The flows of people across national boundaries is a major phenomenon of modern international relations. But it is as yet insufficiently recognized within international relations theory.
The realist theory of international politics, for example, does touch upon individuals such as diplomats, soldiers, colonists, and students going abroad, but deals with these only as instrumentalities of the state. The liberalist theory of international relations is more cognizant of individuals as international actors. Yet it regards them as a part of a collective nation, the forming of which it claims to be the only possible way for them to become international actors. Interdependence theory, a combination of the realist and the liberalist schools, is possibly better prepared to incorporate internationally active human beings into its theoretical framework, as it tries to account for recent trends called transnational relations and recognizes informal as well as formal international institutions as elements for the formation and maintenance of an “international regime”. Yet, concerned chiefly with interdependent relations among governments, international organizations and multinational corporations, it limits itself to dealing with individuals having formal capacities.
In today's internationalizing world, an enormous number of ordinary people move across national boundaries as tourists, migrants, workers, students and so on, and their number is increasing rapidly, with the state's control made more and more difficult. Cases like Muslim workers in France and illegal immigrants in the United States challenge the basic notion of nation itself. It is of course to be remembered that most flows of people across national boundaries remain under the control of the state; more people going abroad means more people carrying passports and visas issued by the state. This is why the flow of people across national boundaries must be studied from the international relations point of view. In other words, if the international flow of ordinary people is considered a phenomenon of international relations, then we must develop new international relations theories that better accomodate them.
The present article, as no more than a general introduction to this special issue, is not an attempt at theory building. It rather highlights the need for new theories, and offers rudimentary typologies of international flows of people, for example, people moving with one way tickets vs. people moving with return tickets, and voluntary movements vs. involuntary ones. And, finally, it considers how to differentiate the multiplicity of causes that generate people's movement across national boundaries.

View full abstract

Swiss is famous for its many foreign workers. The number of foreigners amounts to nearly 20% of the total population. Swiss is an “early starter” in permitting entry to many foreign workers after the W. W. II. In the 1960s and 70s, grassroots movements appealed to the “anti-Üeberfremdung Initiative” to cut down the number of foreigners. In Switzerland, social discontent and social movements are in conflict with the corporatist system. This “anti-Üeberfremdung Initiative” could not gain a majority, but it has changed the government policy toward foreign workers in a basic way.
In many Western societies like France and West Germany, anti-foreign movements are now very active as a result of economic depression in these societies. The competition between home workers and foreigners is intense. And, cultural conflict is serious because of the immense gap between the advanced societies, who accept foreigners, and the developing countries, who send them. As a consequence, xenophobia becomes acute in these advanced societies. In Swistzerland also, this type of anti-foreign movements exists. And besides, it has another type of anti-foreign feeling based on its “traditional conservatism, ” which is the core of the Swiss Confederation. Now, it is difficult for Switzerland to maintain a balance in the domain of language, religion and age because of the massive number of Italian workers. Traditional people are afraid that the “Üeberfremdung” will completely change the Swiss Confederation.
Hence, the Swiss government is forced to make a new economic policy which is compatible with this anti-foreign feeling. The Swiss government has cut the number of foreign workers and utilized a great number of seasonal workers and border-commuters, who are not counted as “foreign workers.”

View full abstract

The series of strikes against the French automobile industry in 1982 and 1983 came to public notice as the first organized mass protests by immigrant workers since their introduction into the French economy after World War II. This paper throws light upon the social background of these protests. It focuses upon two recent features of immigrant collective consciousness: the strengthening of professional consciousness and the intensification of religious identity.
One can say that the twofold transformation of immigrant consciousness was brought about mainly by their prolonged stay in France, amounting to settlement there.
On the one hand, as the prospect of returning to their respective home countries (mostly in North Africa) grew dimmer with the suspension of new entry permits in 1973, immigrants showed increasing interest in their working conditions and in the possibility of improving them. This tendency went hand in hand with a decrease in the turnover rate among immigrant workers who, due to a recession, found little opportunity to change jobs. Immigrant workers no longer perceived themselves as “temporary visitors” to France; instead, they became increasingly conscious of the permanent nature of their situation.
On the other hand, the Islamic community in France became increasingly active, especially during the latter half of the 1970s. Increasing numbers of mosques have been built, reflecting the new rise of religious identity. Compared to the 1960s when Muslims preferred to confine their religious practice within their private sphere, immigrants today affirm publicly their religious and cultural identities.
The impact of this new religious fervor upon immigrant workers is difficult to determine. As the hypothesis of “Islam as an apparatus for social regulation” (Jacques Barou and Catherine de Wenden) indicates, religious demands are partly institutionalized by factory management itself, to help promote a certain order necessary for productivity. However, in spite of the ambivalent nature of the religious issue, it can safely be said that the rise of both professional and religious identities affirms a certain consolidation of immigrants' self-perception, allowing them to act upon the society in which they now see themselves as active members.

