possible. The episode illustrates how strong Britain's desire was to remain in the mainstream of international politics. The possibility of a break-up of the Commonwealth was a major reason why the British did not want to antagonize the anti-colonial camp at the UN. Fortunately for the British, the pressure for an ever faster decolonization receded when most of the sizable British colonies had attained independence by 1963 (Kenya). Nevertheless, the British continued to be fearful lest the issues such as Aden should be given undue attention in the UN and were no longer able to pursue a policy of an ‘orderly decolonisation’, which had characterised Britain's imperial policy up to the previous decade.

著者

永野 隆行

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2001, no.128, pp.211-222, 2001-10-22 (Released:2010-09-01)

参考文献数

20

著者

白鳥 潤一郎

出版者

JAPAN ASSOCIATION OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2010, no.160, pp.160_17-33, 2012

---

The aim of this article is to examine the role of Japanese diplomacy in bringing cooperative relationship among oil-consumers, and how it led to the establishment of the International Energy Agency (IEA) in November 1974 after the First Oil Crisis (FOC). The foundation of the IEA has an epoch-making significance in itself, as this institution provided a platform in which long-term policy cooperation among oil consumers could be designed and implemented. The IEA obligates signatory states to stockpile a designated certain amount of oil reserves, and it also specifies the Oil Emergency Sharing System in the agreement. This represents an effort for advanced countries seeking cooperation while the postwar international economic order was undergoing to serious changes.<br>Most works on Japanese diplomacy dealing with the FOC period have tended to focus on Japan's stance toward the Middle East. They generally emphasize highlight the anxiety within the government to secure a stable supply of oil as the principal reason for Japan eventually swinging toward pro-Arab policy. However, such narratives do not provide us with a whole picture, since the FOC was not only brought by Arab oil embargo. If we were to fully grasp the underlying cause of Japan's policy behavior in the FOC, we must first take into account a structural change in the international oil market since the late 1960s resulting from the strengthening of oil-producers. In the same vein, it is equally crucial to analyze how the oil consumers in general responded to the oil producers united under the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).<br>After the FOC, cooperation among oil consumer states intensified with Washington Energy Conference in February 1974, and Japan was an active participant during the process. In fact, the Japanese government was the first to announce its intention to participate in the conference. It also actively took part in Energy Coordination Group (ECG) following the Washington Energy Conference, and facilitated ECG in playing a moderating role between Great Britain and West Germany.<br>Japan actively participated in these institutional frameworks since the policymakers shared two perceptions. The first is the recognition that the oil consumers, in order to decrease their vulnerability in oil supply, must unite. The second perception is that it is important for Japan to support the maintenance of a liberal international economic order which would ensure the stable flow of oil supplies. Seen from this context, the Japanese participation in the establishment of the IEA from the first stage is a drastic deviation from past diplomatic practice of passively joining already-existing international organizations. Although Japan's role in G7 for facilitating international cooperation among advanced countries is better known, it is significant to notice that Japan's early participation in establishing cooperative framework in the aftermath of the FOC is the true turning point.