The Journal of Research Institute for the History of Global Arms Transfer
Online ISSN : 2423-8546
Print ISSN : 2423-8538
ISSN-L : 2423-8538
Volume 2018, Issue 2
Displaying 1-10 of 10 articles from this issue
  • [in Japanese]
    2018 Volume 2018 Issue 2 Pages 1-2
    Published: July 23, 2018
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (509K)
  • Considering the Relationship between Arms and Violence Taking Place within States
    NICHOLAS MARSH
    2018 Volume 2018 Issue 2 Pages 3-21
    Published: July 23, 2018
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Weapons have an intimate relationship with violence – they are tools which multiply human capacity to cause injury. However, the global distribution of weapons does not help to explain the global distribution of violence. High levels of civilian armament are found in some of the most peaceful countries, and conflict initiation occurs in contexts where arms are comparatively scarce. A solution to this apparent paradox can be found by examining weapons acquisition by armed groups operating in the world’s most violent areas; and looking at whether a lack of arms inhibits their capability to carry out their objectives. Armed groups have many potential sources of arms such as trafficking, theft from the state, or donations and so arms may be easily acquired even if are comparatively scarce in the population at large. Arms present in society may not be used to kill, injure, or intimidate if their possessors are not motivated to commit acts of violence.
    Download PDF (481K)
  • ITSUHIRO HAZAMA
    2018 Volume 2018 Issue 2 Pages 23-37
    Published: July 23, 2018
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    This paper aims to practice history from below concerning the disarmament of the pastoral communities of north-eastern Uganda, the Karimojong and the Dodoth. The central government is a major source of so-called illegally transferred guns for East African pastoralists, and state violence has awoken the memories of local residents in terms of their experiences with violence. In the disarmament of the twenty-first century, newly purchased guns are being submitted to the military in order to emancipate captive pastoralists who were taken to and detained in military barracks. Those who will be exchanged for these guns are represented by the pastoralists as homologous with nineteenth century slaves who were caught by outsiders engaged in ivory trade when guns were brought into the Karamoja region. The ritual healing of violence-related illnesses requires a shared history of state violence to make people realize that those who rule always exercise violence against those being ruled and how people have lived as cultural existence. This past reconstruction is currently present and is a process of interweaving personal memories into collective memories. The history of arms transfer and the state control of north-eastern Ugandan pastoralists is the past facts selected trough problem consciousness directed at external violent rule. It is also a composition of facts and current history in the sense of Croce’s historical thought and is a history lived with the body.
    Download PDF (414K)
  • TORU SAGAWA
    2018 Volume 2018 Issue 2 Pages 39-44
    Published: July 23, 2018
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Is there any correlation between arms availability and violence intensification or conflict frequency? It has been reported that the proliferation of automatic rifles has increased the seriousness and frequency of conflicts over the past 40 years in East African pastoral societies. Early literature insisted that pastoral societies have been inundated with uncontrolled youth violence due to new rifles. However, much of the research shared a technologically-deterministic bias. This study focuses on the conflict dynamics of pastoral groups after the proliferation of automatic rifles to examine the relationship between arms availability and violence. I show that the pastoral peoples in the border area of Ethiopia, Kenya, and South Sudan have controlled the extensive use of violence and maintained local order. To examine the relationship between arms availability and violence, it is important to consider the historical processes in place after the proliferation of new arms, the social and cultural contexts in which the groups with new arms are embedded, and people’s agency to control the violence.
    Download PDF (150K)
  • TAMARA ENOMOTO
    2018 Volume 2018 Issue 2 Pages 45-59
    Published: July 23, 2018
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Every time a mass shooting occurs in the United States, there is a call for tighter regulation of civilian firearm possession. Debates often ensue as to whether tighter regulation would lead to a reduction in the number of deaths and injuries caused by firearms. In such debates, present-day Japan is often used as an example of a correlation between tight regulation and a low level of firearmsrelated deaths and injuries. Stringent firearm regulation in Japan is said to date back centuries. It has been claimed that successful precedents which formed the historical and social basis of current Japanese gun control include regulations enacted by Hideyoshi Toyotomi in the late sixteenth century, by the Edo shogunate between the early seventeenth and mid-nineteenth centuries, and by the Meiji government between the late nineteenth century and the early twentieth century. But what if the ‘successful historical precedents’ are not based on historical facts? This article addresses this widely held myth concerning the Japanese case and seeks to contribute to the theory on the relationship between arms availability and armed violence based on the available historical findings.
