詳細検索結果
以下の条件での結果を表示する: 検索条件を変更
クエリ検索: "クネセト"
27件中 1-20の結果を表示しています
  • ―「超正統派」のポリティクスをめぐって
    臼杵 陽
    日本比較政治学会年報
    2002年 4 巻 213-236
    発行日: 2002/06/25
    公開日: 2010/09/09
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 鈴木 啓之
    日本中東学会年報
    2018年 34 巻 2 号 123-127
    発行日: 2019/01/15
    公開日: 2020/04/01
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 宗教と国際政治
    臼杵 陽
    国際政治
    1999年 1999 巻 121 号 95-107,L11
    発行日: 1999/05/21
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    This article focuses on one of the most controversial questions of politics and religion in Israel, that is to say, on the controversial dispute about conversions to Judaism. These is controversy between Orthodox Jews, who have monopolized such Jewish religious matters as conversions and marriage ceremonies in Israel, and Reform and Conservative Jews who have not been officially authorized to carry out conversions and perform weddings in Israel. While Reform and Conservative Jews are the majority among Diaspora Jewry, especially in the United State, they are a minority among Israeli Jews. Reform and Conservative Jews in the United State are entitled to immigrate to Israel as Jews in accordance with the Law of Return, but they are not recognized as “true Jews” by Orthodox Jews in Israel. The Reform and Conservative Jews are forced to convert again to Orthodox Judaism if they are to enjoy their religious life as equals to the Orthodox brethren in Israel.
    In January 1998, Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu appointed then Finance Minister Yaakov Ne'eman as chairman of a committee to try and seek a compromise solution among the three major denominations of Judaism (Orthodox, Reform and Conservative) on the question of conversions of Jews and on other religious matters in Israel. The debate of the Ne'eman committee, which was composed of representatives of the three denominations, poured oil on fire with regard to this decisive question of “Who is a Jew?”, that is to say, who has authority over the question of the definition of a Jew in Israel.
    First, this paper analyzes the monopoly enjoyed by Orthodox Jews in official religious institutions such as Ministry of Religion, the Chief Rabbinate, Rabbi Courts, and Local Religious Councils in light of the relationship between state and religion. Second, the paper discusses, in the context of the relationship between religion and politics, the political roles of a Sephardi orthodox religious party, “Shas (Sephardi Torah Guardians)”, which has tried to propose legislation establishing a conversion law and a local council law to the Israeli Parliament (Knesset). Third, the paper examines the recommendation of the Ne'eman committee and its repercussion among the concerned parties in Israel and the United States. A preliminary unsigned copy of the commitee's recommendation in November 1998 proposed to set up a joint institute for conversion studies at which Orthodox, Conservative and Reform rabbis would all teach, but actual conversions would be performed only by Orthodox rabbinical courts.
    In conclusion, since the recommendation of the Ne'eman committee was vehemently refused by the Orthodox-controlled Chief Rabbinate Council, despite the approval of the recommendation by the Knesset, Reform and Conservative movements continued to struggle for the plurality of Judaism in Israel and against the Orthodox monopoly. They petitioned the High Court of Justice to instruct the appointment of Reform and Conservative rabbis in Local Religious Councils.
  • 池田 明史
    中東レビュー
    2019年 6 巻 17-22
    発行日: 2019年
    公開日: 2019/05/30
    ジャーナル フリー HTML
  • London and Ann Arbor, MI: Pluto Press, 2004, ix+342pp.
    立山 良司
    アジア経済
    2006年 47 巻 2 号 93-97
    発行日: 2006/02/15
    公開日: 2023/01/11
    ジャーナル フリー
  • ソ連の遺産か?
    鶴見 太郎
    ユダヤ・イスラエル研究
    2017年 31 巻 25-
    発行日: 2017年
    公開日: 2020/10/29
    ジャーナル オープンアクセス
  • ―商店街の事例から―
    飛奈 裕美
    アジア・アフリカ地域研究
    2008年 7 巻 2 号 214-237
    発行日: 2008/03/31
    公開日: 2018/12/05
    ジャーナル フリー

    The aim of this article is to describe how Israeli non-military occupation policies cause problems among Palestinians and how the Palestinians tackle these problems through a case study of Palestinian merchants in the Old City of Jerusalem. Many studies of Israeli occupation and Palestinian resistance have focused on their military aspect. On the other hand, researches on East Jerusalem have generally examined Israeli occupation policies, particularly the policy of “Judaization,” and their impacts on “the Final Status” negotiation in the future, apart from the context of the occupation and the resistance.

