(PDF) 太平洋島嶼国における新しい安全保障観を求めて : 大砲かバターかマグロか

Kobe University Repository : Kernel タイトル Title Guns, Butter and Tuna: Alternative Security in the Pacific Island States(太平洋島嶼国における新しい安全 保障観を求めて : 大砲かバターかマグロか) 著者 Author(s) Alexander, Ronni 掲載誌・巻号・ページ 国際協力論集,2(1):115-140 Citation 刊行日 Issue date 1994-06 資源タイプ Resource Type Departmental Bulletin Paper / 紀要論文 版区分 Resource Version publisher 権利 Rights DOI URL http://www.lib.kobe-u.ac.jp/handle_kernel/00181195 Create Date: 2017-12-19 115 1 1 5 S Security, e c u r i t y，w whether hetheri ittb beep personal e r s o n a lo orrn nationa t i o r ト G GUNS, UNS ， B BUTTER UTTERA AND ND TUNA: ALTERNATIVE T UNA:A LTERNATIVE SECURITY INNT THE S ECURITYI HE P A C I F I CI SLANDS A ES* PACIFIC ISLAND STT AT TES 事 ai, iss s something too w which a l，i o m e t h i n gt hich w wee a all l lf feel e e la attract t r a c ‑ tion, although t i o n， a l t h o u g hi itt o often f t e np proves r o v e st too b bee a ann i illul l u ‑ o ti m p o s s i b l eg oal . T hee ndo h e s i v e，i sive, iffn not impossible goal. The end offt the Cold C oldW arh a sb roughts omed r a m a t i cc h a n g e s War has brought some dramatic changes too t the security environments off m many count h es e c u r i t ye n v i r o n m e n t so any c o u n ‑ tries, regions and peoples offt the world, leavt r i e s，r e g i o n sa ndp e o p l e so h ew orld，l e a v ‑ ing some relieved and others increasingly i n gs ome r e l i e v e da nd o t h e r si n c r e a s i n g l y concerned. c o n c e r n e d . F ort h o s eo u c k ye nought For those offu ussl lucky enough too b b l et n d u l g ei h e o r e t i c a lp u r s u i t s，t beea able tooi indulge innt theoretical pursuits, this h i s t i m eo hangeh asg i v e nu p p o r t u n i t yt time offc change has given ussa anno opportunity too * ** * R RONNI ONNIA ALEXANDER LEXANDER broaden b roaden o ur d e f i n i t i o na nd u n d e r s t a n d i n go our definition and understanding off s e c u r i t yt o m e t h i n gb eyondt h ec o n f i n e so security toos something beyond the confines off national security innc cold n a t i o n a ls e c u r i t yi o l dw ars t r a t e g i ct e r m s . war strategic terms. The T hep r e s e n tp aperf o c u s e so e c u r i t ya present paper focuses onns security assi itt i e e nf romt h ep e r s p e c t i v eo hata r et r a ‑ isss seen from the perspective offw what are tra- ditionally viewed asss some offt the least secure d i t i o n a l l yv ieweda omeo h e1 巴a s ts e c u r e members off t the international community m embers o h ei n t e r n a t i o n a lc ommunity ‑ the t h ev erys m a l lo i c r o ‑ s t a t e so h eP a c i f i c very small orrm micro-states offt the Pacific. Through adopting al largely endogenous T hrougha d o p t i n ga a r g e l ye ndogenous11 a and nd environmental perspective, security can bee e n v i r o n m e n t a lp e r s p e c t i v e， s e c u r i t yc an b seen assb being anni important underlying factor s e e na e i n ga m p o r t a n tu n d e r l y i n gf a c t o r inn a any discussion offd development i ny d i s c u s s i o no evelopmenta nd/or s o ‑ and/or soc i a li s s u e si h er e g i o n，a cial issues innt the region, and ndt thereforeessenh e r e f o r e e s s e n ‑ tial too a any consideration off t the role off t the t i a lt ny c o n s i d e r a t i o no h er o l eo h e Pacific Islands inn t the world-system ass a a P a c i f i cI s l a n d si h ew o r l d ‑ s y s t e ma whole. w h o l e . * * T This h i sp paper a p e rw was as o originally r i g i n a l l yp presented r e s e n t e da as sa a k e y n o t ea d d r e s sa t "Kein address at K e i nS STILLER TILLER O OZEAN", ZEAN"， keynote G ermany，2 23-26 3‑26A April, p r i l，1992. 1992 Germany, *キ P r o f e s s o r，G r a d u a t eS c h o o lo fI n t e r n a t i o n a l Professor, Graduate School of International C o o p e r a t i o nS t u d i e s，K o b eU n i v e r s i t y Cooperation Studies, Kobe University. ** For a d discussion of endogenous security see F o ra i s c u s s i o no fe n d o g e n o u ss e c u r i t ys e e Putting u t t i n gt the h eE Earth a r t hF First, i r s t ，H Hono n ‑ R o n n iA l e x a n d e rP Ronni Alexander. o l u l u :S p a r kM a t s u n a g aI n s t i t u t ef o rP e a c e，U Spark Matsunaga Institute for Peace, Unin i olulu: v e r s i t yo fH a w a i i，f versity of Hawaii, forthcoming. o r t h c o m i n g . I In nJ Japanese, a p a n e s e， 0 ' : : ' - , 7vt--lj-;"'-:$r-~ r*~~W:i:: see s e eロニー・アレキサンダー著 『大きな夢と 目 小さな島々…太平洋島興国の非核化にみる新し Ij, ~ ~ Ii'/; 4 · .. :.tf~$Ii'/;I\W:OOO)~Ff1{11:1:J:i. J.,*lf L. い安全保障観~ 国際書院， 1 992年 ) 。0 "''ti:£:*~lJl~ ( (OO~'l!f[ljj;, 1992~) 116 1 1 6 国際協力論集 第 2巻 第 1号 T This hisp paper aperi issc composed omposedo offf four o u rp parts. a r t s . T The he s southeast o u t h e a s tA Asia, sia，t the countries offt the h ec o u n t r i e so h en northern o r t h e r n f i r s ti n t r o d u c t o r ys e c t i o nd e a l i n gw i t h first iss a ann i introductory section dealing with P a c i f i cR imp l u sA u s t r a l i aa ndN ewZ e a l a n d， Pacific Rim plus Australia and New Zealand, the definition off t the region too b bee d discussed. t h ed e f i n i t i o no h er e g i o nt i s c u s s e d and the Pacific Basin. a ndt h eP a c i f i cB a s i n . The second section addresses the question off T hes e c o n ds e c t i o na d d r e s s e st h eq u e s t i o no This paper takes as somewhat T hisp apert a k e sa omewhatb r o a d e rv iew broader view nuclearism and nuclear security n uc 1e a r i s ma nd n uc 1e a rs e c u r i t yd during u r i n gt the h e offt the region which can, for lack offa a b better o h er e g i o nw hich c a n，f o rl a c ko e t t e r Cold War, and proposes ann a alternati vee nd p r o p o s e s a l t e r n a t iv C old W a r， a term, bee c called the Pacific'. Here, a l l e dt h e 'Greater G r e a t e rP a c i f i c ' . H ere， t erm，b approach toos security innt the region. a pproacht e c u r i t yi h er e g i o n . P a r tI I I Part III the countries off t the t h ec o u n t r i e so h eP Pacific a c i f i cR Rim im a are r et those h o s e t a k e su h es e c u r i t yi s s u e sw hich a r eo are off takes upp t the security issues which which w hich b o r d e ro h eP a c i f i cO cean，a border onn t the Pacific Ocean, and nd a are r e m ostc o n c e r nt h eP a c i f i cI s l a n dC o u n t r i e s ‑ most concern toot the Pacific Island Countries- not necessarily confined too A Asia orr t too t the n o tn e c e s s a r i l yc o n f i n e dt sia o h e e c o n o m i cd evelopment，c economic development, cultural integrity and u l t u r a li n t e g r i t ya nd Northern hemisphere. N orthern h e m i s p h e r e . environmental sustainability. e n v i r o n m e n t a l s u s t a i n a b i l i t y . The paper T he p aper a and/or nd/or P Pacific a c ぴi cI Island s l a n dC Countries o u n t r i e sr refer e f e rt too t the h e concludes with as section addressing c onc 1udesw i t ha e c t i o na d d r e s s i n ga areas r e a sf for o r South Pacific Forum countries and the non-inS outhP a c i f i cF orumc o u n t r i e sa ndt h en o n ‑ i n ‑ consideration with regard too s security inn t the c o n s i d e r a t i o nw i t hr e g a r dt e c u r i t yi h e dependent island entities inn t the region, with d ependenti s l a n de n t i t i e si h er e g i o n，w i t h future, and addresses the need for a n new def u t u r e，a nda d d r e s s e st h en eedf o ra ewd e ‑ the exception offA t h ee x c e p t i o no u s t r a l i aa nd N ewZ e a l a n d . Australia and New Zealand. finition offt the concept offp political sovereignty. f i n i t i o no h ec o n c e p to o l i t i c a ls o v e r e i g n t y . T h ee x t e n tt h a tP apuaN ew G uinea( PNG) Toot the extent that Papua New Guinea (PNG) PART P ART1 NTRODUCTION‑ EFININGT HE I::I INTRODUCTION - D DEFINING THE d e f i n e si t s