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: "安藤太郎" 実業家
5件中 1-5の結果を表示しています
  • 小玉 敏子
    日本英学史研究会研究報告
    1965年 1965 巻 33 号 1-10
    発行日: 1965/12/04
    公開日: 2010/11/17
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 森川 隆司
    英学史研究
    1978年 1979 巻 11 号 77-106
    発行日: 1978/07/01
    公開日: 2009/09/16
    ジャーナル フリー
  • 伊藤 孝治
    アメリカ研究
    2012年 46 巻 33-50
    発行日: 2012/03/25
    公開日: 2021/11/06
    ジャーナル フリー

    In March 1897, the Hawaiian government refused entry to Japanese emigrants. That refusal led to a confrontation between Japan and the Republic of Hawaii. Because the United States had started to commit itself to the annexation of Hawaii however, the rivalry between Japan and the Republic of Hawaii transformed into enmity between Japan and the United States.

    The primary purpose of this paper is to analyze the Japan-U.S. confrontation at the turn of the century over Hawaii from the perspective of Japan’s pursuit of national prestige and America’s promotion of overseas expansion. This viewpoint has been insufficiently addressed in reports of the relevant literature. Rivalry with the United States over Hawaii and annexation of the islands as its consequence were the price Japan paid for its national prestige. Confrontation with the United States over Hawaii was an unintended result to Japan.

    From March 1897, Japan had had no intention of occupying Hawaii or challenging the supremacy of the United States over the islands. Japan sought merely to emulate Western powers and achieve equal status to that which other countries had enjoyed. The primary objective was national prestige. When its citizens were refused entry into Hawaii, the Japanese government demanded indemnity, even resorting to the dispatch of a warship. When the United States attempted to annex Hawaii, it protested diplomatically but vehemently against the effort. Finally, in return for approval of America’s annexation of Hawaii, the Japanese government demanded that the United States guarantee its vested rights and most-favored-nation treatment. It was important to the Japanese government that Japanese emigrants in Hawaii be able to enjoy equal status to those of citizens of the Western powers, without suffering discrimination.

    Although Japan’s vigorous behavior related to Hawaii was primarily undertaken for national prestige, the behavior was mistakenly regarded as a severe threat by the United States, which valued the geographical position of Hawaii in the context of commerce and geopolitics. The United States adopted the annexation of Hawaii as a measure to meet the threat posed by Japan. The Japanese government persisted strenuously in maintaining its national prestige as a great power. Thereby, it spoiled its friendship with the United States contrary to its intentions, even producing the unintended result of promoting America’s annexation of Hawaii. Confrontation with the United States over Hawaii and annexation of the islands as its consequence were the price Japan paid to assert its national prestige.

  • 古賀 広志
    情報経営
    2022年 83 巻
    発行日: 2022年
    公開日: 2023/02/16
    会議録・要旨集 フリー
  • 村嶋 英治
    アジア太平洋討究
    2018年 33 巻 153-204
    発行日: 2018/03/20
    公開日: 2022/10/27
    研究報告書・技術報告書 フリー

    The first part of this paper was published in March 2016 (No. 26 issue of this journal) and its second part was published in October 2017 (No. 29 issue of the same journal).

    In the third part, the following topics will be treated. (1) Introduction of a newly found memoir of Omoda Rihei (a member of the first Japanese emigrant to Siam in January 1895), (2) On the 14th September 1895, Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs placed all Japanese residents in Siam under the protection of France. How Japanese residents in Siam and Siamese Government reacted against such a imprudent decision of Japanese Government. (3) Iwamoto Chizuna’s effort to establish Japanese consulate in Bangkok in order to make Japanese residents exempt from the status of French Protégé. (4) Iwamoto’s abortive enterprise to establish a big Japan-Siam trade company by mobilizing the capital of a large number of investors in the second half of 1896.

feedback
Top