    Download PDF (247K)
  • Reality and Limitations of the Establishment of the Japanese Total War System
    ATSUSHI KOKETSU
    2018 Volume 2018 Issue 2 Pages 61-72
    Published: July 23, 2018
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Interest in the First World War among the Japanese people was relatively mild during that conflict. In contrast, the Japanese ruling classes perceived the war with shock and a deepening sense of crisis. Thus, party politicians, military officers and bureaucrats had to adjust their interests to prepare for Japan to conduct the sort of “total war” that they observed in WWI. However, they failed to reach a consensus about the total war system, and this conflict continued until the end of the Pacific War in 1945. Even afterward, they were never able to construct a Japanese model of the total war system. The primary reason for this failure was the existence of multiple layers of authority in the Japanese state and the inability of the nation’s elite groups to mutually adjust their own vested interests. In doing so, they put their own particular interests above the needs of the state and the people. In other words, it was the state structure of Japan, with its multiple powerful stakeholders, that comprised the main obstacle to the construction of a total war system. In this article, I will outline the conflicts that accompanied discussions of the creation of a total war system, arguing that these conflicts were at the very core of Japan’s essence as a state. I will conclude that the Japanese model of a total war system was highly deficient, particularly in comparison with those of Europe and the United States.
    Download PDF (214K)
  • HIROSHI TSUDA
    2018 Volume 2018 Issue 2 Pages 73-91
    Published: July 23, 2018
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Anzac Day, which began as a memorial to the First World War’s Gallipoli campaign, is a symbolic occasion in Australia during which the nation state commemorates its losses all wars since. This essay examines the transformation of Australian nationalism from the interwar period through to the 1970s by tracing the national integration through war memory in the context of the ‘British world’: Australians’ perceptions of the imperial wars in which they participated and of their own national history have been defined by their country’s identity as a former British dominion. The nationalist historiography that arose following the Second World War encouraged a trend to emphasise a dichotomy between Australian nationalism and British imperialism. In this conceptualisation, the experiences of the two World Wars are the moment at which Australia’s identity separated from that of the Empire. The analysis on Anzac Day, however, suggests that the imperial identity generated within the ‘community of culture’ prevailed even after the Second World War. The decline of traditional British solidarity coincided with Australia’s gradual decolonisation and the subsequent self-examination that occurred during the ‘new nationalism’ of the 1960s–70s. The emergence of a nationalist historical discourse and the reinterpretation of war narratives reflected this reformation of national identity, which was not as self-evident as supposed in nationalist historiography.
    Download PDF (3467K)
  • Connection between Heinkel and the Japanese Navy
    TAKASHI NISHIO
    2018 Volume 2018 Issue 2 Pages 93-117
    Published: July 23, 2018
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    The purpose of this article is to explore the aero-technology transfer from Germany to Japan that took place during the 1930s through the connection between Heinkel Co., one of the leading aircraft manufacturers in Germany, and the Japanese navy. This article especially focuses on the transfer of Heinkel aircraft and its consistent contribution to the sudden acceleration in Japanese naval aviation technology, particularly in dive bombers.The Japanese Naval Aviation Department firmly intended to attain indigenization of its aircraft design and manufacture as part of the three-year program (1932-34). As the only exception to the plan, the prototype of the navy’s first dive bomber, He50, was developed by Heinkel. Just after Germany’s rearmament in 1935, the Japanese navy provided the German navy with development aid in the form of construction and operation of aircraft carriers as military technical trade, while the Germans exported Heinkel’s latest transport aircraft, He70, and dive bomber, He118, to Japan. The Japanese navy utilized these new aircrafts for its indigenous carrier-based dive bombers. As the United States embargo on arms to Japan was stricter after 1937, the Japanese aircraft industry was forced to depend heavily on Germany as its only major supplier of aircraft technology.
    Download PDF (800K)
  • [in Japanese]
    2018 Volume 2018 Issue 2 Pages 119-112
    Published: July 23, 2018
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (530K)
  • [in Japanese]
    2018 Volume 2018 Issue 2 Pages 123-126
    Published: July 23, 2018
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (491K)
feedback
Top