    Making use of fieldwork conducted in East Jerusalem by the author, this article will describe the following:

    1. Judaization of Jerusalem has been promoted not only by making the population balance desirable for Jewish Israelis and undesirable for the Palestinians, and confiscating as much land belonging to the Palestinians as possible for Jewish citizens, but also by eliminating “non-Jewish” social, historical, economic, and cultural factors.

    2. The problems of living under occupation are deeply connected to the daily lives of the Palestinians, such as tax problems and settlement activities by Jewish Israelis. These problems are caused by the legal and administrative systems of the occupier.

    3. The reactions of the Palestinians to the problems are also expressed within the occupier’s legal and administrative systems. However, the Palestinians are not subordinate who just obey the occupier’s systems. They re-interpret and utilize the occupier’s legal and administrative systems in order to survive the occupation and keep living in East Jerusalem.

  • 池田 明史
    中東レビュー
    2020年 7 巻 14-19
    発行日: 2020年
    公開日: 2020/03/27
    ジャーナル フリー HTML
  • 女性の軍隊経験の語りから
    澤口 右樹
    日本中東学会年報
    2019年 35 巻 2 号 33-70
    発行日: 2020/01/15
    公開日: 2021/03/31
    ジャーナル フリー
    This study analyzes the relationship between the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and women. Institutional gender equality is being achieved in the IDF because of a universal conscription system, social networks developed by military personnel, and the cultural function of the IDF. The context of sexual minorities in contemporary Israel also influences the IDF’s gender structure. At the same time, the IDF maintains a male-dominated gender structure because of occupational limitations within the military, obstacles to obtaining civil leadership roles following military service, and gender-cultural beliefs. The IDF also faces unique complications, including the political context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the influence of Jewish Orthodoxy. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict encourages the IDF to represent female soldiers as symbols of gender equality in order to obtain international legitimacy. Israel’s occupation policy of West Bank and Gaza Strip also undermines women’s status because the IDF sees male combatants as ideal soldiers. Stemming from Judaism, religious groups have caused the IDF to establish gender segregation. Finally, Judaism sometimes encourages women to join the military based on nationalistic motivations. This gender structure influences women’s gender norms. Through survey interviews with women who served in the IDF, military service was found to function as an opportunity for women’s empowerment. This study found differences in women’s sense of empowerment depending on their social class and occupation in the military. However, this article also points out that this empowerment was restricted by the military’s gender-dichotomous norms, in which “strength” is seen as masculine and “weakness” is viewed as feminine. These norms were reproduced in the women’s assumptions about members of sexual minorites. To conclude, the achievement of institutional gender equality in the IDF strengthens and reproduces existing gender norms in contemporary Israel.
  • 鈴木 均, 岡田 江平, 石黒 大岳, 土屋 一樹, ダルウィッシュ ホサム, 池田 明史, 渡邊 祥子, 内藤 正典
    中東レビュー
    2015年 2 巻 2-42
    発行日: 2015年
    公開日: 2019/12/07
    ジャーナル フリー HTML
  • 友成 九十九
    工業化学雑誌
    1935年 38 巻 2 号 150-156
    発行日: 1935/02/05
    公開日: 2011/09/02
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 立山 良司
    中東レビュー
    2015年 2 巻 103-121
    発行日: 2015年
    公開日: 2019/12/07
    ジャーナル フリー HTML

    The American Jewish community as a whole still remains very much supportive of Israel’s policies. Most American mainstream Jewish organizations and their leaders have hardly criticized Israel’s position regarding the occupation, settlements, and the peace process. But over the last ten years or so, different views and opinions have become more visible in the American Jewish community, as represented by J Street, a “pro-Israel and pro-peace” lobby. What has brought about this diversification in the American Jewish community over their attitude toward Israel’s policies?

    Many opinion surveys indicate that younger American Jews have become more critical of Israel’s policies with regard to the Palestine question and the peace process. This may be attributed to a shift in identity among young American Jews. Older American Jews tend to see Israel as democratic, progressive and peace-seeking, etc. In addition, they perceive Israel as a safe haven for Jews. But younger Jews draw from memories and impressions scene in recent events, such as the First and Second Intifada, and the military confrontations with Palestinian groups based in Gaza, all of which are perceived as morally and politically more complex than the wars Israel fought between 1948 and 1974.

    Communities in the Jewish diaspora try to influence the policies of their homeland in order to protect their identity and sets of values. While the American Jewish community is still strongly committed to liberal democratic values, its counterpart in Israel has leaned toward the political right and toward ethno-religious nationalism. The diffusion of identities and sets of values in both communities may bring about further shifts in the relations between the two communities.

