国際政治
Online ISSN : 1883-9916
Print ISSN : 0454-2215
ISSN-L : 0454-2215
1984 巻, 77 号
選択された号の論文の15件中1~15を表示しています
  • 国際統合の研究
    鴨 武彦
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 1-22,L5
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    The study of international integration primarily concerns with the problems of how national states will commit themselves to the processes of building supranational community by peaceful means. International integration is very unique in challenging nation-state system towards the transformation of dynamics through noncoerciveness. Integration studies were born particulary in 1950s among American IR scholars. As is known, it coincided with post-war historical facts in Western Europe in the early 1950s when new efforts toward regional integration were made, though partially in industrial sectors such as coal and steel.
    The study of international integration had been relatively well developed through the 1960s. Many important hypotheses were set up, and they were extensively examined. However, since the 1970s integration studies seemed to have lost previous academic concerns and attentions among IR scholars. Integration theories are today strongly criticized. Does it mean the collapse of integration theories? Or does it merely show decline of some integration schools, say, of neo-functionalist school? We must know why and how this has happened. It is quite interesting to note the fact that criticism on integration theories is in parallel with the stalemate of the European Community (EC) in integration efforts.
    The purpose of this article is therefore, first, to consider how seriously integration studies have been in the deadlock. More specifically, what part of integration studies are cast into doubt? Secondly, this article analyzes the current stages of European integration, focusing on positive as well as negative sides. The EC looks quite ambivalent in political development. For it succeeds in expanding its potential power externally, and in increasing international influences, while it often fails in establishing common policies among member states. Why is it so? Finally, I will try to argue some prospects of integration studies. The underlying assumption is that the study of integration is not yet dead. It could be revitalized if we would carefully reexamine its research strategy.
  • 国際統合の研究
    高柳 先男
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 23-41,L6
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    We must be aware of the fact that in West European advanced societies the movement of regionalism has become salient since the late 1960s, and that these movements have spilled over into demands for the ethnic minority and protests against the political centers. French movements are particularly a case in point. They are characterized as regionally based protests against political regimes within which both nation-states and European Community are predominant as actors.
    Here an important question is posed: Can integration theories make clear the substance of these movement dynamics? The purpose of this article is, therefore, to attempt to answer why existing integration theories could not well analyze the problem of regional protests. The weakness of integration theories is in too much emphasis on the logic of fucntionalism. What regionalism in France indicates is possibly that national, subnational (or regional), and transnational interests are not complementary but competitive in integration dynamics. Integrationists tend to assume that the complementary scheme is correct. However, the reality is often not so. Why? The reason is that the EC integration is nothing more than the technocratic integration in nature. This has led to a variety of center-periphery gaps. Hence we will discuss the negative effect of the EC integration on domestic politics of member countries, especially focusing on the French case.
  • 国際統合の研究
    金丸 輝男
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 42-56,L6
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    one of the basic problems of integration Europe now faces is to make decisions based upon the Treaty. The key point for the improvement of the decision-making process, especially in its input process, lies in the introduction of the majority system. The majority system has long been denied unlawfully by the Luxembourg Compromise. Unanimity and package decision have prevailed after the Compromise. How far such unanimity and package decisions could have enhanced the integration of Europe should not be underestimated. But now the time has come to change the system which has made it difficult to implement a new, effective policy for urgent decision-making in such cases as crises and to make the Councils work functional. In December 1974, the first blow to the Compromise was given by the Summit. Since the Summit, cases in which the majority system apply have gradually increased. But unanimity and package decisions continue to prevail in the Councils over issues concerning the very important interests of the member countries. The second blow to the Compromise was given on May 18, 1982. Mr. Keersmaeker had made up his mind to adopt the agricultural prices based upon the Treaty, despite the UK's insistence upon its own very important interests. He denied the UK's appeal to the Compromise strongly backed by Mr. Tindemans. This is the first case in which the qualified majority system was applied against the said interests. The UK used the Compromise in the wrong way. The unanimity and eventually the package system formally broke down. In reality, the UK's urgent necessity to gain the member countries support by chance made it possible to make the decision lawfully. Nevertheless, the fact that a qualified majority decision was applied has important effects and was impressive. The possibility to appeal to the Compromise which is still alive, literally, will gradually be reduced. As Mrs. Thatcher had to declare, after the decision on the prices, that the UK will stay as a full member of the Europe, the member countries' interdependencies has increased to the extent that no country can leave the Europe. The more interdependence increases, the more the possibility to appeal to the Compromise will decrease, both formally and substantially. May 18, 1982 marked the symbolic first step for supranational decision-making. It will bring something new for the future of Europe.
  • 国際統合の研究
    田中 俊郎
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 57-72,L7
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    One of the basic weaknesses of international regional integration studies so far is the over emphasis of the supranational or transnational aspects of integration while disregarding national aspects. Therefore, it is important to identify and analyse these national aspects and merge them with the supranational or transnational aspects of integration.
    Based on this perspective, this article attempts to shed more light on how a common policy of the European Communities affects national interest groups behaviour. The author chooses the Common Fisheries Policy of the European Communities and the British fishing industry as a case.