e l fa a c i f i cI s l a n dC ountry，i defines itself ass a a P Pacific Island Country, itt PACIFIC P ACIFIC w i l lb will be巴 i included nc 1uded i inn t the h eu usage s a g eo off t that h a tt term, erm， T het erm'Pacific' P a c i f i c 'h asm anyd i f f e r e n ti n t e r . The term has many different inter· The T he P Pacific a c i f i cB Basin ωi n although due tooi its large size, a l t h o u g hd uet t sl a r g es i z e，i ittw will i l ln not o tb be巴 pretations, and itti issi important ndi m p o r t a n ta attt the h eo outset u t s e tt too p r e t a t i o n s，a i nc 1udedi e f e r e n c e st m a l lo orrv very erys small m a l l included innr references toos small establish some geographical parameters for e s t a b l i s hs ome g 巴o g r a p h i c a lp a r a m e t e r sf o r island countries innt the region. The countries i s l a n dc o u n t r i e si h er e g i o n . T hec o u n t r i e s o urd i s c u s s i o n . T her e a s o nf o rt h i si our discussion. The reason for this issc clear, 1e a r， off A Asia which o sia w hich d o tl i eo h eP a c i f i ca r e doo n not lie onn t the Pacific are for while this paper iss c concerned primarily f o rw h i l et h i sp aper i o n c e r n e dp r i m a r i l y beyond the scope offt this paper. b eyondt h es c o p eo h i sp aper with the Pacific Island Countries, w i t ht h eP a c i f i cI s l a n dC o u n t r i e s，i itti issh hardly a r d l y Innc considering the Pacific Region', I o n s i d e r i n gt h e 'Greater G r e a t e rP a c i f i cR e g i o n '， n e c e s s a r yt o i n to u tt h a tt h e r ei i to necessary too p point out that there iss a a b bit off iss p i perhaps erhaps u useful s e f u lt toot think h i n ki inn t terms e r m so offt three h r e e confusion asst toow what exactly issm meant byyt that c o n f u s i o na hate x a c t l yi eantb h a t broad groups. b road g r o u p s . T here a r e，f There are, first i r s to off a all, l l，t the h e t e r m . I apan，f term. Inn J Japan, for o re example, xample， 'the t h eP Pacific' a c i f i c ' Pacific Island Countries. P a c i f i cI s l a n dC o u n t r i e s . generally tends too b bee s synonymous with the g e n e r a l l yt e n d st ynonymous w i t ht h e very small countries have become almost en· v ery s m a l lc o u n t r i e sh aveb ecomea l m o s te n A s i a . P a c i f i c，a ndl i t t l eo t t e n t i o ni a i d Asia·Pacific, and little orrn nooa attention issp paid tirely dependent onn f foreign economic assistt i r e l yd e p e n d e n to o r e i g ne c o n o m i ca s s i s t ‑ too e either the island countries offt the Pacific t i t h e rt h ei s l a n dc o u n t r i e so h eP a c i f i c ance for even a n c ef o re vent h e i rb a s i cn e c e s s i t i e s . A ne their basic necessities. Atto one B a s i no h eP a c i f i cc o u n t r i e so a t i nA mer Basin orrt the Pacific countries offL Latin Amer· end off t the scale e nd o h es c a l ea r ed e p e n d e n c i e ss uch a are dependencies such ass i c a . G e n e r a l l y，t ica. Generally, the Asia-Pacific region issd de· h eA s i a ‑ P a c i f i cr e g i o ni e . Tokelau T okelauo s s o c i a t e ds t a t e ss ucha h eC ook orra associated states such asst the Cook fined f i n e da e i n gc omposedo sia，o ass b being composed offA Asia, orr a attl least e a s t Islands I s l a n d so e d e r a t e dS t a t e so i c r o n e s i a . orr F Federated States off M Micronesia. Many off t these M any o h e s e G GUNS, UNS，B BUTTER UTTERA AND NDT TUNA: UNA:A ALTERNATIVE LTERNATIVES SECURITY ECURITYI IN NT THE HEP PACIFIC A C I F I CI ISLAND SLANDS STATES TATES 117 1 1 7 Att t the other end are the large Melanesian A h eo t h e re n da r et h el a r g eM e l a n e s i a n A mericanc o u n t r i e sw i t ht h eU h ec e n t e r USSa attt the center, American countries with the countries, which hicha are r er relatively e l a t i v e l yw well e l le endowed ndowed c o u n t r i e s，w a ndt h eo t h e ro h eA sianP a c i f i cc o u n t r i e s， and the other offt the Asian Pacific countries, w with i t hn natural a t u r a lr resources e s o u r c e sa and nd p physically h y s i c a l l ym much uch especially the NIEs e s p e c i a l l yt h eN IEso orrJ JapaNIEs,2 apaNIEs， 2w which hichc cen· e n l larger a r g e rt than h a nt their h e i rM Micronesian i c r o n e s i a no o l y n e s i a n orr P Polynesian t ter e ro onnJ Japan. a p a n . R Regional e g i o n a lo organizations r g a n i z a t i o n ss such u c ha ass c o u n t e r p a r t s . A mongt h e s eM e l a n e s i a nc un coo un· counterparts. Among these Melanesian P PECC ECC o PEC i n c o r p o r a t eb o t ho h e s e orr A APEC incorporate both off t these t r i e s，P tries, PNG NG i iss o offc course o u r s ee exceptional x c e p t i o n a li innt terms e r m s g r o u p s，a groups, and even nde v巴ng goos soof far a ra asst tooi include n c l u d et the h e o offi its t ss size i z ea and ndp potential o t e n t i a lw wealth. e a l t h . A Attt the h es same ame A ASEAN SEAN c countries o u n t r i e si inn t the h eP Pacific a c i f i cr region, e g i o n，o orr t time, i m e，P PNG NGd differs i f f e r sf from romi its t sn neighbors e i g h b o r si innS South· o u t h . perhaps include the Pacific innA Asia. Under· p e r h a p si n c l u d et h eP a c i f i ci s i a . U n d e r ‑ e east a s tA Asia s i an not o to only n l yi inn t terms e r m so off i its t sp r e s e n t present standably, with the s t a n d a b l y，w i t ht h eg great r e a tc cultural, u l t u r a l，g geographic· 巴o g r a p h i c l e v e lo c o n o m i cd e v巴l level off e economic development, o p m e n t，b but u ta also l s oi inn a l，e aI, economic c o n o m i ca and nd p political o l i t i c a ld differences i f f e r e n c e si inn t the h巴 t terms e r m so off it~ c colonial o l o n i a lh history, i s t o r y， a and nd i its t ss self· e l f Pacific, groupings and divisions occur within P a c i f i c，g r o u p i n g sa ndd i v i s i o n so c c u rw i t h i n i identity d e n t i t ya assa aP Pacific a c i f i cI Island s l a n dC Country. o u n t r y . I Innm mod· od. these large regional organizations. Itti isse en· t h e s el a r g er e g i o n a lo r g a n i z a t i o n s . I n e r nh i s t o r i c a lt e r m s，P ern historical terms, PNG NGi issp perhaps e r h a p sc closer l o s e rt too tirely possible t i r e l yp o s s i b l et h a tf u t u r er e l a t i o n si h e that future relations inn t the i its t sP Pacific a c i f i cn neighbors e i g h b o r st than h a nt toot those h o s ei innS South· o u t h P a c i f i c， b Pacific, both organized and otherwise, will o t ho r g a n i z e da nd o t h e r w i s e，w i l l e east a s tA Asia. s i a . center onn c cooperation and competition be· c e n t e ro o o p e r a t i o na nd c o m p e t i t i o nb e ‑ T The hes second e c o n dg group roupo offc countries o u n t r i e sa r et h o s eo are those onn t h e S o u t h巴r the Southern n R Rim im o off t the h e P Pacific a c i f i c B Basin. a s i n . 