View full abstract

In the first section the author gives a brief description of various groups of refugees based on his own experience of engaging in relief work, such as the Palestine refugees (under UNRWA), Indochinese refugees, Afghan refugees and “famine” refugees in Africa (under UNHCR). The author in this way intends to offer general concepts of refugees and various features of their problems.
Then, in the second section explanations are given on the present situation and the manner of responding to them by international society, and especially UNHCR and VOLAGs (voluntary agencies), under existing international legal instruments. Refugees are defined under the “Refugee Convention” of 1951 and “Refugee Protocal” of 1967. Besides these “definition refugees, ” for whom UNHCR has the primary responsibility of protection and assistance under its Statute, there have been other groups of refugees UN General Assembly resolutions have placed under UNHCR. This resulted from the recent situation, where the mass flow of refugees made the definition of refugees almost out-of-date. The second problem concerns the attitudes and policies of the countries which accept refugees (countries of first asylum). The ASEAN states, for instance, do not allow the refugees the “local settlement or integration”. Then, for the durable solution of the refugee problem two other formulas have been applied by UNHCR; namely (the third country) resettlement and voluntary repatriation. Such countries as the USA, Canada, Australia, Japan and other “advanced” countries have been according the refugees the chance for re-settlement. Through voluntary repatriation great many Cambodian refugees and about 3, 000 Laotian refugees have been repatriated, for whom UNHCR have given some relief goods. In addition to these measures, as a special counter-measure for the potential refugees in the countries of their source, UNHCR made an agreement for authorized departure from Vietnam in 1979, although the flow of “boat-people” from Vietnam has not yet been totally absorbed.
Special attention is given to Cambodians who are staying along the Thai-Cambodian borders, amounting to about 250, 000. Since international relief organizations will not give food and other relief goods to the combatants of the so-called Tripartite Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea, an exile regime, the combatants have been using these displaced Cambodians as a utensil for receiving relief goods. Recently some VOLAGs working at the border areas or inside Cambodia (People's Republic of Kampuchea) for humanitarian purposes, took steps to appeal to the UN and their respective governments that these Cambodians should be treated as refugees, be accorded the care of UNHCR and be moved to safer area in Thailand.
In the third section recent moves in the international society for seeking new approaches to the fluctuating refugee problem are pointed out. In the late 1970s the UN asked Prince Agha Khan to study the mass displacements of people. He submitted the so-called Agha Khan Report in which he offered some proposals and suggestions including an early warning system on refugees. But, this report has not been given much attention in international society. Prince Agha Khan then set up, together with the Crown Prince of Jordan and other prominent personalities, the Independent Commission on International Humanitarian Issues (ICIHI), which is in the future expected to produce its final report on various problems or issues, including the refugee problem. In Japan a group of experts was formed in 1984, under the co-sponsorship of the UN University and Soka University (Institute of Asian Studies), and submitted an interim report and the final report, respectively in 1985 and 86, on the potential refugees in Asia.
Although these reports would be of much importance for the future response of international

