本稿は2年間の交渉の末昨年7月に漸く合意に至ったイラン核交渉について、その背景にあって強力に交渉の帰趨を支配してきた国際政治の構造的な要因に着目し、それがイラン問題に留まらず広く現在の国際関係を歴史的に規定してきたことに注意を喚起しようとするものである。

2013年以降のイラン核開発疑惑をめぐる交渉の実質的な主役である米国は、この交渉について国家安全保障上の「深刻な懸念」を表明するイスラエルの説得に腐心してきた。だがここでイスラエルの懸念の主な根拠がアフマディネジャード大統領（当時）の「イスラエルを地図上から消す」発言であること、この発言の真意についてあいまいな部分が残るにもかかわらず、イスラエル側がネタニエフ首相を中心にこれに固執し続けてきたことはきわめて特異なことであると言わなければならない。

その背景にはオスロ合意の空洞化と軌を一にするイスラエルの国内政治の極端な右傾化、1979年の革命以後のイランを全否定して「反近代化（De-modernization）」のサイクルに落とし込もうとする一部の根強い潮流（それは皮肉にも隣国のイラクにおいて実現した）、さらに旧来からの「西欧VSアジア」の差別的構造を維持しようとする強力な力が否定しようもなく働いていると見るべきであろう。

この最後の点について筆者は第二次大戦中のマンハッタン計画に言及し、当時のルーズベルト米大統領がいずれにしても西欧側にあったナチス･ドイツへの原爆の投下を躊躇する一方で、これを引継いだトルーマン大統領はその外部にあった日本に対して2度の原爆投下をためらわなかったという事実を指摘する。こうした事例に象徴される不平等な関係が現在でも絶えず繰り返されている事実は、イラン核合意の性格を公平に理解し今後の展開を見通すうえで不可欠な前提である。

（文責・鈴木 均）

The result of the November election of the US president has crucial importance for the future of several countries including Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Iran, with different nuances pertaining to each country. In the case of Iran, contrary to the other two countries, the result of Donald Trump’s victory is disgusting, as he has openly denied the profits of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) from the outset of his election campaign.

If Hillary Clinton were elected, she would have followed Barack Obama’s political legacy in many ways, including the policies that brought about his breakthrough in US–Iranian relations after the 1979 revolution. We could refer to many pieces of evidence, especially from M. Landler’s convincing work entitled Alter Egos (2016). President Obama’s unprecedented challenge in this regard was to change relations with Iran such that there is less emnity. Nowadays it seems very difficult to expect that this rare historical chance at a stronger US-Iran relationship will eventually materialize.

In this very difficult situation, Japan should not hesitate to make every effort to convince the Trump Administration that it is crucial for the US to maintain diplomatic relations with Iran to keep the Middle East from entering a more catastrophic situation characterised by greater warfare. Japan is an important player in this situation given its uniqueness in having an alliance with the US while at the same time being trusted by Iran.

With its geopolitical implications, Israel’s presence in the Middle East is conspicuous. Over the last two decades, Israel has rapidly expanded its sphere of influence to other parts of the world through economic transactions. Its dramatic development has been supported by its economic globalisation and high-tech industry. Israel currently belongs with the developed economies as a member state of the OECD, with a per-capita income of US$ 35,000, and is often referred to as a “success story” that other countries can draw lessons from for their own economic development.

Part One attempts to analyse the factors, mainly related to economic policies, which contributed to the paradigm shift in Israel’s development strategy from the Zionist socialistic ideology to the neoliberal globalising policy orientation. The turning point was the economic reform introduced in 1985, which enabled the Bank of Israel to play an independent and leading role in monetary and fiscal policies against the rampant hyperinflation at the time. However, it should be noted that the reform package was a co-product of Israel and the US administration, supported by financial assistance attached to the reform. For the US, an economically stabilized Israel was an essential strategic asset against the Soviet Union. Since then, various reforms were introduced gradually, such as liberalisation of the labour market, privatisation, liberalisation of the financial market, and capital transfers. However, the voluminous favourable grant from the US was essential in absorbing balance of payment constraints and various social tensions through the transition period. Therefore, Israel’s transition to a neoliberal globalised economy was not a model that could be easily imported by other developing countries in the region.