田 tween the American Pacific onnt the one hand t weent h eA merican P a c i f i co h eo n eh and and the JapaNIEs onnt the other. a ndt h eJ apaNIEso h eo t h er . T These hesea r et h ec o u n t r i e so s i aa ndo e n ‑ are the countries offA Asia and offC Cen· The final cluster off P Pacific countries are T he f i n a lc l u s t e ro a c i f i cc o u n t r i e sa r e t r a la ndS o u t hA mericaw hichb o r d e ro h e tral and South America which border onnt the t h ei n d u s t r i a l i z e da nd i n d u s t r i a l i z i n gc o u n ‑ the industrialized and industrializing coun· P a c i f i c，a Pacific, assw well perhaps those which maintain e l lp e r h a p st h o s ew hichm a i n t a i n t r i e so h eN o r t h e r nP a c i f i cR i m . A n e tries offt the Northern Pacific Rim. Att o one a p primarily Pacific focus. a r i m a r i l yP a c i f i cf o c u s . When viewed W hen v iewed e n do h es p e c t r u ma r eJ a p a n，t end offt the spectrum are Japan, the h eU US, S，C Cana· a n a ‑ from Japan, the Latin American countries doo f r o mJ a p a n，t h巴 L a t i nA mericanc o u n t r i e sd d daa a and ndv erys o o nS o u t hK o r e a ;a h eo t h巴r very soon South Korea; attt the other not n o ta p p e a rt a r to h eA s i a ‑ P a c i f i cr e ‑ appear toob beea ap part offt the Asia·Pacific reo end are China, DPRK (North Korea) and e n da r eC hina， D PRK ( N o r t hK o r e a )a nd g i o n，a gion, and ndp perhaps e r h a p st the h es same amei isst true r u ef for o rc coo u un· n ‑ S i b e r i a . Siberia. t r i e sl i k巴 I tries like Indonesia n d o n e s i aw when hen v viewed iew巴d f from r o mt the h e o i b e r i a，t offS Siberia, these countries form the economic h e s ec o u n t r i e sf ormt h ee c o n o m i c o other t h e rs side. i d e . Y Yet, e t，a asst the United States works h eU n i t e dS t a t e sw orks and political center offt the region, and inns spite a ndp o l i t i c a lc e n t e ro h er e g i o n，a ndi p i t e too c cement its economic relations with its t e m e n ti t se c o n o m i cr e l a t i o n sw i t hi t s off t their o h e i rv a s tp o l i t i c a la nd e c o n o m i cd i f f e r ‑ vast political and economic differ· neighbors and increase its overall presence n e i g h b o r sa nd i n c r e a s ei t so v e r a l lp r e s e n c e e n c e s，t ences, they h e ya are r em moving ovingt toos solidify o l i d i f yt their h e i rr rela· e l a ‑ onnt the American continent through the North o h eA mericanc o n t i n e n tt h r o u g ht h eN orth 2 K Kinhide Mushakoji. J a p a n，t the h eJ JapaNIEs a p a N I E sa and n d 2 i n h i d eM u s h a k o j i "Japan, t h eJ a p a n e s ei nt h eP o s t ‑ C o l dW arA s i aP a c i f i c the Japanese in the Post· Cold War Asia Pacific R e g i o n . " P a p e rp r e s e n t e dt ot h eX I II n t e r n a ‑ Region." Paper presented to the XII Interna· t i o n a lC o l l o q u i u mo nt h eW o r l dE c o n o m y :"Asia tional Colloquium on the World Economy: A s i a i nt h eW o r l dE c o n o m y "，T o k y o，D e c e m b e r 11, 1 1， in the World Economy", Tokyo, December American Free Trade Area (NAFTA), weec can Am 巴r i c a nF r e eT radeA rea( NAFTA)，w a n s e et wog r o u p se m e r g i n gi h e'Greater G r e a t e rP a c i ‑ see two groups emerging innt the Paci· f i cR e g i o n ' . O neg roupc o n s i s t so h eL a t i n fic Region'. One group consists offt the Latin W ith t h e p o s s i b l e e x c e p t i o n With the possible exception 1993, 1993，p pp.3·5. p . 3 ‑ 5 118 1 1 8 国際協力論集 第 2巻 第 1号 t tions i o n sa and ndp position o s i t i o no offc centrality e n t r a l i t yi innt the h er region. e g i o n . ing the disposing society. Unfortunately, ini n gt h ed i s p o s i n gs o c i e t y . U n f o r t u n a t e l y，i n ‑ One example offt this O nee xampleo h i st r e n di h em ovet orm trend isst the move toof form creased knowledge and new ideas about the c r e a s e dk nowledge a nd n ew i d e a sa b o u tt h e a f free trade r a d ea area r e ac comprised omprised o off C CIS, IS，C China, hina， a r e巴 t limitations l i m i t a t i o n so f，a of, and ndj joint o i n tr responsibility e s p o n s i b i l i t yf for o rt the h e both Koreas, Japan and the United States. b o t hK oreas，J apana ndt h eU n i t e dS t a t e s . global commons innt this century have done litg l o b a lc ommonsi h i sc e n t u r yh aved onel i t W hati h er o l eo h eP a c i f i cI s l a n dC oun What isst the role offt the Pacific Island Coun- tle tooc change the the reality offt this t 1et hanget h et h er e a l i t yo h i s 'garbage g a r b a g e t r i e si h i st r i ‑ p a r t i t ed i v i s i o no c o n o m i c tries inn t this tri-partite division off e economic dump' role. The most dramatic examples off d ump' r o l e . T hem ostd r a m a t i ce xampleso and political power innt the Pacific? Clearly, a nd p o l i t i c a lp ower i h eP a c i f i c ? C l e a r l y， this inni its modern form t h i si t sm odernf orma r eo i l i t a r yn a ‑ are offa a m military na- the very small Pacific Island Countries are onn t h ev erys m a l lP a c i f i cI s l a n dC o u n t r i e sa r eo ture: war and/or weaponry, nuclear u c l e a rt tests e s t sa and nd t u r e :w ara nd/orw eaponry，n the t h e p e r i p h e r y o ny m odel w r e a t e， periphery off a any model wee c create, n u c l e a rw a s t e . nuclear waste. although itti issi important toon note the a l t h o u g hi m p o r t a n tt o t et h eg great r e a td dii ‑ It I tw would ouldc certainly e r t a i n l yb beeg going o i n gt too o of far a rt too s sugug versity among the Pacific Islands themselves. v e r s i t ya mongt h eP a c i f i cI s l a n d st h e m s e l v e s . gest g e s tt h a ta l lo h ev erys m a l lP a c i f i cI s l a n d that all offt the very small Pacific Island I w would suggest that both historically and inn I oulds u g g e s tt h a tb o t hh i s t o r i c a l l ya ndi States S t a t e sa r en o t h i n gm oret h a np o p u l a t e dg a r ‑ are nothing more than populated gar- the t h ep r e s e n tc o n t e x t，t present context, the h es significance i g n i f i c a n c eo off t the h e bage dumps, yet innt terms offt the system ass a a b aged umps，y e ti e r m so h es ystema Pacific islands lies not inn t the islands themP a c i f i ci s l a n d sl i e sn o ti h ei s l a n d st h e m ‑ whole with its heavy Western bias and emphaw h o l ew i t hi t sh eavyW esternb i a sa nde m p h a ‑ selves, s e l v e s，b but u tr rather a t h巴ri innt the h ea access c c e s st they h e yo offer f f e rt too sis onns size, this may bee u uncomfortably close s i so i z e，t h i sm ay b n c o m f o r t a b l yc l o s e t h e s e a a nd i t s r e s o u r c e s . the sea and its resources. toot the t h巴 t truth r u t ha ass i itti iss p perceived e r c e i v e di inn p places l a c e sl like i k e Historically H i s t o r i c a l l y speaking, the islands have been used for s p e a k i n g， t h巴 i s l a n d sh ave b een u s e df o r Washington orrT Tokyo. W ashingtono okyo different purposes innd different eras, d i f f e r e n tp u r p o s e si i f f 巴r e n te r a s，b but u tw while h i l e It I ti is, s，t therefore, h e r e f o r e，p perhaps erhaps n not o tu unreasonable n r e a s o n a b l e certainly colonization and economic enterc e r t a i n l yc o l o n i z a t i o na nd e conomic e n t e r ‑ toos suggest that a d distinction beem made between t u g g e s tt h a ta i s t i n c t i o nb adeb etween prise did take place, particularly innt the smala r t i c u l a r l yi h es m a l ‑ p r i s ed i dt a k ep l a c e，p those island countries which play a p passive t h o s ei s l a n dc o u n t r i e sw hich p l a ya a s s i v e ler islands l e ri s l a n d si as m ore f o rt h ep urpose o itt w was more for the purpose off role inn t the world-system and those which r o l ei h ew o r l d ‑ s y s t e ma nd t h o s ew hich s t a k i n ga l a i mt h eo c e a nt h a nf o rt h es a k e staking ac claim toot the ocean than for the sake p l a yam or巴 a playa more active c t i v eo one. n e . T The hep passive a s s i v er role o l ec can an off p possession off t the islands themselves. o o s s e s s i o n o h e i s l a n d s t h e m s e l v e s . bees seen ass a a s b e e na o r to g a s o l i n es t a t i o n "f u n c ‑ sort off" "gasoline station" func- Moreover, inn k keeping with M oreover，i e e p i n gw i t h 18th 18th a and nd 19th 19th tion; important iffa and when one issi innn need off t i o n ;i m p o r t a n ti ndw heno n ei eedo c e n t u r yE uropeanw orldv iewso h es e a sa century European world views offt the seas ass gasoline, g a s o l i n e， b but u to otherwise t h e r w i s ed duly u l yc charted h a r t e da and nd being without limit