国際政治
Online ISSN : 1883-9916
Print ISSN : 0454-2215
ISSN-L : 0454-2215
1992 巻, 101 号
選択された号の論文の13件中1~13を表示しています
  • 国家主権と国際関係論
    山影 進
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 1-9,L5
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    The post-Cold War era began with the quest for sovereignty in the Soviet Union, eastern Europe and elsewhere. The concept of sovereignty is still the last resort for those people who are oppressed, unrepresented, or discriminated againts. On the other hand, the society of sovereign states has long shown its inability to cope with various transnational phenomena such as economic interdependence and environmental pollution. The concept of sovereignty is under attack as the major cause of failure in enhancing international cooperation and supra-national institutionalization.
    International relations concerning sovereignty deserve special academic attention. The perspective of the post-Cold War may not be long and wide enough; that of post-World War II seems to be more appropriate. The issue is not simply related to self-determination but is also closely associated with deepening interdependence between peoples. Some peoples call for independence, but independent nations face interdependence. Restructuring of nation-states takes place in two directions: separation and integration. One cannot assume, however, that restructuring will eventually lead to a harmonious world. International society will continue to be too dynamic to reach any stable stationery divisions of the Globe.
    Sovereignty must be examined from theoretical perspectives. It constitutes the basis of the major school of international relations theory. It is also closely related to political theory not to mention international law.
    Changing international relations posed questions concerning sovereignty, and hence the questions concerning relevancy of various intellectual frameworks. “Sovereignty and international relations” calls for insight to imagine a global society beyond the nation-state system.
  • 国家主権と国際関係論
    高山 巖
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 10-31,L6
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    When the new-born modern State, in an attempt to overcome the resistance of the medieval social forces that stood in its way, adopted the concept of Sovereignty as a symbol of its territorial supremacy, it was immediately caught in a heated controversy which revolved round the issue: wherein should this supreme power ultimately reside, that is, in the ruling Monarch or in the People?
    Out of this polemic emerged two schools of thought which exerted an immense influence on the development of international relations theory. One was the Grotiusian school or model which, leaving untouched the Monarch vs. People polemic, declared instead the State to be sovereign, thus preparing the ground for the concept of State Sovereignty that won wide acceptance in later years. The other school can be linked to Rousseau who, having derived sovereignty fron the General will of the People, went further to identify Nation and People, so that the long dormant role of Nationality was finally transformed into a radically active one in politics. The origin of modern nationalism can rightly be traced to Rousseau. To this must be added the role played by the doctrine of the Reason of State, which was initially developed by Machiavelli and Hobbes, and was later completed by Hegel with his deified concept of “State as an absolute goal in itself”. Such was the historical setting in which the myth of the Nation-State as a sacrosanct entity of unquestionable supremacy was born and nurtured.
    The crisis of 20th century international relations, however, has evoked an acute awareness of the need for a new paradigm in the conceptual relations of Nation, State, and Man. The World Community model, which takes the global community of mankind as a point of reference, as contrasted with the Grotiusian model of sovereign States, deserves special attention in this regard, although its viability amidst the harsk realities of State-oriented international relations can never be taken for granted. The future of the Nation-State and of State Sovereignty may be said to depend on the extent to which mankind will successfully maintain a dialogue between the old and new models in such a way that the focus of man's national sentiment as a member of the State can eventually be made compatible with his identity as a member of the community of a higher order, known as the Global Human Community.
  • 国家主権と国際関係論
    森井 裕一
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 32-56,L7
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    Another distinctive step in the history of the European Community (EC) has been marked by the signing of the Treaty on European Union (Maastricht Treaty) on February 7, 1992. After briefly analyzing the political process to the Maastricht agreement since the coming into force of the Single European Act (SEA) in 1987, this article attempts in the first part to evaluate some major implications of the Maastricht Treaty such as Economic and Monetary Union, Common Foreign and Security Policy, the principle of subsidiarity, etc.
    The second part of this article begins by presenting some current theoretical perspectives in the analysis of the new dynamics of the EC, and goes on to introduce a new perspective in the understanding of the current developments in Western Europe. Theorists who reevaluate and modify the integration theories, which had their zenith in the 1960s, and analyze the new dynamics of European integration since the SEA, are not quite successful in understanding the current fundamental changes in the EC Member Countries, because today the western part of Europe is marked not only by integration but also by differentiation. Those who attempt to analyze changes in Europe through the sociocultural aspects, which stress the problems of differentiation, uncover the fundamental problem of multi-identity. But they cannot explain the phenomena of simultaneous development of integration and differentiation in Western Europe and overlook the problem of the eccentric-overlapping governance.