    The following questions are asked: What was the situation of the British fishing industry before British entry into the European Communities? How did it react institutionally in order to make its voice heard in the making of the Common Fisheries Policy? What were the political channels available to exert pressures both on the national and European levels? How did they evaluate effects and the efficacy of respective political channels?
  • 国際統合の研究
    大隈 宏
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 73-88,L8
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    This article is an attempt to examine the evolution of the EEC's development co-operation policy within the context of interest politics among member states. The objective of this work is to focuse on five development co-operation issues that raised the tension in the Community and marked the turning point in the history of the EEC's development co-operation policy, and to chart the changing pattern of confrontation and co-operation among member states.
    The first point of the four-part article describes the five development co-operation issues examined: (1) Part IV Provisions of the Treaty of Rome, (2) Yaoundé I Convention, (3) Association with the Commonwealth Developing Countries, (4) Generalized System of Preferences, (5) Common Fund. The second part analyzes the dynamics of interest politics among member states, finding various patterns of confrontation and co-operation. The third part discusses the overall pattern of interest politics among member states, and examines the background factors that account for the particular behavior of each member state. The final part confronts the fundamental question of the future possibility of establishing the EEC's Common Development Co-operation Policy.
  • 国際統合の研究
    村井 吉敬
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 89-109,L8
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    The short history of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) has the reputation of being a case of “successful” regional co-operation in Southeast Asia in spite of a pessimistic prospect in its initial stage. However its “success” of solidarity was attained simply as a result of external pressures, namely the American defeat in Indochina and the regional tension arising from the Vietnamese invasion of Kampuchea. Except for this kind of regional “solidarity” mainly arising out of common fear of the Soviet “threat”, it might be said that ASEAN could not bring about solid results.
    This article aims to discuss the difficulties not only of regional integration in Southeast Asia but also of national integration in each country. Indonesia, a major member country of ASEAN, is characterized by its ethnic, religious and historical diversity. This nation also has a center and periphery in terms of social class and locality. This structure of center-periphery is analyzed mainly from the standpoint of one Indonesian local society; Sunda (West Java) World. The national integration of Indonesia from above after independence sometimes brought a process of depriviation of local identity and the oppression of the locality and local people.
    After the establishment of ASEAN it might be possible to say that authoritarian repressive integration through, “development” has been legitimized on the grounds of strengthening “regional co-operation” or fostering “regional peace.” But, at the same time, when we look at this integration process from the perspective of the vast majority of people, it is hard to say that the situation of their life, safety and justice has been much improved.
    It might be concluded that ASEAN is now functioning as a kind of sub-metropole of the world capitalistic system when we consider ASEAN's economic and sometimes military dependence upon the U. S., Japan and the EC. Nevertheless we should seek the common interest of Southeast Asian people from the standpoint of their peripheral situation in the world.
  • 高橋 進
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 110-124,L9
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    The Cold War penetrated the West German domestic political scene in the late 1940s and 1950s. The Conservatives and their leader, Konrad Adenauer, pursued the goals of participating in the Council of Europe, in the Coal and Steel Community, in the EDC and in NATO. They also favored West German rearmament. Committed to the reunification of the two Germanys, the Socialists consistently opposed this push for acceptance of West Germany's role in the Western European community and the Western Alliance.
    The SPD started to rebuild its party organization and to draw up a blueprint for a new social and political order in Germany immediately after the collapse of the Third Reich. The primary goal of the SPD's program was to build a new society founded on the idea of “democratic socialism, ” rejecting Communism and “reactionary bourgeois capitalism.” The preoccupation with this goal explains the SPD's opposition to Adenauer's European-oriented policy. The SPD advocated the so-called “magnet” theory for the unification of East and West Germany, by which unification would be achieved only through the magnetic power of West Germany. According to the SPD's argument, a social democratic, sovereign West Germany could best meet this precondition. This strategy for unification led the Socialists to oppose German membership in a Western European community which rejected the equal status of West Germany and which they believed possessed a “conservative, clerical, capitalistic and cartel-oriented” bias.
    The SPD's policy to oppose Adenauer's European-oriented policy changed gradually amid the heated battle over West Germany's rearmament and its entry into the EDC and NATO. The Socialists now shifted to arguing that reunification and European integration should be considered not in terms of the domestic contest over the political regime, but rather within the context of the bipolarized international order. They insisted that unification required an East-West détente and both East and West must pay a price to achieve unification through negotiations. They further argued that the Soviet Union would relinquish its hold over East Germany if the West pledged that a united Germany would remain outside a military alliance. The SPD therefore proposed that West Germany, whose political and economic commitments naturally tended toward the Western side, should not join Western Alliance before the Four Powers began negotiations for unification. Clearly, the previous demands of the SPD for unification under a social democratic Germany had changed to demands for unification through East-West détente
    When the EEC was established in 1957, the SPD voiced no objections to integrating West Germany into the European community.
  • 大島 美穂
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 125-139
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 藤本 博
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 140-144
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 石井 修
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 144-149
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 長谷川 毅
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 149-152
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 多賀 秀敏
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 152-157
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 藪野 祐三
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 157-161
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 稲葉 千晴
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 162-166
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 鴨 武彦
    1984 年 1984 巻 77 号 p. 167
    発行日: 1984/09/29
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
feedback
Top