and having ann e endless b e i n gw i t h o u tl i m i ta nd h aving a n d l e s s ignored i g n o r e do o r g o t t e n . F ort h e s ec o u n t r i e s，a orrf forgotten. For these countries, a capacity for absorption, the islands and the c a p a c i t yf o ra b s o r p t i o n，t h ei s l a n d sa nd t h e prerequisite for economic development has p r e r e q u i s i t ef o re c o n o m i cd evelopment h as seas around them were used throughout s e a sa roundt hemw ereu sedt h r o u g h o u tm od mod- been too p b een t u tt h e m s e l v e so h em ap. I h e put themselves onn t the map. Inn t the e r nh i s t o r ya ern history ass a a "garbage g a r b a g ed dump" ump" f for o rt the h e Cold C oldW arc o n t War context 巴x to offt the h e1970s 1970sa and nd8 80s, 0s，t this h i s w orlds ystem‑ l a c ew heret h eu nwanted world system - a a p place where the unwanted often happened more inn a a s strategic, ass o f t e n h appened m ore i t r a t e g i c， a a nd/ord angerous a s p e c t so and/or dangerous aspects off"modern" modern"s socieo c i e ‑ opposed tooa anne economic, way through provido pposedt conomic，w ayt h r o u g hp r o v i d ‑ tyyc could beed disposed offw without fear offh harmt o u l db i s p o s e do i t h o u tf e a ro arm‑ ing access toot the ocean i n ga c c e s st h eo c e a na nd/ora e s u l to and/or assa a r result off G GUNS, UNS，B BUTTER UTTERA AND NDT TUNA: UNA:A ALTERNATIVE LTERNATIVES SECURITY ECURITYI IN NT THE HEP PACIFIC A C I F I CI ISLAND SLANDS STATES TATES 119 1 1 9 t h ep e r c e p t i o no h ep a r to u t s i d ep owers the perception onnt the part offo outside powers i important m p o r t a n tb both o t hi inn a a t theoretical h巴o sense, and r e t i c a ls e n s e， a nd o h e "strategic off t the significance" off t the island s t r a t e g i cs i g n i f i c a n c e "o h ei s l a n d a also l s oi inn a a p practical r a c t i c a lo one, n e，b because itt h helps too e c a u s ei e l p st states. Unlike countries such ass F Fiji and s t a t e s . U n l i k ec o u n t r i e ss u c ha i j ia nd clarify the nature offt the relationship between c l a r i f yt h en a t u r eo h er e l a t i o n s h i pb etween P NG w hich h a v eb ecome d i r e c t l yi n c o r p o . PNG which have become directly incorpo· strategic and economic issues innt the analysis s t r a t e g i ca nde c o n o m i ci s s u e si h ea n a l y s i s r a t e di n t ot h ec a p i t a l i s tw orld‑economyi rated into the capitalist world-economy inna ann offv o e r ys m a l ls t a t e s . very small states. e c o n o m i ca e l la t r a t e g i c / p o l i t i c a lw ay， economic assw well assa a s strategic/political way, P ARTI I :N UCLEARI SMA NDS ECUR1TYI PART II: NUCLEAR ISM AND SECURITY INN the incorporation process for these small ist h巴 i n c o r p o r a t i o np r o c e s sf o rt h e s es m a l li s ‑ T HEP ACIFIC THE PACIFIC lands has been primarily strategic, and has l a n d sh a sb e e np r i m a r i l ys t r a t e g i c，a nd h a s N i s c u s s i o no e c u r i t yi s s u e si h e Noo d discussion off s security issues inn t the led l e dt u a l i t a t i v e l yd i f f e r e n tr o l ei h e too a a q qualitatively different role inn t the p r e s e n t ‑ d a yP a c i f i cc a ni g n o r eC hinaa ndt h e present-day Pacific can ignore China and the w o r l d ‑ s y s t e mi t s e lf . 1 oulds u g g e s tt h a ti world-system itself. I w would suggest that inn two Koreas, specifically the instability onnt the t woK o r e a s，s p e c i f i c a l l yt h ei n s t a b i l i t yo h e this regard, the former can bees seen assb being a t h i sr e g a r d，t h ef o r m e rc a nb e e na e i n ga K oreanP e n n i n s u l a，i Korean Penn insula, including the question off n c l u d i n gt h eq u e s t i o no p a r to hati o r l d ‑ s y s t e mt h e o r yi e n e r ‑ part offw what innw world-system theory issg gener- the nuclearization offN North Korea, and the int h en u c l e a r i z a t i o no orthK orea，a n dt h ei n ‑ a l l yr e f e r r e dt h e 'periphery' ally referred tooa asst the or, innt this p e r i p h e r y 'o r，i h i s creasing importance and prominence offC China c r e a s i n gi m p o r t a n c ea ndp r o m i n e n c eo hina context, the c o n t e x t，t h ei inner n n e rp periphery, e r i P h e r y，w while h i l et the h el latter a t t e r inn t the region. i h er e g i o n . b belong e l o n gt too a a s e p a r a t eg r o u p i n gw hich c a nb separate grouping which can bee Koreas are K o r e a sa r ea r o s s r o a d s，a atta ac crossroads, and n dw whatever hatevert the h e c a l l e dt h eo called the outer u t e rp periphery. e r i P h e r y . T This h i sd distinction i s t i n c t i o n f final i n a lo outcome, utcome，t the stability offt the two Koreas, h es t a b i l i t yo h et woK o r e a s， b between etween t the h ei inner n n e ra and nd o outer u t e rp peripheries e r i p h e r i e si iss united u n i t e do orrs separate, e p a r a t e，a affects f f e c t st that h a to offt the h ee entire n t i r e e extremely x t r e m e l yf fine, i n e，p perhaps e r h a p si indistinguishable, n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e，a and nd r region. e g i o n .1 Inna addition, d d i t i o n，t the future offt the Chinese h ef u t u r eo h eC hin巴s 巴 c can a nc change h a n g ea according c c o r d i n gt tooe economic c o n o m i ca and ndp politico l i t i c ‑ experiment innb building as socialist market e x p e r i m e n ti u i l d i n ga o c i a! is tm arkete ecoc o ‑ a all c conditions. o n d i t i o n s . A Ann i important m p o r t a n td difference i f f e r e n c ec can, a n， n omyi r u c i a li m p o r t a n c ei o to n l yr e ‑ nomy isso offc crucial importance innn not only re- however, bees seen innt the way these groups off h owever，b e e ni h ew ayt h e s eg r o u p so g i o n a lt e r m s，b gional terms, but inn a a g global sense ass w well. u ti l o b a ls e n s ea e l l . states conduct their relations with other s t a t e s c o n d u c tt h e i r r e l a t i o n sw i t h o t h e r While acknowledging W hilea c k n o w l e d g i n gt h a tt h e s ea r ei s s u e so that these are issues off countries; the c o u n t r i e s ;t h ef u r t h e r"out" further o u t "o one n eg goes, o e s，t the h em more ore g r e a ti n t e r e s ta ndi m p o r t a n c e，f great interest and importance, for o rr reasons e a s o n so off r relations e l a t i o n sa r ec o n d u c t e dd i r e c t l yw i t h， a are conducted directly with, and nd s space p a c ea and ndf focus, o c u s，t the present discussion will h ep r e s e n td i s c u s s i o nw i l l c confined o n f i n e dt to, o，c countries innt the center. Innt this o u n t r i e si h ec e n t er . 1 h i s beel limited toot the security b i m i t e dt h es e c u r i t yo h eP a c i f i cI s 1 a n d offt the Pacific Island s e n s e，t h et e r m"o'!.