    The model of complex governance, which was introduced by Barry Hughes, though already mentioned implicitly by other authors and to some extent adopted in the Maastricht Treaty as the principle of subsidiarity, presents to us an interesting point of view in the understanding of the current problem of integration and differentiation. The complex governance model explains the emergence of multi-tiered and geographically overlapping structures of governance. It argues that concentric and overlapping circles of institutional structure (for example EC, nation states, local governments, transnational organizations, etc.), which vary according to issue area, are functioning for the welfare of individual citizens.
    In the third part of this article examples are given to show how complex governance is evolving in Western Europe. This part also considers how the concept of the nation state and that of national sovereignty are changing through the evolving complex governance in Western Europe. As examples the current developments of the post-Maastricht EC, especially Economic and Monetary Union, transborder regional cooperations and the new cooperation between EC and regions are examined.
    Although overlapping governance is evolving quietly in several levels of government in Europe, we must recognize it as a sign of further qualitative change of the “nation state system”.
  • 国家主権と国際関係論
    定形 衛
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 57-71,L8
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    The purpose of this paper is to consider the meaning of national sovereignty in diplomacy of the socialist and federal states, especially in Yugoslavia.
    Excommunicated from the Cominform in June 1948, the most important item in Yugoslav diplomacy was to secure full sovereignty of its own. It held true of Yugoslav foreign policy after the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in the summer 1968. According to the Constitution of 1974, considering peaceful coexistence and active cooperation among states and peoples, irrespective of differences in their social systems, as indispensable conditions for peace and social progress in the world, Yugoslavia based its international relations on the principles of respect for national sovereignty and equality, non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries. From this view point one may say that Yugoslav nonaligned diplomacy had achieved great success in the field of foreign policy.
    However, what has to be noticed is that Yugoslav inner politics had continued to infringe on national sovereignty from within. In other words, democratic centralism as the basic principle of the Communist Party (League of Communists) had ascendancy over federalism as the principle of the state order.
    Consequently it was natural that the collapse of the Communist party followed malfunction of the federal organizations and stripped Yugoslav national sovereignty of all its contents.
  • 国家主権と国際関係論
    羽場 久美子
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 72-89,L9
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    The collapse of the Socialist system of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union in 1989-91 has precipitated reform of economic, political, social and security systems throughout Europe. In these circumstances, the idea of a “Central Europe”, has been restored not only as a historical concept, but also as an emerging economic, social and cultural system. At first, it took the form of the so called Pentagonale and the cooperation of three countries, Hungary, Czecho-Slovakia and Poland. At present, German economic influence is expanding to all these areas.
    After the failure of the coup d'état of the Soviet Union in August 1991, the new “Central European” area is beginning to show signs of moving towards economic integration with the EC and towards cooperation with NATO in security policy. The leaders of the EC and NATO, who were irresolute at first, also began to establish positive relations with the new Central European countries toward the reorganization of the Eastern half of Europe after the decrease in power of the Soviet Union.
    In this article, the author investigates Central European regional cooperation and its process to strengthen its relation with the EC and NATO. In this paper, the author wishes to investigate how the former East European countries could successfully develop a cooperative relationship with the rest of Europe; in order not to become an economic and military hinterland again, but to be, instead, an autonomous and independent entity, without division and exhaustion caused by internal nationalist fragmentation.
  • 国家主権と国際関係論
    末内 啓子
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 90-105,L10
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    Studies of International Relations have been undergoing debates for some time. Contrasting views of international relations have resulted in debates, such as those between idealists and realists over norms and objectivity, and between traditionalists and behavioralists over history via-a-vis science. Recently, the influence of “critical theory, ” which examines relations between a theory and its norms, challenges the mainstream of International Relations, which has pretended to separate itself from values. For instance, recent studies by Robert Cox, R. B. J. Walker, Richard K. Ashley, and Mark Hoffman assert that any theory in the field of International Relations is bound to values and history. These studies try to examine the assumptions and the nature of theories in International Relations.