View full abstract

The purpose of this paper is to survey the causes of the new influx of immigrants into the United States after World War II, and to analyze its social, political, and economic impact on American society, the impact on the sending countries, and its implications for US foreign relations.
There were multiple “push-pull” factors that account for this influx. During and immediately after WW II, the US started democratizing its immigration policy due to its newly assumed role as a leader of the free world. Under the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, every nation of the world was given quotas and all racial bars to naturalization were ended for the first time in American history. The Immigration Act of 1965 finally ended the forty-four year policy of using national origin as the major criterion for admitting immigrants. All racial and ethnic quotas were removed. Since the onset of the Cold War, the US has also promoted a generous policy toward political refugees from Communist countries in an effort to enhance its image as a champion of freedom. Thus, its pull factors were integrally related to American diplomatic interests.
The combination of American policy and world economic and political developments resulted in a concentration of immigrants from Asia and Latin America, who comprised a much larger percentage of the total annual immigration than ever before. Minority as they are, these new immigrants did not encounter major opposition from American society, due to the civil rights movement and to the changing American labor needs which demanded professional skills. These new immigrants also contributed to a major demographic change of American society in terms of population growth and racial and ethnic composition.
This immigration has had both positive and negative impacts on the sending countries. The US can be seen as exploiting the Third World, especially by attracting professionals for its own benefits at the cost of the Third World, that provides them with basic education and training. On the other hand, an open immigration policy can alleviate the pressure of poverty and population in the Third World by pulling the excess laborers with a lure of a relatively high wage compared to the standard in their society. This is especially true with illegal immigrants from Mexico today. To evaluate the overall effect of US immigration policy on the world economy is beyond the scope of this paper. However, this study seeks to emphasize that the US be fully aware of its interdependence with the rest of the world and to cooperate with them through an effective exchange of “human resources.”
The US is now searching for a new social order where friction among peoples of different race, ethnicity, culture and language are minimized. This search will hopefully set an example to the world how ethnically different people can coexist equally.

View full abstract

China, under its “four modernizations” policy now sends increasingly large numbers of students to Western countries and Japan, in order to train the talent necessary to promote science and technology in the shortest possible time. According to a Chinese report, nearly forty thousand students went abroad in the period from 1978 to 1983, half of whom went to the United States. The U. S. Institute of International Education reported that in the year 1985-86 alone, 13, 908 Chinese students, excluding visiting scholars and researchers, were studying in that country, making them the seventh largest group. The number represented an increase of 38.4 percent over the previous year, the, highest rate of increase for any country. It was only in 1978 that educational exchanges between China and the U. S. were reactivated.
Based on several surveys of Chinese students at U. S. institutions of higher education, the following features are characteristic of the current situation in the U. S.:
(a) Chinese students with J-1 visas, namely, students sent by the Chinese government, are concentrated at a number of leading universities, reflecting Chinese government policy, whereas privately funded students with F-1 visas are scattered at many different institutions.
(b) Half of the Chinese students have actually been professors and researchers. This is because the Chinese government at the beginning placed more emphasis on sending mid-career teachers and researchers; but in the 1980s increasingly more graduate students are being sent overseas.
(c) Of total expenses for J-1 visa students and scholars, 41 percent have been incurred by the Chinese government and 36 percent by U. S. host institutions. Recently, the Chinese government has been decreasing its share. It is now more favorably disposed toward sending students on private funds as an important means of training. But among privately funded students, there is tendency to stay on in the U. S. after completion of one's study, thus creating the danger of a brain drain.
(d) Because the “four modernizations” policy is the basis for sending Chinese students abroad, it is natural that these students have been concentrated in the natural sciences and engineering. Recently, however, the Chinese government, realizing that modernization requires the training of talent in wider areas, has become more positive about sending students in the social sciences and management.