-ter o u t e rp e r i p h e r y "m ayj u s tb periphery" may just bee sense, the term C o u n t r i e s，a Countries, and thus the question offC China and ndt h u st h eq u e s t i o no hinaa nd a uphemism f o r a odern v e r s i o n o a e euphemism for a m modern version off the Korean Penn insula will not be巴 a addressed t h eK oreanP e n n i n s u l aw i l ln o tb d d r e s s e d s t r a t e g i cc o l o n i a l i s ma ndi f，i strategic colonialism and if, innf fact, this disa c t，t h i sd i s ‑ directly here. d i r e c t l yh e r e . Both China and the two B o t hC hina a nd t h et wo tinction makes any sense, then the end offt the t i n c t i o nm ak 巴sa nys e n s e，t h e nt h ee n do h e From a h historical standpoint, security inn F rom a i s t o r i c a ls t a n d p o i n t，s e c u r i t yi Cold War should make a d difference inn t the C o l dW ar s h o u l dm ake a i f f e r e n c ei h e the Pacific has been linked with nuclearism t h eP a c i f i ch a sb e e nl i n k e dw i t hn u c l e a r i s m role offt these so-called strategically significant r o l eo h e s es o ‑ c a l l e ds t r a t e g i c a l l ys i g n i f i c a n t inna all its forms since the i l li t sf o r m ss i n c et h ef i r s tu s eo u c l e a r first use offn nuclear states. s t a t e s . It I ti isss suggested u g g e s t e dt that h a tt this h i sd distinction i s t i n c t i o ni iss weapons. W 巴a p o n s . Not only were the N o to n l yw ere t h ef first i r s ta atomic t o m i c 120 1 2 0 国際協力論集 第 2巻 第 1号 b bombs ombs t too b bee u used s e di inn w warfare a r f a r ed dropped ropped o onn a a l a n d s，a ndi i g n i f i c a n tt o t et that h a tw while h i l e lands, and itti isss significant toon note Pacific country, Japan, but the military base P a c i f i cc o u n t r y，J apan，b u tt h em i l i t a r yb a s e the t h eT rustT e r r i t o r yA greementw hicho f f i c i a l ‑ Trust Territory Agreement which official- which enabled the United States tood drop those w hiche n a b l e dt h eU n i t e dS t a t e st ropt h o s e lyy p put those and the I u tt h o s ea nd t h eo t h e rM i c r o n e s i a ni s ‑ other Micronesian is- bombs was located onn T Tinian Island inn t the b ombs w as l o c a t e do i n i a nI s l a n di h e lands under l a n d su nderUS o n t r o lw asn o ts i g n e du n t i l US c control was not signed until n o r t h e r nM arianaI s l a n d s . T hati s l a n dw as northern Mariana Islands. That island was 1947，n 1947, nuclear uc 1e a rt testing e s t i n gw was asb begun eguni innt the h eM Marar‑ w restedf romt h eJ a p a n e s ea r e a tc o s tt o t attg great cost toon not wrested from the Japanese shaHs inn1946. s h a l l si 1946 o n l yt h eA l l i e sa ndJ a p a n e s ed i r e c t l ye ngaged only the Allies and Japanese directly engaged T hise a r l yn uc This early nuclearization 1e a r i z a t i o no offt the h en northwest o r t h w e s t i h ef i g h t i n g innt the fighting, but also toot the inhabitants off ，b u ta l s ot h ei n h a b i t a n t so Pacific set the stage for later nuclear competi巴tt h es t a g ef o rl a t e rn uc 1e a rc o m p e t i ‑ P a c i f i cs the Marianas. t h eM a r i a n a s . tion inn t the region, and clearly geo-political t i o ni h er e g i o n，a nd c 1e a r l yg e o・po! it i c a l Unfortunately for the Pacific, its involveU n f o r t u n a t e l yf o rt h eP a c i f i c，i t si n v o l v e ‑ conditions served only toom make things worse. c o n d i t i o n ss e r v e do n l yt aket h i n g sw o r s e . ment inn n nuclearism and nuclear politics did m ent i uc 1e a r i s ma nd n uc 1e a rp o l i t i c sd i d Innt the period before the establishment offt the 1 h ep e r i o db 巴f o r et h ee s t a b! ishmento h巴 not end with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Uran o te ndw i t hH iroshimaa ndN a g a s a k i . U ra Partial P a r t i a lT Test e s tB Ban an T Treaty reaty ( (1946-1962), 1946‑1962)，b both o t h nium mining, nuclear testing and nuclear n ium m ining， n uc 1e a rt e s t i n ga nd n uc 1e a r the United States and Britain tested nuclear t h eU n i t e dS t a t e sa nd B r i t a i nt e s t e dn uc 1e a r waste disposal were conducted innt the region w aste d i s p o s a lw ere c o n d u c t e di h er e g i o n warheads w arheads i h eP a c i f i c，a inn t the Pacific, although l t h o u g ha after f t e rt the h e and geo-political factors ensured a nd g 巴o ‑ p o l i t i c a lf a c t o r se n s u r e dt that h a tt the h e signing off t that agreement, both countries s i g n i n go h a ta greement， b o t hc o u n t r i e s Pacific region would continue toob beei involved P a c i f i cr e g i o nw ouldc o n t i n u et n v o l v e d moved their tests underground and changed m oved t h e i rt e s t su nderground a nd c hanged inn C Cold i old W ar p o l i t i c sa h r e eo h ef i v e War politics ass t three off t the five the location toot the continental United States. t h el o c a t i o nt h ec o n t i n e n t a lU n i t e dS t a t e s . established nuclear powers e s t a b! is hed n uc 1e a r p owers ( (US, US， f former o r m e r Inns spite offt the Test-Ban Treaty, France began 1 p i t eo h eT e s t ‑ B a nT reaty，F ranceb egan USSR, China) border onnt the Pacific, and both U SSR .C h i n a )b o r d e ro h eP a c i f i c，a ndb o t h atmospheric testing inn t the Pacific inn 1966, a t m o s p h e r i ct e s t i n gi h eP a c i f i ci 1966， France and Britain had F rance a nd B r i t a i nh ad t e r r i t o r i e sa nd/or territories and/or a and ndo only n l ys switched w i t c h e dt too u underground nderground t testing e s t i n gi inn c close 10 s et ties i e sw with i t ht the h er region. e g i o n . 1975. Att t this writing, France iss c cooper，F rance i o o p e r 1975. A h i sw r i t i n g ( 1 )T HE C OLD W AR P AC1F1C: N UCLEAR‑ (1) THE COLD WAR PACIFIC: NUCLEAR- a t i n gw i t ht h eg l o b a lm oratoriumo u c l e a r ating with the global moratorium onn n nuclear 1 SMAND S‑USSRR ELATIONS ISM AND U US-USSR RELATIONS t e s t i n g ，a l t h o u g ht h e r ea r ef r e q u e n tr reports e p o r t s testing, although there are frequent With the defeat off] Japan innW WWII, the W itht h ed e f e a to apani WII，t h eUS US r u l e ds upremei h en o r t h w e s tP a c i f i c . T he ruled supreme innt the northwest Pacific. The establishment offa a s strategic e s t a b l i s h m e n to t r a t e g i ct r u s tt e r r i t o r yi trust territory inn. M i c r o n e s i aw asp a r to t r a t e g yt eep Micronesia was part offa a U USSs strategy took keep others out offt the region, and this originally o t h e r so u to h er e g i o n，a nd t h i so r i g i n a l l y a p p l i e dt c o n o m i ca c t i v i t i e sa e l la u c ‑ assw well assn nucapplied tooe economic activities l e a ra nd c o n v e n t i o n a lm i l i t a r yo n e s . O ne lear and conventional military ones. One p a r to h eA mericans t r a t e g i ca gendaw aso part offt the American strategic agenda was off course nuclear testing inn t the Marshall Isc o u r s en uc 1e a rt e s t i n gi h eM a r s h a l l1 s ‑ i n d i c a t i n ga t r o n gd e s i r eo h ep a r to h e indicating a s strong desire onnt the part offt the 3 French military toor resume testing. F renchm i l i t a r yt esumet e s t i n g .3 3 3 I In nr reference e f e r e n c et to oF France's r a n c e ' sn nuclear u c l e a rt testing, e s t i n g，s see e e for example Tests Needed", Pacific f o re x a m p l e "French F r e n c hT e s t sN e e d e d "，Pac~βC N ews B u l l e t i n .V Vo1.8, o. 18 ，N No.12, o . 1 2，D December, e c e m b e r，1993. 1 9 9 3 . News Bulletin. In addition, with i t hr regard e g a r dt to on nuclear u c l e a rt tests, e s t s，i it ti is s I na d d i t i o n，w interesting to note the recent information i n t e r e s t i n gt on o t et h er e c e n ti n f o r m a t i o nc o m ‑ comi n go u to nU St e s t i n g .F o re x a m p l e，i ing out on US testing. For example, in nD Deceme c e m ‑ b e r，1993, ber, 1993，t the h eD Department e p a r t m e n to of fE Energy n e r g yr released e l e a s e d d o c u m e n t sw h i c hr e v e a l e d2 04 p r e v i o u s l yu n documents which revealed 204 previously unk nownt e s t s，s known tests, some o m eo of fw which h i c hw were e r ec conducted o n d u c t e di in n t h eP a c i f i c .( (WISE WISE N News ews C Communique o 隅 隅u n i q u e 4 407, 07， the Pacific. F February e b r u a r y2 25, 5，1994, 1994，p p.7) . 