|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
118356
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Wasington, DC, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2013.
|
| Description |
xxi,395p.hbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:2/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 057148 | 355.033/SWA 057148 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
| 058221 | 355.033/SWA 058221 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
092261
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
How can Japan put its past behind? Scholars, journalists, and activists frequently argue that Japan cannot solve its "history problem" unless it follows West Germany's lead in offering contrition for World War II violence. Into this debate, Jennifer Lind's Sorry States: Apologies in International Politics offers an original and provocative contribution. Lind argues that while countries should acknowledge past atrocities, frequent public apologies can be domestically polarizing and diplomatically counterproductive. Sorry States outlines a theory of remembrance and threat perception and tests it in a comparative study of Japanese-South Korean and Franco-German relations after World War II. Its methods, data, and findings will interest not only East Asianists, but also scholars of international reconciliation and security studies more broadly. This roundtable presents three critical essays in addition to a response by the author. They discuss the mechanisms through which historical memory influences perceptions of threat, the relative weight of ideational versus material factors in threat perception, and whether changes in international norms and economic interdependence may increasingly pressure countries to confront past violence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
145762
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
After months of contentious debate, Japan's parliament, called the Diet, in mid-September 2015 finally passed the Shinzo Abe government's package of eleven bills on security.1 This legislation, along with the revised U.S.–Japan Defense Cooperation Guidelines of April 2015, will transform the legal and institutional framework for Japanese defense policy and U.S.–Japan security relations.2 Japanese proponents of this transformation have argued the changes are necessary to make bilateral security cooperation more seamless to respond effectively to new regional and global security challenges and to contribute more proactively to international security affairs. Opponents, however, have charged that the legislation illegitimately hollows out Article 9 of Japan's constitution—which outlaws war as a means to settle international disputes—and could embroil Japan in misguided wars launched by the United States.3 Chinese and Korean critics of the legislation have echoed these criticisms by claiming that Japan is now remilitarizing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
070259
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Santa Monica, Rand Corporation, 1995.
|
| Description |
xviii, 102p.
|
| Standard Number |
083302308X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 037852 | 952.049/MOC 037852 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
078331
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Boulder, Lynne Rienner, 2007.
|
| Description |
vii, 347p.
|
| Standard Number |
9781588264831
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 052515 | 327.52/BER 052515 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
077795
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2007.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines whether recent changes in the security environment, including North Korea's nuclear test of October 2006, are driving Japan to consider the acquisition of its own nuclear deterrent. It argues that a combination of three factors have thus far sustained Japan's nuclear restraint: (1) national identity as a non-nuclear weapon state, (2) commitment to global nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament, and (3) realist security calculations. Partial changes in these factors have provoked in Japan a new round of debate about the nuclear question that can be grouped around three general options: (1) move toward a nuclear weapons option, (2) robust conventional defense and a stronger alliance with the United States, and (3) a more assertive non-nuclear diplomacy. The article concludes that the most likely Japanese course for the time being is to strengthen the alliance with the United States and improve conventional defense capabilities, including missile defense. Although the taboo about public discussions of the nuclear weapons option may be weakening, Japan will continue to forgo that option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
126858
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
001132
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Washington, D C, Brookings Institution, 1997.
|
| Description |
xx, 216p.
|
| Standard Number |
0815758006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 040656 | 355.0310973/MOC 040656 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|