Military Cooperation and Territorial Disputes: The Changing Face of Japan’s Security Policy

Japan ◽  
1953 ◽  
pp. 236-260
Author(s):  
Hiroshi Nakanishi
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Territorial Disputes ◽  
Military Cooperation

Mastering “Irrational” Violence: The Relegitimization of French Security Policy in Sub-Saharan Africa

2006 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno Charbonneau
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Military Doctrine ◽  
Military Cooperation ◽  
Renforcement Des Capacités ◽  
Rwandan Genocide ◽  
Global Context ◽  
French Military ◽  
Sub Saharan

The global context of the 1990s imposed constraints on French security policy in sub-Saharan Africa, but it has also offered new opportunities to reauthorize and relegitimize French military cooperation, military intervention, and prepositioned forces after the fiasco of the Rwandan genocide. It is argued that the post-Rwanda French military doctrine of the mastery of violence has relegitimized French hegemony by identifying violence as the enemy to be contained, controlled, and eliminated. The “new” military cooperation (symbolized by the program of RECAMP [Renforcement des capacités africaines au maintien de la paix]) has in fact redefined the French “right” of military intervention in Africa instead of promoting the formal objectives of security and development.

scholarly journals The Belarusian-Russian Military Alliance in the Context of the Geostrategic Importance of Belarus for Russia as a Way to the West and Its Role in Achieving Its Geopolitical Goals (Part 1)

2021 ◽  
pp. 87-107
Author(s):  
Grzegorz Bazyur
Keyword(s):  
Research Methods ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Military Cooperation ◽  
The West ◽  
Military Alliance ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Russian Military ◽  
Vladimir Putin

This article by Grzegorz Baziur concerns the geostrategic importance of Belarus in the context of the „Russian road to the West” in the light of the neo-imperial policy of the Russian Federation, implemented by the authorities under the leadership of President Vladimir Putin. In the introduction, the author presented the aims of the article, research methods and his theses, and in the first part he described Belarusian-Russian relations in terms of military cooperation and the Russian vision of security policy in the West. In the last part of the text, the author asks the question - is there anything to fear from Belarus in the context of the Belarusian-Russian alliance under Russia's hegemony? In this part, he discusses the meanders of Polish-Belarusian relations with Russia in the background, and the whole article concludes with conclusions on the security perspectives of Belarus and its neighboring countries, including Poland.

Interstate Rivalry in East Asia

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Khoo
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
East Asia ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Territorial Disputes ◽  
World War ◽  
China Sea ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Interstate Rivalry

It is difficult to overstate the importance of East Asia to U.S. national security policy. East Asia was an important venue of contestation for the United States during World War II and the Cold War. Presently, the United States has multiple regional alliances and partnerships and is deeply integrated with the region’s political economy. The region is also the site of a number of critical interstate rivalries that directly impinge on U.S. interests. This chapter evaluates the literature on the U.S.-China relationship and territorial disputes in the South China Sea and East China Sea. This chapter contends that neorealist theory offers a particularly illuminating lens in which to understand interstate rivalry in East Asia.

South Korea’s and Taiwan’s Territorial Disputes with Japan, 1990s to 2018

Asian Survey ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 583-606
Author(s):  
Christina Lai
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
State Building ◽  
Territorial Disputes ◽  
Maritime Disputes ◽  
Constructivist Perspective ◽  
Senkaku Islands ◽  
Taiwanese Government

South Korea and Taiwan are former Japanese colonies that have undergone similar processes of state-building since WWII. But they have chosen different rhetorical frameworks in their maritime disputes with Japan. In South Korea, negotiating with Japan can be viewed as threatening the country’s independence and pride, whereas in the Taiwanese government, cooperation with Japan is considered mutually beneficial. Why have these two countries taken such divergent stances toward Japan? This article examines the territorial disputes between South Korea and Japan over Dokdo, and between Taiwan and Japan over the Senkaku Islands. It sets forth a rhetorical framework of comparison, and it proposes a constructivist perspective in understanding South Korea’s and Taiwan’s legitimation strategies toward Japan from the late 1990s to 2018. This comparative study suggests that the differences between their legitimation strategies can be traced to their different colonial experiences with Japan.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document