7 ). ー G GUNS, UNS，B BUTTER UTTERA AND NDT TUNA: UNA:A ALTERNATIVE LTERNATIVES SECURITY ECURITYI IN NT THE HEP PACIFIC ACIFICI ISLAND SLANDS STATES TATES 121 1 2 1 The Pacific has been used for testing more T heP a c i f i ch a sb e e nu s e df o rt e s t i n gm ore inn t the region, and nd t the h eo only n l yd direct i r e c tS Soviet o v i e t i h er e g i o n， a t h a nj u s tn u c l e a rw a r h e a d s . T heU S，U than just nuclear warheads. The US, USSR SSR access was through the Vietnamese bases i e t n a m e s eb a s e sa att a c c e s sw ast h r o u g ht h巴 V a ndC hinah avea l lu sedt h eP a c i f i cf o rm i s . and China have all used the Pacific for mis· C amranhB aya ndD a n g . T heo n l ym a j o r Camranh Bay and DaaN Nang. The only major sile testing and the United States maintains s i l et e s t i n ga nd t h eU n i t e dS t a t e sm a i n t a i n s power with substantial military bases and p ower w i t hs u b s t a n t i a lm i l i t a r yb a s e sa nd one offi its most important military facilities onn o n eo t sm osti m p o r t a n tm i l i t a r yf a c i l i t i e so facilities innt the region was the United States, f a c i l i t i e si h er e g i o nw ast h eU n i t e dS t a t e s， Kwajalein Atoll innt the Marshall Islands - t the K w a j a l e i nA t o l li h eM a r s h a l lI s l a n d s‑ h e which had, and continues toom maintain, major w hichh ad，a ndc o n t i n u e st a i n t a i n，m a j o r Kwajalein Missile Testing Range. This facil· K w a j a l e i nM i s s i l eT e s t i n gR a n g e . T hisf a c i l . installations onn t two Pacific islands, Hawaii awaii i n s t a l l a t i o n so wo P a c i f i ci s l a n d s，H ity issu used for testing missile, communication, ommunication， i t yi s e df o rt e s t i n gm i s s i l e，c and Guam, a ndG uam，s subsidiary u b s i d i a r yi installations n s t a l l a t i o n so onna a n numum‑ tracking and delivery systems. t r a c k i n ga ndd e l i v e r ys y s t e m s . It I tp played l a y e da ann b e ro s l a n d si h en o r t hP a c i f i ca ndi mpor ber offi islands innt the north Pacific and impor· i m p o r t a n tr o l ei h ed e v e l o p m e n to h eh i g h . important role innt the development offt the high· tant bases innJ Japan, Korea, orea，A Australia u s t r a l i aa and, nd，u un· n t a n tb a s e si apan，K during u r i n g t e c hw eaponsu s e dw i t hs u c hf a n f a r巴 d tech weapons used with such fanfare til recently, the Philippines. The United h eP h i l i p p i n e s . T he U n i t e d t i lr e c e n t l y， t the Gulf War, and ndi isse expected x p e c t e dt toop play l a ya anne exx ‑ t h eG u l fW ar，a S t a t e se n g a g e di a s s i v em i l i t a r ye x e r c i s e s States engaged innm massive military exercises panded role inn p post-Cold War American p anded r o l e i o s t ‑ C o l dW ar A merican s u c ha IMPAC ndT EAMSPIRITw i t hi t s such assR RIMP AC a and TEAMSPIRIT with its 4 s t r a t strategy 巴g ya and ndd defense. e f e n s e .4 allies innt the region, and also provided nomina l l i e si h er e g i o n，a nda l s op r o v i d e dn o m i n ‑ F From romt the h ee end ndo offt the h ew war art toot the h em mid-1980's, id‑1980's， all d defense assistance. Inn a addition, training r a i n i n g a e f e n s ea s s i s t a n c e . I d d i t i o n，t t h eP a c i f i cw asf o ra l lp r a c t i c a lp u r p o s e sa the Pacific was for all practical purposes ann programs such asst the American International p rogramss u c ha h eA mericanI n t e r n a t i o n a l E x t e r n a ls e c u r i t ya r r a n g e ‑ External security arrange- M i l i t a r yE d u c a t i o na nd T r a i n i n gP rogram Military Education and Training Program m 巴n t si h er e g i o nl i n k e dt h eU n i t e dS t a t e s， ments innt the region linked the United States, (IMET) which fostered American values such ( IMET)w hichf o s t e r e dA mericanv a l u e ss uch A Australia u s t r a l i aa and nd N New ew Z Zealand e a l a n di inn t the h eA ANZUS NZUS ass d democracy, capitalist economic develop· a emocracy， c a p i t a l i s te c o n o m i cd e v e l o p . Treaty and the United States and Japan innt the T r e a t ya ndt h eU n i t e dS t a t e sa ndJ a p a ni h e ment and civilian control offt the military were m enta ndc i v i l i a nc o n t r o lo h em i l i t a r yw ere US-Japan Security Treaty. The only other U S‑Japan S e c u r i t yT r e a t y . T he o n l yo t h e r available for foreign civilian and military a v a i l a b l ef o rf o r e i g nc i v i l i a na nd m i l i t a r y major presence inn t the region was France, e g i o nw as F rance， m a j o rp r e s e n c ei h巴 r 5 personnel from 'friendly' countries. p e r s o n n e lf rom' f r i e n d l y 'c o u n t r i e s .5 American lake. A merican l a k巴 which maintained bases inn N w hich m a i n t a i n e db a s e si New ew C Caledonia a l e d o n i a T The heo overall v e r a l ls strategic t r a t e g i cs situation i t u a t i o ni innt the h eP Paci· a c i . a nd F rench P o l y n e s i a，t and French Polynesia, the h ep primary rimary p purpose u r p o s e f i cc hanged s omewhat i 1984， w fic changed somewhat inn 1984, when hen t the h e offw which was the conducting and support off o hichw ast h ec o n d u c t i n ga nds u p p o r to n newly-installed Lange 巴w l y ‑ i n s t a l l e dL angeL Labour abourG Government overnmenti inn USSa and n u c l e a rw eapont e s t i n g . U n l i k et h eU nd nuclear weapon testing. Unlike the New Zealand announced itt w would not allow N ew Z e a l a n da nnounced i ould n o ta l l o w F rance，C France, China and Japan had hinaa ndJ a p a nh adn noof foreign o r e i g nb bases a s e s a nys h i p si n t oi t sp o r t su n l e s si asc e r t a i n any ships into its ports unless ittw was certain t h a tt h e yc a r r i e dn u c l e a rw e a p o n s . M r that they carried noo n nuclear weapons. Mr. 4 R Regarding Kwajalein, refer e f e rt to oR Radio a d i oA Austra· u s t r a 4 e g a r d i n gK w a j a l e i n，r lia, l i a，13, 1 3，14 1 4M May ay1993. 1 9 9 3 . A Also I s os see e ef for o re example x a m p l e S D Ii sD e a d . L o n gL iv eG P A C S ! "，P a c i j 王cR e p o r t ， "SDI is Dead·Long Live GPACS!", Pacific Report, A August u g u s t1993, 1993，p p.26; . 2 6 ;P Pacific a c { βcN News 仰 sB Bulletin, u l l e t i n ，V Vol.8, ol .8 ， No.6, May, and Wars Reverts to N o . 6，M ay，1993; 1 9 9 3 ;a n d "Star S t a rW arsR e v e r t st o Maiden Name", The heB Bulletin u l l e t i n0 of1t the h eA Atomic tomicS Scien· c i e 件 M a i d e nN a m e "，T tists, t i s t s ，V Vol.49 o. l4 9N No.6, O . 6，J July/ u l y /A August u g u s t1993, 1993，p p.8. . 8 L a n g e ' sp o s i t i o nl e dt h ee v e n t u a lw i t h ‑ Lange's position led too t the eventual with5 e n r yS .A l b i n k s i ."America's 5 H Henry S. Albinksi. A m e r i c a ' sF Future u t u r ei in nt the h e P a c i f i cI s l a n d sR e g i o n ' ¥ J Pacific Islands Region". Journal o u r n α10 of1t the h eP Pacific a c { βc No.61 (Vo1.l6, No.4), January Society, S o c i eか N O . 6 1( V o1 . l6 ，N o. 4 ) ， J a n u a r y 1994, 1994， p pp.133-134. p . 1 3 3 ‑ 1 3 4 . 