太平洋島嶼フォーラムの変化と連続性-オセアニアにおける多国間主義の現段階-

多国間主義の検証

抄録

The Pacific Islands Forum, which changed its name from the South Pacific Forum to the present one in 2000, can be regarded as the most wellfunctioning multilateralism in Oceania. This article aims to analyze the change and continuity in the Pacific Islands Forum by examining three periods respectively, the period as the South Pacific Forum, the transitional period in the 1990s, and the period as the Pacific Islands Forum.
The South Pacific Forum started its activities in 1971 and consolidated its foundation as a regional body to respond to external pressure, namely nuclear issues. In the late 1980s, it responded to another external pressure, climate change issues, by using other organizations as multiple channels to send a voice to the international community. At almost the same time, it also tried to deal with global trade liberalization as another external pressure by building economic relations with the Asia-Pacific region. In contrast to this, it avoided getting involved in regional conflicts stemming from ethnic problems within member countries.
However, the South Pacific Forum went through a transitional period in the 1990s, in which it started to commit to intraregional affairs. In order to tackle transregional crime it adopted the Honiara Declaration in 1992, requesting member countries to take law enforcement measures. The Aitutaki Declaration adopted in 1997 went further, setting out guidelines for regional security.
While it maintained its stance of non-interference in relation to the coup in Fiji in May 2000, it eventually decided to adopt a policy of intervention with the outbreak of the coup in the Solomon Islands in the following month. The Biketawa Declaration, defining the Forum's guiding principles and courses of actions towards regional conflicts, was adopted at the annual meeting in October, where the change of name to the Pacific Islands Forum was also officially proclaimed.
Unlike the South Pacific Forum, the Pacific Islands Forum is a regional organization that intervenes in regional conflicts as well as responds to external pressure. It should be pointed out, however, that there is continuity between the two. One of the reasons why the Pacific Islands Forum decided to adopt a policy of intervention was the adverse effect that the two coups in 2000 had to the region's reputation as a trade and investment market, something that the Pacific Islands Forum has tried to form in response to global trade liberalization. In that sense, external pressure still existed behind the Forum's decision of adopting a policy of intervention.