今日の中東諸国において、エジプト、シリア、イラク、リビア、イエメン、アフガニスタン等、統治体制の困難を抱えている国々は地域的な暴力主義の温床となり、ニューヨーク、ロンドン、マドリッド、ジャカルタ、ニューデリー、パリ、ブリュッセルなどを標的にした国際テロリズムの震源となってきた。

これらの背景には社会的な極度の不平等･貧困の問題があるのであり、単に安全保障上の観点のみの対応策では体制の権威主義化を助長することで社会の矛盾を拡大させ、過激主義の拡大に資するだけである。

アラブ世界の諸国家はかつては過激な「アラブ民族主義」の主張で国民の支持を得てきたが、それらの一部は莫大な石油収入に頼ることで国民との正常な関係の構築に失敗し、少数の支配者層による権力の独占に終始してきた。

その結果として現在中東地域の若年層は、世界でも最も自らの社会経済から疎外され、抑圧された状況に置かれている。エジプト･イラクなどの各国では伝統的な農業生産の基盤が長期的に破壊され、食料の多くを輸入に頼るに至っている。域内の各国はこうした現状に対処するどころか全くの機能不全に陥っているのである。

さらに2010年末以降の短い「アラブの春」によって覚醒した若者の一部は、その後の政治状況の暗転のなかで「イスラーム国」などに流入し、アフマド･ダッラーウィーのように悲劇的な最期を迎えた例もある。

これまで米国の対中東政策は成功してきたとは言い難く、むしろ新たな紛争の火種となる社会の分裂と対立を助長することに終始してきた。その最終的な帰結ともいえる「イスラーム国」の問題を乗り越えるためには、軍事的な対抗手段に訴えるのではなく、経済成長と分配の平等、国民に開かれた民主的統治システムなど、まさに「アラブの春」で希求された理想の実現を図っていく以外にはあり得ない。

（文責・鈴木 均）

The rapid decline in Saudi Arabia’s oil revenue has forced its economy into depression. While the government maintained its expenditure at a high level in 2014 and 2015 to prevent a decline, the economy gradually ran into depression. The government issued a treasury bond to domestic banks in July 2015 to finance its deficit and prevent a rapid decrease in the foreign reserves of the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency (SAMA, the central bank). The government continued its issuance.

The government realised that the oil prices would not recover to their earlier high levels of more than $100 per barrel. Therefore, towards the end of 2015, it took certain steps to reform its financial structure, cutting its energy subsidies and trying to increase its revenue. During the same time, Mohammad bin Salman, the deputy crown prince, started conceiving fundamental financial and economic reforms. On April 25, he announced ‘Vision 2030’. On May 7, he restructured the ministries and reshuffled the cabinet, creating a super ministry, i.e. the Ministry of Energy, Industry, and Mineral Resources. The super ministry with a non-royal minister will be the key ministry to implement the reforms.

The vision expressed an idea of reforms. The details of reforms were not announced in the vision. The Saudi Arabian government had tried to reform its economy and financial structure in some decades. However, it never obtained the desired results, which shows the difficulties encountered in implementing reforms. The idea of reforms showed in ‘Vision 2030’ seems to have several difficulties to implement.

On June 6, the Saudi Arabian cabinet approved the National Transformation Program (NTP) 2020, a detailed plan for the next five years, pertaining to the overall ‘Vision 2030’. Notably, NTP has made no mention of the IPO of Saudi Aramco. Obtaining a good result within five years seems difficult. Nevertheless, the implementation of NTP may contribute towards strengthening the power of the deputy crown prince.