  • 金城 美幸
    ユダヤ・イスラエル研究
    2019年 33 巻 89-
    発行日: 2019年
    公開日: 2022/11/01
    ジャーナル オープンアクセス
  • 三船 毅, 前田 幸男, 日野 愛郎, 中井 遼
    選挙研究
    2016年 32 巻 2 号 120-129
    発行日: 2016年
    公開日: 2019/12/01
    ジャーナル オープンアクセス
  • 清水 学
    中東レビュー
    2020年 7 巻 115-137
    発行日: 2020年
    公開日: 2020/03/27
    ジャーナル フリー HTML

    India’s status in the world has been elevated since the beginning of this century, supported by its accelerated economic growth. In order to grow from a regional to world power, the foreign policy of a nation needs to be adapted to the new circumstances. In this context, the new relations between India and the Middle East attract our attention. We must also consider the repercussions of domestic politics on the subject, particularly since the advent of the BJP government under Narendra Modi in 2014.

    Ever since the BJP government came to power in 2014, India has begun to question the assumptions of political principles such as “secularism,” established under the Congress party government since the country’s independence in 1947. The new orientations could be termed as a paradigm change or a watershed in the political framework in the history of independent India. In the domestic field, the BJP government challenges the Indian “secularism” and pursues a sort of “ethnic democracy,” a concept introduced in Israel. Concerning its foreign policies India is gradually discarding its use of the traditional non-alignment principle and pursues a combination of multiple alliances taking into account the rising influence of China.

    The ruling party, BJP, is the political wing of the RSS, an influential Hindu right-wing ss organization promoting Hinduism as the national identity of the Indian nation. The BJP and RSS particularly target the Muslim community in their campaign to promote “Hindutva,” a Hinduized national integration concept. The Indian “secularism” traditionally emphasizes equal consideration of every religious community in India. However, the Modi government in 2019 annulled the constitutional clauses that guaranteed special allowances to the Jammu and Kashmir state with Muslim majority and introduced an amendment to the citizenship law which excluded Muslims while considering granting citizenship to illegal refugees.

    Under these circumstances, the Modi government pursues three different policies toward the Middle East. The first policy is to promote trade and investment, primarily from the viewpoint of mutual economic interests. India’s dealings with the Gulf countries and East Africa are typical cases where the Modi government employs this policy. The second policy is to enhance India’s regional dominance and neutralize any interventions from neighboring Muslim countries in India’s domestic policies concerning the Muslim citizens in the country. The third policy is a newly emerged special relationship with Israel, which has strategic, technological, and ideological implications in the reorganization of power structure in the South West Asia.

  • 清水 学
    中東レビュー
    2017年 4 巻 42-53
    発行日: 2017年
    公開日: 2019/11/12
    ジャーナル フリー HTML

    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.