View full abstract

When we look back over Japan's foreign student policy and the reality of foreign student inflows to Japan from the end of W. W. II to the present, the following two questions come to light. (1) Why, in the 1980s, did the rate of increase in the number of foreign students become dramatically higher? (2) Why is it that in Japan, where a clearly demarcated national boundary supposedly makes it difficult for foreigners to stay as long-term residents, a consensus appears to be forming on the intake of a large number of foreign students?
Academic analyses and government policy hold that foreign students are “special foreigners” attending only tertiary level educational institutions and who will return to their home countries as soon as their studies have been completed. However, the hard facts concerning the recent situation of foreign students in Japan confirm that Japan is no longer an exception to the world-wide trend in which the flow of foreign students is one form of international migration and there is a strong possibility of their becoming immigrants in the country where they study. This paper considers, then, the gaps between the reality and the government perceptions of foreign-student issues in Japan. It deals specifically with question (1), examining such factors as 1) the 1982 revisions to Japanese Immigration Control Order, 2) recent changes in the overseas studies policy of countries from which students come, 3) the special characteristics of Taiwanese students.
I argue that the major reason for the dramatic increase in the number of foreign students in Japan actually lies outside the scope of the Ministry of Education's foreign-student policy. Rather, two changes, independent of the Japanese government's foreign-student policy, occurred simultaneously, creating and intensifying the increase in the numbers of self-financed students. Firstly, changes to Japan's immigration policy eased the way for foreign students' entry into and residence in Japan by simplifing entry visa issuing procedures for Japanese language school students, liberalizing changes of visa status and foreign student's eligibility for part-time work etc. Secondly, changes in the emigration policies of Japan's Asian neighbours facilitated the departure of greater numbers of self-financed students, eg. Korea's abolition of the qualifing examination for overseas study, Taiwan's liberalization of overseas travel etc.
Future foreign student issues in Japan will concentrate on 1) part-time work by self-financed students, 2) the increase in the number of foreign students in quasitertiary institutions, 3) alternatives available to foreign students remaining in Japan after completing their studies (employment, Japanese spouse etc.). Because these issues are concerned with how non-Japanese nationals should be received into Japanese society, they are necessarily influenced by the Ministry of justice's policy decisions.

View full abstract

Recently, the number of Japanese travelers abroad has increased enormously. A cross-cultural experience has become much more common for the average Japanese, even among students. Yet not a few Japanese find difficulty adjusting to foreign life. This paper surveys recent studies on cross-cultural experiences and their implications, from the viewpoints of International Relations and Mental Health.
One issue examined involves those factors determining adjustment to foreign life. Two types of maladjustment are identified. One is “maladjustment from movement”, that is, maladjustment caused by international movement. The other is “illness movement maladjustment” where movement itself is a form of illness behavior; one's going abroad is often a simple escape from difficulties at home.
A second issue involves the changes of images toward host countries during short stays abroad. It is suggested that recent young Japanese travelers have sufficient information about their host countries to form objective images even during a short stay abroad.
A third issue involves the effects of brief cross-cultural experiences on human growth. It is maintained that staying abroad can bring many young Japanese to deeper self-awareness and cultural awareness as Japanese. A travel experience further gives most individuals a sense of cultural relativism, making it meaningful not only for their mental health but for international relations in general.

View full abstract

Since Gorbachev and his government launched the “Perestroika” reform, dissident movements and flows of people in the Soviet Union have attracted greater academic as well as practical attention. Yet, studies of these questions remain uncultivated, and few such studies exist in Japan. In order to clarify the current state of dissident movements and flows of people in the Soviet Union and to understand the degree of maturity of Soviet society, this article first surveys the different streams of the dissident movements, locating Sakharov and Solzhenitsyn in these streams. The former was exiled to the city of Gorki and later released, whereas the latter remains exiled outside the country. With this comparison in mind, the author then considers the questions of freedom of residence and of movement in the Soviet Union. Finally, the issue of Crimean Tatars, who have been exiled as a whole ethnic group, is considered in relationship to Perestroika.
Sakharov, who acknowledges Marxist-Leninist theory as the legitimate ideology of the Soviet state, demands democratization and reform of the government. In short, he is a reformer within the regime. Solzhenitsyn, by contrast, is a true radical reformer who denounces Marxist ideology itself. One of Sakharov's demands has been liberalization of the people's freedom of movement and residence.
Unlike the constitution of a capitalist country such as Japan, the Soviet constitution does not grant freedom of residence, movement and choice of occupation, or the freedom of emigration and denaturalization. As is well known, every Soviet citizen is required to carry a passport. One's choice of occupation, residence and movement, both international and domestic, was severely restricted, even after a 1974 reform slightly simplified the passport regulation. In August 1986 the immigration law was revised to liberalize somewhat the Soviet citizen's access to international travel after the beginning of 1987. Historically speaking, the Helsinki declaration of 1975 led the Soviet Union to take some measures to liberalize the freedom of residence and movement in the 1970s. But in the late 1970s and early 1980s, intensified international tensions caused a tightening of the Soviet borders. With the Perestroika since 1985, restrictions governing residence and domestic and international movement have been somewhat loosened.
In June 1945, at the same time as several similar autonomous republics of Soviet national minorities, the Crimean Autonomous Republic ceased to exist, and the Tatar people were exiled to other areas. This Stalinist misatke was criticized by Khrushchev and the Tatars now demand to return to Crimea. The Soviet government has tried to allay Tatar dicontent by giving them a certain degree of cultural freedom, but it is doubtful if this policy will succeed. The current government will sooner or later be tested on this question too. On the whole, however, the Gorbachev regime seems aware that Perestroika inevitably requires granting more freedom of movement to the Soviet people.