122 1 2 2 国際協力論集 第 2巻 第 l号 d drawing rawing o off N New ew Z Zealand e a l a n df from rom t the h eA ANZUS NZUS Pacific fleet was comprised off7 755m major surP a c i f i cf l e e tw asc o m p r i s e do a j o rs u r ‑ T Treaty, r e a t y，a and helped too c create the impression nd h e l p e dt r e a t et h ei m p r e s s i o n aircraft carriers, face combat ships and two f a c ec ombats h i p sa ndt wo a i r c r a f tc a r r i e r s， that the non-nuclear ripples onnt the American t h a tt h en o n ‑ n u c l e a rr i p p l e so h eA merican 8 800 a attack t t a c ks submarines u b m a r i n e sa and n d3 30 0s strategic t r a t e g i cm misi s ‑ nuclear lake were turning into seriously antin u c l e a rl a k ew eret u r n i n gi n t os e r i o u s l ya n t i sile submarines, and according toot the US, the s i l es u b m a r i n e s，a nda c c o r d i n gt h eU S，t h e nuclear waves. n u c l e a rw a v e s . T This h i si impression m p r e s s i o ng grew rew w with i t h Soviet ships and submarines innt the S o v i e ts h i p sa nds u b m a r i n e si h eW estern Western t the h es signing i g n i n go offt the h eS South o u t hP Pacific a c i f i cN Nuclear u c l e a rF r e e Free P a c i f i cw erea l r e a d yc a r r y i n gc r u i s em i s s i l e s . Pacific were already carrying cruise missiles. Z oneT r e a t ya h eS o u t hP a c i f i cF orumh e l d Zone Treaty attt the South Pacific Forum held T herew erea l s os ome5 o v i e td i v i s i o n sd e ‑ There were also some 500S Soviet divisions de- i a r o t o n g at h ef o l l o w i n gy e a r . innR Rarotonga the following year. p l o y e di h eS o v i e tF ar E a s t，S ployed inn t the Soviet Far East, Siberia i b e r i aa and nd 日 F u e lw as a dded t h i sf i r eo u l y Fuel was added too t this fire onn 2 288 J luly e l la ass3 35-40% 5‑40%o offt the h eS Soviet o v i e t C Central e n t r a lA Asia, s i a，a assw well 1986，.when 1986, when M Mikhail i k h a i lG Gorbachev orbachev a announced nnounced i intercontinental n t e r c o n t i n e n t a lb ballistic a l l i s t i cm missiles i s s i l e s( (ICBMs) I C B M s )a and nd h his i sp perception e r c e p t i o no offt the h eS Soviet o v i e tU Union niona a c i ‑ assa a P Paci- s submarine-launched u b m a r i n e ‑ l a u n c h e db ballistic a l l i s t i cm missiles i s s i l e s( (SLBMs). S L B M s ) . f i cp ower . 羽 fic power. While acknowledging the legitiT h i l ea c k n o w l e d g i n gt h el e g i t i ‑ A Am major a j o rs submarine ubmarineb base a s ew was asl located o c a t e da e t r o ‑ attP Petro- mate interests offt the United States innt the rem atei n t e r e s t so h eU n i t e dS t a t e si h er e ‑ p a v l o v s ko h eK amchatkap e n n i n s u l a，a pavlovsk onn t the Kamchatka penninsula, and nd gion, Gorbachev criticized the g i o n， G orbachev c r i t i c i z e dt h e "militarized m i l i t a r i z e d deployments offt troops innt the Northern d e p l o y m e n t so r o o p si h eN o r t h e r nT e r r i ‑ Terri- triangle" off W Washington-Tokyo-Seoul, and t r i a n g l e " o a s h i n g t o n ‑ T o k y o ‑ S e o u l， a nd t o r i e s( K u r i l eI s l a n d s )w erei n c r e a s e d . tories (Kurile Islands) were increased. stated s t a t e dt h a th as"prepared that heew was p r e p a r e dt tooe expand xpandt ties" i e s " I d d i t i o nt i g h e rm i l i t a r yp r o f i l e，t Inna addition tooa a h higher military profile, the h巴 u s t r a l i a，N New ew Z Zealand, e a l a n d，t the h e w with i t hI Indonesia, n d o n e s i a，A Australia, Soviet Union also increased its political and S o v i e tU nion a l s oi n c r e a s e di t sp o l i t i c a la nd P Philippines, h i l i p p i n e s， T Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, h a i l a n d， M a l a y s i a， S i n g a p o r e， economic profile innt the region innt the e c o n o m i cp r o f i l ei h er e g i o ni h e 1980's. 1 9 8 0 ' s . Burma, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Brunei, the Republic B urma，S r iL anka，N e p a l，B run巴i ，t h eR e p u b l i c T a l k st m p r o v er e l a t i o n sw ereo p e n e dw i t h Talks tooi improve relations were opened with off t the Maldives and the micro-states off t the o h eM a l d i v e sa nd t h em i c r o ‑ s t a t e so h e C hinaa ndJ China and Japan. Among these Soviet initiaa p a n . A mongt h e s eS o v i e ti n i t i a ‑ Pacific. P a c i f i c . It I ti issi interesting n t e r e s t i n gt toon note o t et that h a tP Papua apua tives, perhaps t i v e s，p e r h a p st that h a tw which hichc caused a u s e dt the h eg greatest r e a t e s t N ewG uineaw as i n c l u d e da mongt h em i c r o ‑ New Guinea was included among the micro- s t i rw as t h es i g n i n go i s h i n ga g r e e m e n t stir was the signing off a a f fishing agreement s t a t e s， I n d i a m e n t i o n e d e l s e w h e r e i h e states, India mentioned elsewhere inn t the w i t hK i r i b a t ii 1986. T hea g r e e m e n tg a v e with Kiribati inn 1986. The agreement gave s p e巴c h a nd P a k i s t a n， S o u t h K orea a nd speech and Pakistan, South Korea and t h eU SSRf i s h i n gr i g h t si i r i b a t i ' sE EZb u t the USSR fishing rights innK Kiribati's EEZ but T aiwanl e f to u te n t i r e l y . 6 Taiwan left out entirely.6 d i dn o tg r a n ta c c e s st t st e r r i t o r i a ls e a s did not grant access too i its territorial seas G o r b a c h e v ' ss p e e c hm arked a m p o r t a n t Gorbachev's speech marked ann i important ( w i t h i n12 12m i l e so h ec o a s t )o t sp o r t s . (within miles offt the coast) orrt tooi its ports. t u r n i n gp o i n ti o v i e ti n v o l v e m e n ti h e turning point inn S Soviet involvement inn t the T hea g r e e m e n tw asn o tr eneweda f t e re x p i r a ‑ The agreement was not renewed after expira- P a c i f i c，a Pacific, and innt the mid-80's there was indeed ndi h em i d ‑ 8 0 ' st h e r ew asi n d e e d t i o n，a tion, and the Kiribati government refused too ndt h eK i r i b a t ig overnmentr 巴f u s e dt annu undeniable expansion innt the Soviet Pacific a n d e n i a b l ee x p a n s i o ni h eS o v i e tP a c i f i c agree too a a S Soviet demand for a r reduction off a g r e et o v i e td emandf o ra e d u c t i o no forces. f o r c e s . F ore xample，a For example, asso off1989, 1989，t the h eS Soviet o v i e t $300,000 innl license fees due toot the fact that $ 300， 000i i c e n s ef e e sd uet h ef a c tt h a t 6 G Gill in John Ravenhill. lN NooL Longer 仰 g e γ仰 an A American 棚田伝聞 6 i l li nJ o h nR a v e n h i l. Lake? L a k e ? S Sydney: y d n e y :A Allen l l e na and n dU Unwin, nwin，1989, 1989，p p..115. 1 1 5 fishing yields did not meet the inititial exf i s h i n gy i e l d sd i dn o tm e e tt h ei n i t i t i a le x ‑ pectations. Another agreement, one which did p e c t a t i o n s .A nothera g r e e m e n t，o n ew hichd i d G GUNS, UNS，B BUTTER UTTERA AND NDT TUNA: UNA:A ALTERNATIVE LTERNATIVES SECURITY ECURITYI IN NT THE HEP PACIFIC A C I F I CI ISLAND SLANDSTATES123 STATES 123 include landing rights, was asm made adew with i t hV Vanuatu anuatu i n c l u d el a n d i n gr i g h t s，w T These hesew were erec composed omposedo off8 877w warships, a r s h i p s，6 6 c cara r i inn1987, 1987，b but u ti itta also l s oe ended ndeda after f t e ro one n ey year. e ar . r riers, i e r s，4 444a attack Uacks submarines u b m a r i n e sa and nd 10 10s strategic t r a t e g i c Innt terms offf formal relations, throughout the I e r m so o r m a lr e l a t i o n s，t h r o u g h o u tt h e m missile i s s i l es submarines. u b m a r i n e s . I Inna addition, d d i t i o n，t the deployh ed e p l o y ‑ 1 9 8 0 ' s，t 1980's, the h eS Soviet o v i e tU Union nionm maintained a i n t a i n e dt ties i e sw with i t h ment offa a n new generation offc cruise missiles, m ento ewg e n e r a t i o no r u i s em i s s i l e s， a all l lo offt the h es states t a t e so onnt the h ew western e s t e r nP Pacific a c i f i cR im， Rim, the Tomahawk, t h eT omahawk，c carrying a r r y i n ga a 2 200 00 k kiloton i l o t o nw wara r ‑ w with i t h t the h e e exception x c e p t i o n o off S South o u t h K Korea orea a and nd h ed e s t r u c ‑ h head eadw with i t hr roughly o u g h l ys sixteen i x t e e nt times i m巴st the destruc- ( R e l a t i o n sw ere e s t a b l i s h e dw i t h (Relations were established with t i v ec a p a b i l i t yo h巴 a tive capability offt the atomic bomb dropped onn t o m i cb ombd roppedo S o u t hK oreai 1 9 9 1 ) .T h巴 S The Soviet o v i e tU Union n i o na also l s o South Korea inn1991). Hiroshima issi indicative offt the intensity offt the H i r o s h i m ai n d i c a t i v eo h ei n t e n s i t yo h e established relations with Fiji, Tonga, onga， e s t a b l i s h e d r e l a t i o n s w i t h F i j i， T nuclear arms race innt the Pacific onnt the n u c l e a ra rmsr a c ei h eP a c i f i co h ep a r t part Vanuatu, Kiribati, Nauru, Tuvalu, V anuatu， K i r i b a t i， N auru，T uvalu，W Western estern o h eU n i t e dS t a