| . |
ASIAN STUDIES CONFERENCE JAPAN
|
|
| Index
last update 06/20 ASCJ
Executive Committee |
Summer 2000 ASCJ Conference Details 19. Individual Paper Session: International Relations Co-Chairs: Keiko Sueuchi, Meiji Gakuin University and Wenran Jiang, University of Alberta Paper 1: Zha Daojiong, International University of Japan. "Economic Security: Comparing Japanese and Chinese Conceptualizations"
The end of the Cold War has led to a renewed interest in using the notion
of "economic security" to study international political economy
(IPE). In Western IPE research, just what "economic security" consists of
remains a matter of debate. This contrasts with IPE research in East Asia.
First in Japan (since the 1970s) and now China (since the early
1990s), the idea of "economic security" is far less problematic and a
popular research agenda.
This paper first reviews a seeming extension of security studies
into the economic sphere in the Western academia. It
then goes over salient points in Japanese and Chinese notions of "economic
security", compares and contrasts them to identify areas of convergence
and divergence. Finally the paper reviews Japanese and Chinese reactions
to the IMF/World Bankfs handling of the Asian Economic Crisis as an
illustration of the contrast in Western, Japanese, and Chinese approaches
to managing the global political economy at the turn of the century. Paper
2: Takeuchi Hiroki,
University of California, Los Angeles.
"Domestic Factors in the Taiwan Strait Crisis:
Taiwanese Democracy and Chinese Capitalism" As Robert D. Putnam points out in "Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games" (International Organization, 42, 3, Summer 1988), domestic politics and international relations are often entangled. Putnam offers a stimulating theoretical approach to this issue. An interesting question is how domestic politics and international relations interact with each other. This paper attempts to deepen our understanding of how they interact with each other by a case study of the Taiwan Strait crisis of 1996. In 1996, China fired missile at the Taiwan Strait when the presidential election took place in Taiwan. While this crisis, fortunately, ended with avoiding any real armed conflict between them, the event drew much attention all over the world. Although the crisis should be examined within the framework of Sino-Taiwan relations, it is necessary to take two other factors into consideration: such as, (1) domestic politics of both China and Taiwan, and (2) their relations with the US. According
to Thomas C. Schelling (1980) in The Strategy of Conflict, a strategic
move "induces the other to choose in one's favor. It constrains the other's choice by affecting his
expectations" (p. 122). How
do states influence the other's expectations?
How do players in domestic politics influence decision-makers in
international negotiations, and the reverse?
I consider these questions, focusing on the Taiwan Strait Crisis in
1996. First
I discuss the Sino-Taiwan relations in the domain of international
relations. Second, I examine
the impacts of Taiwan's domestic politics on Sino-Taiwan relations and
vice-versa. Third, I discuss
the impacts of China's domestic politics on Sino-Taiwan relations and the
reverse. Fourth, I focus on
the impacts of U.S. policies toward China and Taiwan. Paper
3: Lee Seokwoo,
University of Oxford. "The Legacy of Japanese Colonialism and
the Resolution of Territorial Disputes in East Asia" Since
the conclusion of World War II, over half a century ago, the legacy of Japanese
militarism and colonialism in East Asia has produced many unresolved
conflicts that have divided parts of the region. There are three ongoing
territorial disputes in East Asia in which Japan is a disputant: Against Russia, Japan continues to claim sovereignty over the
Kurile Islands/Northern Territories, against China and Taiwan over the
Senkaku Islands/Diao-yu-tai/Tiao-yu-tai, and against Korea, mainly South
Korea, over Liancourt Rocks/Tokdo/Takeshima. Deep-rooted historical and
emotional animosity between Japan and the other disputants is most
certainly an impediment to the resolution of the territorial disputes in
East Asia. Although
the claimants for ownership of the three Islands in dispute often attempt
to marshal support from ancient historical sources, it cannot be denied
that much of the uncertainty surrounding territorial demarcations is a
by-product of the post-World War II boundary decisions and territorial
dispositions. All the three controversies in East Asia are not isolated
territorial disputes between East Asian countries, but a reflection of the
uncertain legacies of post-war decision making. Since
the final disposition of territories in East Asia following the conclusion
of World War II was effected by the San Francisco Peace Treaty with Japan
of 1951, it should be placed in a pivotal position as one approaches
territorial disputes in East Asia. Careful interpretation of the San
Francisco Peace Treaty and its implementation can clarify the nature of
the disputes. It is equally important to reckon with subsequent events and
the behaviour of interested countries. Paper 4: Robert Eldridge, Suntory Foundation. "The Amami Reversion Movement: Its Origins, Meaning, and Impact" At
one minute after midnight on December 25, 1953, the
Amami Islands (formerly
a part of Kagoshima Prefecture) in southwestern
Japan were returned to Japanese administration
after being under U.S. military
control for eight years. Literally
a "Christmas Present," the return
of the islands was welcomed by the Japanese government and in by particular the 219,000 islanders and almost 200,000 Amami residents on the Japanese
mainland. Despite being an
important event in postwar U.S.-Japan
relations and having a great impact on America's Okinawa policy,
the return of the Amami
Islands remains for the most part unexamined.
Likewise little research
exists on the Amami reversion movement itself, despite its clearly having
had an impact on the policy-making decisions of both the Japanese and U.S.
Governments. Fortunately, however, original documents from the
reversion movement are preserved in the Amami Islands and several
volumes of memoirs and
remembrances, written by participants in the movement, also exist
shedding light on the activities of the various reversion groups.
Moreover, adding to the different
and sometimes colorful viewpoints, these accounts were written by
individuals in groups in
Amami as well as support groups on the Japanese mainland, by those of conservative as well as Communist political persuasion, and leader
and follower alike. The purpose of this presentation, which will combine the fields of political and diplomatic history, Japanese history, Japan studies, Okinawa studies, and studies on social movements, is to introduce in the time allowed the origins and activities of the Amami reversion movement, clarifying where necessary the different trains of thought in the movement, and suggesting what the meaning, significance, and impact of the movement was. The presentation is based on fieldwork done in the Amami Islands, as well as research trips to Kagoshima, Tokyo, and Washington. It is to form a chapter or two in a future book in Japanese on the return of the Amami Islands and U.S.-Japan relations, and perhaps an individual article as well.
|