View full abstract

Multilateralism is now being put to the test. If both the expansion of transborder institutional activities and the circumvention of multilateralism are the realities of international society, how can we balance the explanation of this phenomenon without underestimating the positive aspect of the former by the negative incentive of the latter? This study suggests a framework of analysis to view the process of peaceful change through social institutions we can call “multilateral regimes” and will apply it to one case study, international relations in Antarctica.
At first, the author assumes five attributes that a regime might possibly have in relation to “actor” (distribution of power) and “outcome” (reallocation of power); the attributes of a regime defined as goal goods, instrumental goods, social order, social institution, and non-goal/instrumental goods. They are considered to influence either a state's (or a group of states') pursuit of self-interests or regime's self-realization. Then, five possible functions of a regime are identified in relation with its formation, maintenance, and change stages; informational, normative, rule-creating, rule-supervisory, and operational functions. Since the author consider a multilateral regime as an institution embodying the ideas conventionalized by actors, diachronic and/or synchronic comparison among conflicting regime initiatives should be undertaken from this perspective to analyze how regimes are formed and also challenged. Lastly, we can look at a regime's performance in its maintenance stage from the resulting condition realized either by the actors' collective use (or non-use) of the above functions or by the regime's influence.
The case study of “Antarctic regime” present some insights into the collaborative action of state actors. Three major regime initiatives are compared in their process of conventionalization. They are the failed attempts by the United States to form a Condominium in Antarctica in 1948, the successful conclusion of the Antarctic Treaty in 1959, and the current discussion to internationalize the region at the United Nations since 1983. Also, the performance of the existing regime will be surveyed.
The tentative findings are as follows; (1) A regime, though it is primarily an instrument for actors, would come to have its own pressure on actors as an exogenous variable. (2) The concensual ideas among actors obtained through the process of their conventionalization is so important to construct a regime that even the leadership by the hegemon will not necessarily assure its success. (3) As a regime naturally limits its members, it requires broader legitimacy and commonality to be more stable and universally relevant.

View full abstract

After the Chinese revolution of 1911, China lapsed into the confusion and was compelled under the direct threat of armed action. Under these circumstances the Yamamoto cabinet which succeeded Saionji's, promoted a policy of nonintervention in Chinese internal affairs. But the General Staff Office and the branch offices of the army were prepared for the worst. And the frustrated Japanese people hoped for the Government to take strong action. The Navy, ontrolled by the men of Satsuma, and Takashi Hara carried out passively their cautious plans, in particular Foreign Minister Nobuaki Makino and his subordinate Moritaro Abe fulfilled their mission. By the way Japan's leaders hesitated to give official support to Sun Wên's revolutionary movement.
Suddenly when the 1913 Revolution in China occurred, some killing and wounding cases happened in the condition without order, and these cases were grievous wounds to national pride for China. Japan approached Britain for support, urging not to interfere in the domestic affairs of China. While the pressure from the army continued, the position of Enjiro Yamaza, who was the Japanese Minister in Peking, was alleviated somewhat by developments in Japan. And he sent a long telegraphic report giving the unfavorable reaction of the Japanese press and soldiers. At last Japan was under the necessity of watching, and if possible controlling diplomacy in Peking. On the other hand the Yamamoto cabinet compromised the army to a certain extent and Hara played a leading part in foreign policy with Makino. And the comments in the press had a moderate tone. The Japanese government undertook to maintain, insofar as possible, the territorial integrity of China, and exerted a moral and political influence under the direction of Yamamoto and Hara.

View full abstract