Search

The article presents the conference paper titled "Explaining Allied Attitudes Toward U.S. Missile Defenses: Canada, Japan, and Britain," prepared for the "Annual Conference of the International Studies Association" in Honolulu, Hawaii. It offers to help fill part of the gap in the literature with respect to the attitudes of U.S. allies. It investigates such developments in a comparative manner with special focus to Canada, Japan, and Great Britain. It also probes the central factors in the national debates of the countries.

This paper examines what I term the ?second face of security.? Specifically, a state?s unilateral choice of arms, allies, or appeasement can strengthen the political power of some societal and economic actors in foreign states while others will be weakened politically and economically. The domestic winners will then apply pressure on the government to support their preferred grand strategy. In contrast, the more traditional ?first face of security? entails direct attempts to create security by influencing other governments to change their foreign policy. This is accomplished through military or economic statecraft such as the threat or use of military force, economic sanctions, foreign aid, or tariffs. In this paper I examine the intent of Britain?s appeasement policy towards Germany and Japan in the late 1930s. ..PAT.-Conference Proceeding [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will focus on how five nations-Portugal, the Netherlands, Britain, the United States, and Japan-achieved trade dominance by devising technologies, social and financial institutions, and markets to enhance their access to raw materials.Through ecological and economic explanation of resource extraction and production, the author reveals globalization as the result of the progressive extension of systematically integrated material processes across cumulatively greater space. Drawing from extensive historical research into how economic and environmental dynamics interacted in the extraction of different materials in the Amazon, especially in the development of the iron mine of Carajas, the author also illustrates the profound connection between global dominance and control of natural resources. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reviews the current global context of foreign aid,particularly the distribution of development aid among the primary national donors -- the United States, Japan, Germany, Great Britain, and France. The chapter examines the stated objectives of these programs and the link between foreign aid and very differing foreign-policy agendas. A central assumption is that foreign aid is a reflection of donors' broader objectives in world politics. By examining both the quantity and "quality"of current aid programs, we gain a better comparative grasp of the global ambitions of the world's major industrial powers. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 1990s has been called the age of apologies due to the escalation of political apologies beginning in this time period. Apologies by governments include the British apology to the Irish and the Maoris, Japan's apology to the Korean comfort women, and the apology of the United States to the native Hawaiians. These apologies are deemed to be part of reconciliation processes for past wrongs. It is notable, however, that official acts of forgiveness rarely accompany these apologies. In fact, forgiveness is not something that nation-states or their representatives seem to do. Why not? What possibilities exist for nation-states to forgive, as part of reconciliation and justice-seeking processes? What would it look like and what meaning would it have? Drawing from literature on state apologies and on forgiveness in societal reconciliation processes, a framework is developed for forgiveness in international relations. Historical and current cases are used as illustrative examples to demonstrate the application of the framework. Five main issues guide inquiry. How does this merciful act of forgiveness fit with the primary requirements of justice in dealing with past wrongs, as evidenced by the institutionalization of war crimes tribunals and truth commissions? How can the collective nation-state forgive on behalf of individual victims? Is forgiveness applicable to inter-state as well as intra-state processes? What is the strategic value of forgiveness for nation-states? Finally, what are the possibilities of unilateral forgiveness? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a comparative study between Japan and Great Britain in relation to citizenship, colonial past and immigration policy. It says that the reason for comparing both countries is that they are both anomalies among other liberal democracies by having weak notions of citizenship. Accordingly, a large number of immigrants in Japan and Great Britain originate from former colonies and these immigrants were wanted as part of the labor force.