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 2024, Issue 1
Displaying 1-8 of 8 articles from this issue
  • Focusing on Loan Guarantees under the Defense Production Act
    ISAO SUTO
    2024 Volume 2024 Issue 1 Pages 1-23
    Published: January 31, 2024
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    The Penn Central Railroad was established in 1968 after the merger of the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central Railroad. In June 1970, however, the company filed for re-organisation, which at that time was the largest corporate failure in U.S. history. The mainline railroads were subject to enduring regulation and protection by the Interstate Commerce Commission. Considering a request for aid from Penn Central, the Nixon administration launched a bailout programme under the Defense Production Act, which was passed during the Korean War. Nonetheless, it faced opposition from Congress and was unsuccessful in securing a loan guarantee from the Federal Reserve Bank. Some have argued that Penn Central’s rescue was a precursor to ‘too big to fail’ or ‘systemic risk’ policies. This paper verifies these assertions by re-evaluating the events that led to the Penn Central Railroad bailout programme. First, the railroad’s ‘bankruptcy’ was made possible by a unique historical context. Second, the Federal Reserve not only indirectly rescued operating companies by providing commercial bank loans to avoid a commercial paper market collapse but also considered the use of direct loans as fail-safe. Thus, the Penn Central Railroad bailout was a failure. Nevertheless, it was the catalyst for subsequent discussions of the bailouts of Lockheed (1971), Chrysler (1979), and even Continental Illinois Bank (1984).
    Download PDF (1269K)
  • TETSUYA SAHARA
    2024 Volume 2024 Issue 1 Pages 25-49
    Published: January 31, 2024
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    The Western support of the Israeli war in Gaza has brought about dispute over the political hypocrisy of the leaders. The marked difference between their attitude to the Russian atrocities in Ukraine and those to the Israeli in Gaza may undermine the rule of law in the international affairs. Moreover, the antiwar activities of the Jewish citizen have raised question over the validity of the equation of the Antizionism with the Antisemitism. The Western approval of the Israeli massacre of the Palestine citizen as “collateral damage” even hint their racist preoccupations. To sum up, the Israeli war has jeopardized the liberal principles of democracy and human rights as a whole.
    Download PDF (1080K)
  • TETSUYA SAHARA
    2024 Volume 2024 Issue 1 Pages 51-79
    Published: January 31, 2024
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    The Israeli war on Gaza has resulted in very heavy civilian casualties. Some people have called the war “horrific,” the “deadliest,” or a “humanitarian catastrophe-tsunami.” Others claim that it is a genocide. In order to grasp the extent of the war’s brutality, this article compared it with three cases that are recognized as genocides either by international institutions or Western authorities: the Herero and Nama massacre (1904–5), the Armenian deportation (1915–6), and the fall of Srebrenica (1995). The analysis found many common aspects among the four cases. The scale of violence of the recent Israeli war has already exceeded the initial stages of ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and is becoming an immense ethnic cleansing comparable with the Armenian case. In light of the bellicose discriminatory discourses of the Israeli leaders, systematic destruction of civilian targets, forced starvation, and rapidly deteriorating hygiene conditions in Gaza, there are ample grounds to believe that the war on Gaza will develop into a full-fledged genocide if unchecked.
    Download PDF (653K)
  • The Trend of “Domestic Production” of Defense Equipment from the 1950s to the 1970s
    SHIN-ICHI SHIRATO
    2024 Volume 2024 Issue 1 Pages 81-108
    Published: January 31, 2024
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    We will examine not only what kind of Japan–U.S. relationship was built through the strengthening of the defense capabilities of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces from the end of World War II to the 1970s but also how Japanese industry groups responded to it during that period. The rearmament of Japan by the Self-Defense Forces was carried out under the strong control of the United States, based on the Japan–U.S. Security Treaty. In addition, the beginning of the Cold War and the Korean War caused a major shift in the U.S. occupation policy. The United States initially provided many arms for free for the creation of the Self-Defense Forces and for the enhancement of defense equipment, but to restrain the outflow of money, it switched from a policy of free to paid armament. In response to this policy shift towards strengthening self-defense capabilities, Keizaidantai Rengokai(Keidanren) and Nihon Heiki Kogyokai tried to achieve economic growth and acquire more advanced technology by taking advantage of the special demand and the business opportunity of building up the defense capabilities of the Self-Defense Forces. The “Domestic Production” of arms was important for these groups. However, even though it is called “domestic production”, advanced technologies used in fighter planes and other equipment were mainly licensed, including important parts like black boxes. Therefore, Japan was a long way off from technological independence.
    Download PDF (628K)
  • Between Independence and Alliance
    ATSUSHI KOKETSU
    2024 Volume 2024 Issue 1 Pages 109-130
    Published: January 31, 2024
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    The purpose of this paper is to discuss the development process of the Japanese defense industry during the Cold War in relation to the issue of arms transfers. After World War II, the U.S. promoted the lending of surplus weapons to Japan, and at the same time, it hoped for the revival of Japan’s independent defense industry, albeit with restrictions. In Japanese domestic politics, a conflict emerged between the Shigeru Yoshida Cabinet’s vision of light armaments and the rearmament plans of those in the defense industry. Thus, the issue of rearmament became an important political issue in Cold War Japan, and at the same time, also conflict over restrictions on the defense industry and its independence influenced the political situation. The conflicts and confrontations over the revival of the defense industry and demands for arms transfers that occurred during the Cold War have continued to have a strong influence on Japan-U.S. relations and the nature of Japan’s national security policy to the present day. This paper analyzes the above issues in light of the controversy over the theory of self-defense and the Japan-U.S. alliance.
    Download PDF (603K)
  • [in Japanese]
    2024 Volume 2024 Issue 1 Pages 131-134
    Published: January 31, 2024
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (944K)
  • [in Japanese]
    2024 Volume 2024 Issue 1 Pages 135-139
    Published: January 31, 2024
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (906K)
  • [in Japanese]
    2024 Volume 2024 Issue 1 Pages 141
    Published: January 31, 2024
    Released on J-STAGE: January 21, 2025
    JOURNAL OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (814K)
feedback
Top