戦間期の列国議会同盟と日本

―中村嘉寿の活動を中心に―

抄録

The Inter-parliamentary Union (IPU), founded in 1889 during the 19^th Century anti-war pacific movement and still active today, has been an international institution at the center of diplomacy between parliamentarians from many countries. Since its founding, the IPU has been active in promoting parliamentarianism, and also worked to solve prewar crises such as demilitarization, racial equality, decolonization, and a system for international arbitration. Japan, having joined the IPU in 1908, has over 100 years of history with the organization. However, due to the IPU’s lack of binding political power, it has often been placed outside of the study of International Political History, and there has been little research undertaken on the subject.

This article uses archival materials held by the IPU at its offices in Geneva, and places the organization in the context of the interwar internationalism movement, in order to study its relationship to Japan at this time. Until the First World War, the IPU was an organization that was conducted in the “salon” style of traditional diplomacy. However, after the First World War, with the creation of new countries in Eastern Europe, as well as the presence of newly joined countries from South America and so on, the IPU transformed into a truly international organization.

Looking at the members of the Japanese delegation of parliamentarians, such as Aikitsu Tanakadate, Jigorō Kanō, and Kaju Nakamura, we can see how they used the IPU to address international issues, as well as including international questions into their own policies. This article looks at the example of Nakamura in particular, due to the ways in which his relationship with the IPU sheds light on the changing role and needs of parliamentarians during the increasingly international interwar period.

Unlike Germany and Italy, whose relationship with the IPU ceased with the end of their parliamentary system, Japan’s relationship with the IPU continued until 1939, when the outbreak of war caused a halt to the institution’s activities. Looking at the crisis of parliamentarianism, issues over mandate territories, and other examples, this article studies the relationship between the IPU and League of Nations and with the Imperial Diet, and describes the state of the interwar system of international cooperation, from the perspective of “parliamentary politics”.