| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
140775
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper sheds light on a relatively underexplored aspect of Japan’s recent security changes by examining the subnational level where the impact has been far-reaching. It focuses on Japan’s maritime frontier zone: the Yaeyama Islands located at the southwestern end of the Japanese archipelago and administered as part of Okinawa Prefecture. It argues that while Yaeyama militarization has been primarily a national response to China’s portrayed assertiveness in the East China Sea, it has also been facilitated by the strategic actions of local political elites, in cooperation with sympathetic extra-local forces. Political elites from two islands, Yonaguni and Ishigaki, have been motivated primarily by diverging material and ideational factors. Yonaguni elites have viewed militarization largely through the prism of “compensation politics.” Their counterparts in Ishigaki have been driven by more ideological objectives, seeking militarization for deterrence purposes and otherwise transforming the island into a rightist breeding ground in defence of Japanese territory. Yaeyama militarization has not only diminished enthusiasm for seeking autonomy and enhancing economic security through microregional cooperation, but has also enhanced local-level insecurities while creating and exacerbating divisions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
085995
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article sets out to challenge the dominant perspective on the nexus between migration and security. In particular since the terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001 the discourse on migrants has been increasingly 'securitised'. Migrants are seen as potential terrorists and thus constitute a security risk for the state. Taking the vantage point of migrants the present article introduces another nexus: the migration-insecurities nexus. It argues that migration as a social process is embedded in violence and insecurities. To start, the mal- or underdevelopment in sending regions has caused many people to migrate-in other words, migration is in part a consequence of the 'violence of development'. However, the insecurities related to the migratory process do not end with the initial moment of departure-they extend to the entire migratory experience, ranging from crossing borders to being subjected to abuse and discrimination at the workplace and the risk of being deported. Additionally, family members and communities of origin are not exempt from being exposed to multiple insecurities. In sum, the article presents a different take on migration as a potential security risk, using Mexican migration to the USA as example.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|