  • 現代の安全保障
    木村 修三
    国際政治
    1979年 1979 巻 63 号 55-68,L3
    発行日: 1979/10/15
    公開日: 2010/09/01
    ジャーナル フリー
    (1) Israel is not a militaristic state although she is a model of ‘nation-in- arms’ in the sense that military defense occupies the center of her people's life.
    (2) The reason why Israel is ‘nation-in-arms’ is due to the fact that she was surrounded by hostile countries which do not recognize her legitimacy as a state, and that she has actually fought four times with them in the past. In addition to this, holocaust analogy and ‘Masada complex’ which are latent in the psychology of Israelis, highten terror in their heart.
    (3) But, up to now, Israel has never faced the critical situation in which she could be actually annihilated. Rather, she has always won overwhelming victory in the past wars, with the only exception of the Yom Kippur War. At the same time, it is an undeniable fact that the terror of annihilation has been utilized for the justification of her intransigent policy.
    (4) Israel has tried to persuade the Arab states for their recognition of Israeli's legitimacy as a state, while totally rejecting the wish of Palestinians for the establishment of their independent state. After the end of Six-Day-War, Israel has made every efforts to secure her security on the basis of tei ritorialism by bringing out the conception of ‘defensible borders’.
    (5) If Israel wishes to secure the true security, it might be indispensable for her to recognize the Palestinians' legitimate rights of self-determination through peaceful settlement, in stead of insisting the conception of security on the basis of territorialism.
  • アリヤー, 入植, およびセファラディームとの関係を中心に
    臼杵 陽
    オリエント
    1993年 36 巻 2 号 67-82
    発行日: 1993年
    公開日: 2010/03/12
    ジャーナル フリー
    The aim of the article is to survey Jewish immigration to Palestine (Aliya) from Yemen, Yemenite settlement in Silwan near the old city of Jerusalem, and their separation from the Sephardi rabbinate in Jerusalem. The article relies upon recent studies on this subject written in Hebrew.
    The first mass Aliya of Yemenites in 1882 (called 'Aliyat Tarmab according to the Jewish calendar), which was coincident with Bilu's Aliya, that is, the first Zionist Aliya, has been ignored in Zionist's historiography. Recently academic endeavors have been made to explore early history of Yemenites in Jerusalem before World War I, as well as Old Yishuv in general.
    Yemenites immigrated to the Holy Land, motivated mainly by the messianic aspirations, but found themselves disappointed in difficult situations in Jerusalem. Most of them remained too poor to find their accommodations. Israel Frumkin (1850-1914), editor of ha-Vatzelet, the second Hebrew magazine in Palestine, gave assistance to poor Yemenite immigrants so as to settle them in an Arab village, Silwan (Shiloah in Jewish history), which had been the main community center of Yemenites until the Arab Revolt of 1936.
    When Yemenites immigrated, they were under the patronage of the Sephardi rabbinate which was recognized as the sole Jewish representative, millet, in Jerusalem by the Ottoman authorities. But later they differed with the Sephardi rabbinate on problems such as Haluka (charitable funds from abroad to Palestine) and Balad Askari (Tax for exemption from conscription), finally to separate as de facto independent kolel (a Jewish community in Palestine from a particularcountry or town) from the Sephardi rabbinate in 1908.
  • ―第二次レバノン戦争(二〇〇六年)とガザ戦争(二〇〇八/〇九年)におけるイスラエルのエア・パワー―
    溝渕 正季
    国際政治
    2014年 2014 巻 178 号 178_73-178_87
    発行日: 2014/11/10
    公開日: 2015/11/30
    ジャーナル フリー
    Since 1903, the year when Wright brothers made a success of building the world’s first successful airplane and making the first controlled, powered and sustained heavier-than-air human flight, airpower has developed astoundingly as an essential component in modern warfare. Up until today, it has been demonstrated by several modern wars. At the same time, however, this was not always the case. In unconventional warfare (or asymmetric warfare, “Non-Trinitarian Warfare,” “Fourth Generation Warfare,”or “War amongst the People”), airpower was not able to play a significant role, and sometimes it even caused a negative impact. In these wars, since the opponents usually disappear among “people,” it is always very challenging to find and attack them without causing any collateral damage. Taking up the Israel’s airpower in the Second Lebanon War (July/August 2006) and the Gaza War (December 2008/January 2009)—these are the two most recent wars in which airpower was employed on the non-state armed group—as the case studies, this article discusses the following questions: Is airpower really incompetent for unconventional warfare? If not so, what would be the essential role for airpower? What airpower actually can and cannot do?
    Based on the rigorous analysis of the wars in Lebanon and Gaza, the article leads the following three conclusions: Firstly, the impact which airpower could cause to warfare is limited. As in conventional wisdom, while airpower is an important and powerful arm of military force, airpower alone does not lead victory for modern wars. This is true for at least unconventional warfare, in which the enemy has no specific “center of gravity” and blends into the urban, mountainous or forested terrain, as in cases of Lebanon and Gaza. In addition, if they did not have enough information for the opponents, airpower could rarely give significant damage. Although it is the case, the collateral damage will be ineluctable if the opponent disappears in the crowd. Secondly, however, airpower is not always incompetent in conventional warfare under certain conditions. There are two key factors: (1) interoperability between the air force and the ground force, and (2) intelligence about the enemy. As in case of Gaza, when these two factors were fully established in pre-war period, it is possible to cause heavy damage to the enemy. Ensuring the qualitative military edge over the enemy is also important as well. Thirdly, it is essential to minimize the collateral damage. No matter how the cutting-edge military technology is overwhelming or the joint training exercise and the intelligence about the enemy are adequate, however, it is almost equivalent with losing the game if there was significant collateral damage. In case of Gaza, IDF was successfully bearing down the enemy physically, but too much collateral damage turns such a “victory” into “defeat.” In any of these wars, Israel’s security environment never been improved in the history.
    It is certain that airpower will keep playing one of the important roles in war given the technological progress in recent years. At the same time, they will face with a dilemma about the cost effectiveness between “rising war expenditure” and “acceptable level of cost.” Just by looking at the current situation in Syria (as of June in 2014), it is clear that unconventional warfare is still happening and will happen in the future. This leads the importance of further research for both direct and indirect role by airpower going forward.
  • 地中海世界の共食と儀式殺人のフォークロア
    蓼沼 理絵子
    ユダヤ・イスラエル研究
    2014年 28 巻 99-108
    発行日: 2014年
    公開日: 2017/04/07
    ジャーナル オープンアクセス
feedback
Top