    Under the influence of the recent development of studying the relations between norms and theory in International Relations, this paper analyzes state-centric models in the tradition of realism (i. e. H. J. Morgenthau) and neorealism (i. e. Robert O. Keohane, Kenneth N. Waltz, and Robert Gilpin). This analysis encompasses questions such as: what are the theorists' views of international relations? What are the normative values underlining their views? How are these explanations and values related to each other in each theory?
    The state has been seen as the most significant actor in the mainstream of International Relations, including realism which sees international relations as a competition among states, and neorealism which recognizes the increasing importance of international economic issues and international regimes during the era of declining U. S. hegemony. The state continues to be described as a rational actor, and at the same time as an indispensable actor in international relations. Both realism and neorealism are based on their assumptions of the separation between theory and norm and are engaged in their pursuits of science. As natural scientists pursue the control of nature, realists and neorealists consider that their science of international relations will provide practical tools to create order and stability out of international relations, which are seen as originally anarchic.
    This examination argues that despite their pretension to value-neutrality, objectivity, scientific outlook, and rationality, the mainstream studies in International Relations are heavily grounded in values. The separation of values and methods create a norm of analytical supremacy and scientific rationality which give the illusion of control over international relations. Realism and neorealism also eliminate challenges to themselves by asserting their “scientific” legitimacy. Accordingly, the dominance of state-centric models in realism and neorealism resulted in their peculiar structure of logic and justification, leaving the field undeveloped in terms of critical challenges to these approaches.
    Therefore, this analysis concludes that it is essential to examine the nature of relations between theory and norms within theories. This attempt encourages the examination of these models by challenging their premises. This approach would not immediately invent an “alternative” theory; yet, it is a significant beginning to the reassessment of the state of the field and the consideration of theoretical alternatives. Accordingly, it is essential to create an analytical dialogue with these theories and to examine the textures of theories which weave together norms, values, and ideas within a historical context.
  • 国家主権と国際関係論
    岩崎 正洋
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 106-123,L9
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    In the field of international political theories, as Stephen D. Krasner has pointed out, it is a matter of course that we deal with the ‘sovereign state’ or the ‘nation state’ as a given. It is difficult for us therefore, to realize that we have not yet had a plentiful discussion about the meaning of the concept of ‘sovereign state.’
    Moreover, in the textbook of international politics, the ‘state’ is viewed as a major actor in international society. The concept of ‘state’ is defined as having three components which are ‘sovereignty’, ‘territory’ and ‘population’. Despite the many changes in real politics, it seems that an examination of the ‘sovereign state’ concept, beyond this limited definition, has not been undertaken.
    We can see two different phenomena in the world trend towards democratization. There is a trend towards ‘integration’ among ‘sovereign states’, while on the other hand, there are instances in which the ‘sovereign state’ has collapsed as a result of the disfunction of the state.
    Therefore, we cannot perceive all sovereign states in the world as having the same meaning. Why is this ‘sovereign state’ concept now obscure? It seems that different levels of political development possess different interpretations of ‘sovereign states.’
    Drawing upon current political trends in world wide democratization, this paper aims to re-examine the concept of ‘sovereign states’ in the field of international political theories and political theories.
  • 国家主権と国際関係論
    岩間 徹
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 124-139,L12
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    National sovereignty in terms of territorial sovereignty has been modified in the development of international environmental law. This paper purports to identify two main developments of restricted territorial sovereignty followed by transfrontier pollution, global pollution, extinction of endangered species and ecological destruction.
    International law has functioned as a law of coordination of various interests of States in such areas as transfrontier pollution and uses of global commons. It has developed substantive and procedural rules for prevention of transfrontier pollution and conservation of living resources. However, some rules have developed to cope with the need for prevention of a newly emerging global pollution such as destruction of ozone layer and global warming and extinction of endangered species and ecological destruction on earth. National sovereignty has been modified to secure common interests of the world community as a whole or mankind.
    The concept of common interests means spatial and temporal solidarity among all states and mankind. It is also closely related to participation by all States in law-making, provision of incentives to secure such participation by developing countries in particular, creation of obligations erga omnes, and legal standing of states whose right were not directly infringed upon to react by resorting to legal remedies, and so on.
  • 今川 瑛一
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 140-142
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 中野 聡
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 143-146
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 中逵 啓示
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 146-149
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 松岡 完
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 149-153
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 山影 進
    1992 年 1992 巻 101 号 p. 158
    発行日: 1992/10/24
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
feedback
Top