2004 年 2004 巻 139 号 p. 125-143,L14
In a Japan that was becoming increasingly isolated as a result of the Manchurian Incident and its withdrawal from the League of Nations, two noteworthy positions were unfolding, with the goal of seeking a new diplomacy in the mid-1930s. These consisted of the “argument of colonial readjustment”, which was directed at the global community, and the “controversy concerning the propriety of unifying China”, which was directed at China.
The “argument of colonial readjustment” reflected the state of global politics at a time when Germany had rearmed itself and occupied the Rhineland while Italy had invaded Ethiopia, and was primarily advocated by the likes of E. House and other politicians and intellectuals in have-nations. This was later submitted by S. Hoare, the British foreign minister, to the League of Nations in 1936 and translated into reality through the establishment of the League of Nations' Committee for the Study of the Problem of Raw Materials in 1937.
Thus, this thesis aims to identify the unique elements of the Japanese position relative to those of the West by sifting through the “argument of colonial readjustment” as it had been embraced in the West and analyzing the given position as it had taken root in Japan, where the influence of the argument had been felt. In this connection, the Japanese position was distinct from the positions of Germany and Italy, as well as those of various other western countries, in that the fundamental rule of freedom of commerce was maintained, a new world order was pursued, and the principle behind independence from colonialism was respected. Advocates who had taken up this position in Japan included Fumimaro Konoe, Kiyoshi Kiyosawa, Masamichi Royama, and Tadao Yanaihara.
The fact that Japan sought various breakthroughs after withdrawing from the League of Nations has been revealed in recent research findings. This research also takes that position and will analysis the contents of the reconfiguration of the international order according to the “argument of colonial readjustment”.