http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Foreign Affairs, the National Interest, and Secular-Religious Identities in Israel
Hamanaka, Shingo Center for Asian Public Opinion ResearchCollaborat 2016 Asian journal for public opinion research Vol.3 No.4
Despite being a key concept of International Relations theory, there is no consensus about what the national interest is. It is almost impossible for political leaders of democratic states to make a crucial decision in foreign policies when considering only the national interest without public support. Rather, we are unable to imagine the national interest without public opinion. In general, international crises galvanize people who held different opinions and unify social cleavages, such as secular-religious identities, into a nation that acts in its national interest. The author proposes a method to operationalize the key concept and describes a relationship between the national interest and religious identities in a democratic state. The selected case is the state of Israel. It is believed that Israel is a good example to think about the association between foreign affairs and political attitudes since it is characterized as a socio-religious divided society and has often waged war against Arab military forces.
Hamanaka, Shingo Center for Asian Public Opinion ResearchCollaborat 2013 Asian journal for public opinion research Vol.1 No.1
For the Palestinians, what is the impact of the Arab Spring? The revolution not only dislodged Mubarak from the presidency, but also changed Egyptian policy regarding Palestinians in Gaza. New Egyptian diplomacy has encouraged Hamas and Fatah, which had been in dispute, to seek reconciliation and has loosened the border control on humanitarian grounds. We focus on Palestinian voting attitudes in the wake of the Arab Spring. Despite the vast quantity of literature written about Palestinian politics since the first decade of the millennium, we know little about the determinants of Palestinian attitudes toward the divided governments in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The Fatah government, in the West Bank, increased in popularity after submitting a request for UN recognition of Palestinian statehood. In Gaza, the Hamas government lost popularity because of mismanagement but won support through the success of its prisoner swap deal with Israel. However, evaluation of the ruling party does not depend only on one-time events. This research attempts to measure the impact of policy change in Gaza after the Arab Spring. We provide an account of our research on Palestinian attitudes toward the divided governments based on two sets of the original survey data conducted in May 2009 and June 2012. The paper sheds light on Palestinian attitudes and makes clear the effects of "democratization" in the Middle East and the effects of regional context factors on the occupied Palestinians.
What is Subregionalism? Analytical Framework and Two Case Studies from Asia
Shintaro Hamanaka 인하대학교 국제관계연구소 2015 Pacific Focus Vol.30 No.3
When scholars and policy-makers use the term subregionalism or subregional cooperation rather than regionalism or regional cooperation, they seem to emphasize certain elements of cooperation that tend to be overlooked or neglected by regional cooperation. What are they? This study first discusses the elements that make cooperation or a project subregional rather than regional. Then the article conducts a comparative case study analysis of subregionalism using the proposed framework to assess how much an actual project is “subregional.” This article covers two case studies: the South Asia Subregional Economic Cooperation program and the Greater Tumen Initiative.
Asia-Only vs. Asia-Pacific Regionalism: The Regionalism Cycle in Summits and Financial Cooperation
Shintaro Hamanaka 인하대학교 국제관계연구소 2011 Pacific Focus Vol.26 No.2
While many believe that Asian regionalism lacks institutions, Asia, in fact, is home to a wide range of regional institutions and frameworks. The rise and fall of regional institutions in Asia is an extremely dynamic process. This paper argues that the dynamic nature of Asian regionalism can be explained by a "regionalism cycle" with regard to membership. The institutional outcomes of regionalism in Asia have been cyclical because the interplay between Japan and the United States has not had a stable equilibrium. This paper tests the hypothesized regionalism cycle based using actual cases of regional institutions in the areas of financial cooperation and summit meetings.
Asian Financial Cooperation in the 1990s: The Politics of Membership
Shintaro Hamanaka 동아시아연구원 2011 Journal of East Asian Studies Vol.11 No.1
A commonplace view holds that the trend toward Asian financial regionalism is a relatively new phenomenon, developing in response to the 1997–1998 Asian financial crisis in particular. In this article I challenge this view by analyzing financial regionalist projects before the crisis. Asian countries, especially Japan, sought to establish an Asiaonly financial cooperation framework throughout the 1990s. The policy stance of the United States, in contrast, was to participate in Asian forums and/or by itself propose and establish regional groupings that included the United States. This competition between Japan and the United States is a key factor in understanding the rise and fall of various regionalist projects and also has theoretical implications for membership politics in regional financial cooperation frameworks.
TPP versus RCEP: Control of Membership and Agenda Setting
Shintaro Hamanaka 대외경제정책연구원 2014 East Asian Economic Review Vol.18 No.2
This paper argues that the formation of regional integration frameworks can be best understood as a dominant state’s attempt to create a preferred regional framework in which it can exercise exclusive influence. In this context, it is important to observe not only which countries are included in a regional framework, but also which countries are excluded from it. For example, the distinct feature of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is its exclusion of China, and that of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is its exclusion of the United States (US). An exclusion of a particular country does not mean that the excluded country will perpetually remain outside the framework. In fact, TPP may someday include China, resulting from a policy of the US “engaging” or “socializing” China rather than “balancing” against it. However, the first step of such a policy is to establish a regional framework from which the target country of engagement is excluded.