t e s . offt the United States. T Taiwan, aiwan 目 Samoa and PNG, and nd S Soviet o v i e te embassies m b a s s i e si inn S amoa a nd P NG， a It I ti issc clear l e a rf from romt the h ea above bovet that h a tt the h eP Pacific a c i f i c C anberra a nd W e l l i n g t o ns e r v e dt h eS o u t h Canberra and Wellington served the South h has a sb been e e nt the h ef focus o c u so off b both o t hA American merican a and nd P a c i f i cI s l a n d sr e g i o n ? I d d i t i o n，u n l i k e Pacific Islands region? Inn a addition, unlike S Soviet o v i e ts strategic t r a t e g i ci interest, n t e r e s t，p particularly a r t i c u l a r l yf for o rt the h e USSa and France, the USSR signed and ratio the t h eU ndF rance，t h eU SSRs i g n e da ndr a t i p a s t 10 10 o 15 y e a r s . W hy? T he a nswer past orr 15 years. Why? The answer f i e dt h eS o u t hP a c i f i cN u c l e a rF r e eZ one Free Zone fied the South Pacific Nuclear l i e so h eo n eh andi t r a t e g i cc o n c e r n sa b lies onnt the one hand inns strategic concerns ab- T r e a t ya nd e x p r e s s巴d i Treaty and expressed its t ss support u p p o r tf for o rt that h a t but stability innA Asia ass o u tn o to n l yt h eU SSRb u ts t a b i l i t yi s i aa out not only the USSR agreement. . a greement well. w e l l .A Attt the h es same amet time, i m e，t the h eU USSh has a se economic c o n o m i c The increased Soviet presence innt the PaciT hei n c r e a s e dS o v i e tp r e s e n c ei h eP a c i ‑ I nc o n t r a s tt h ei s l a n ds t a t e s ' c concerns. o n c e r n s . "In contrast toot the island states' fic provided the impetus for warnings off a a f i cp r o v i d e dt h ei m p e t u sf o rw arnings o f o c u so c o n o m i cs e c u r i t y，t focus onne economic security, the United States, h eU n i t e dS t a t e s， Soviet threat innt the region, which was innt turn S o v i e tt h r巴a ti h er e g i o n，w hichw asi u r n A Australia u s t r a l i aa and nd N New ew Z Zealand e a l a n d‑ - a ass w well e l la ass u s e dt u s t i f ya merican n a v a lb u i l d ‑ u p . used tooj justify ann A American naval build-up. J Japan apana and ndo t h巴rE other East a s tA Asian siana allies l l i e sa and ndf friends r i e n d s T heS o v i e tr e s p o n s et mericana c c u s a t i o n s The Soviet response tooA American accusations ‑ - a attach Uachh high i g hs strategic t r a t e g i ci importance m p o r t a n c et toot the h er ree ‑ w ast l a i mt h a tt h eb u i l d ‑ u pw asn e c e s s a r y was tooc claim that the build-up was necessary g gion. i o n . T The hei island s l a n ds t a t e sa ndt e r r i t o r i e ss t r a d ‑ states and territories strad- f o rn a t i o n a ld e f e n s ei h ee v e n to ar，a for national defense innt the event offw war, ass d l eo r ep r o x i m a t et h ea i ra nds e al a n e s dle orra are proximate toot the air and sea lanes w e l la o rc o n t a i n i n ga e a r m i n gJ a p a na nd well ass f for containing a r rearming Japan and o o m m u n i c a t i o nt h a tl i n kt h er i mn a t i o n s ; off c communication that link the rim nations; f o rp r o t e c t i n gS o v i e ts h i p p i n gt h r o u g ht h e for protecting Soviet shipping through the t h e s el a n e sc a r r yn e a r l yo n e ‑ h a l fo l lA mer‑ these lanes carry nearly one-half offa all Amer- P a c i f i ca ndI n d i a nO ceans Pacific and Indian Oceans. i c a nf o r e i g nt r a d e，a ican foreign trade, and connect the United nd c o n n e c tt h eU n i t e d W hatever i t ss i z e，t Whatever its size, the Soviet presence inn h eS o v i e tp r e s e n c ei States too f five off i its seven alliance relationS t a t e st i v eo t ss e v e na l l i a n c er e l a t i o n ‑ the Pacific could t h eP a c i f i cc o u l dh a r d l yc omparew i t ht h a to hardly compare with that off ships. Preservation offf freedom offn navigation s h i p s . P r e s e r v a t i o no r e巴domo a v i g a t i o n the United States. Innt the the USSd deh eU e ‑ t h eU n i t e dS t a t e s . I h e1980's, 1 9 8 0 ' s，t and the security offt these trans-Pacific routes a ndt h es e c u r i t yo h e s et r a n s ‑ P a c i f i cr o u t e s ployed its 3rd and 7th Fleets innt the region. p l o y e di t s3 rda nd 7 t hF l e e t si h er e g i o n t h u si i t a ln a t i o n a li n t e r e s tf o rn e a r l ya l l thus issa a v vital national interest for nearly all 77 i ibid., b i d ， 目 p p.1l9. .1 l9 t h eP a c i f i cr i mn a t i o n s‑ u ta l s of o rt h巴 l the Pacific rim nations - b but also for the isS ‑ 124 1 2 4 国際協力論集 第 2巻 第 1号 l land a n d s states t a t e s d dependent ependent o onn e export-import x p o r t ‑ i m p o r t man face. The temptation tooc count guns, orr m anf a c e . T het e m p t a t i o nt o u n tg uns，o trade.,,8 Attt the h es same amet time, i m e，i ittm must ustb been noted o t e d t r a d e .，，8 A ODA d dollars orr e even cans off t tunafish iss ODA o l l a r so ven c a n so u n a f i s hi t h a te ven a c c o r d i n gt n eo h em ostc on that even according too o one offt the most con- almost overwhelming. Innt the Pacific, howeva l m o s to v e r w h e l m i n g . I h eP a c i f i c，h owev‑ s e r v a t i v e U o r e i g n a f f a i r s a n a l y s t s， servative USS f foreign affairs analysts, e r，t er, these kinds offc counting exercises h e s ek i n d so o u n t i n ge x e r c i s e sa are r eo offl lii ‑ "the Soviet Union, except for submarine wart h eS o v i e tU nion，e x c e p tf o rs ubmarinew ar m i t e d， b mited, but u t u unfortunately n f o r t u n a t e l y g growing rowing v value. a l u e . fare, has little innt the way offe either f a r e，h asl i t t l ei h ew ayo i t h e rp present r e s e n to orr This issi innp T hisi a r td uet h ef a c tt h a te c o n o m i c part due toot the fact that economic potential capabilities too m mount offensive p o t e n t i a lc a p a b i l i t i e st ount o f f e n s i v eo p op- ODA o orrt tuna are often c o n s i d e r a t i o n ss ucha unaa r eo f t e n considerations such assODA erations innt the South Pacific, and nd( (at a tl least e a s tf for o r e r a t i o n si h eS outhP a c i f i c，a viewed ass l legitimate aspects offi island securv iewed a e g i t i m a t ea s p e c t so s l a n ds e c u r ‑ the foreseeable future) has noo p prospects for t h ef o r e s e e a b l ef u t u r e )h as n r o s p e c t sf o r ity, whereas anti-nuclear activities i t y， w hereas a n t i ‑ n u c l e a ra c t i v i t i e sa are r ed dee ‑ regional r e g i o n a lp o r to t h e rm i l i t a r ya c c e s s . T he port orr o other military access. The finitely not. f i n i t e l yn ot . W What hatf follows o l l o w sh here e r ei issa anna attempt t t e m p t p rimary S o v i e tt h r e a ti h er e g i o ni h u s primary Soviet threat inn t the region iss t thus toot turn this view offs security around, and too t u r nt h i sv iew o e c u r i t ya round，a ndt p o l i t i c a l‑ h e i re f f o r t st c c o m p l i s hd e n i a l their efforts too a accomplish denial political - t l o o ka h ew hole q u e s t i o no e c u r i t yf rom look att t the whole question off s security from too t the United States off t t h eU n i t e dS t a t e so h a tw hich i o t that which iss n not the point off v view off t those who t h ep o i n to iew o h o s ew ho a r et are too b bee available tooM MosCQw."g a v a i l a b l et oscow."g secured. s e c u r e d . ( 2 )S ECURITYF ORWHOM? (2) SECURITY FOR WHOM? Innt the usual conception offr relations among I h eu s u a lc o n c e p t i o no e l a t i o n sa mong Thus far, wee h have looked primarily att T hus f a r，w avel o o k e dp r i m a r i l ya states, there exists onnt the one hand, the idea s t a t e s，t h e r ee x i s t so h eo neh and，t h ei d e a t h eA mericana ndS o v i e tm i l i t a r yp r e s e n c ei the American and Soviet military presence inn t h a ta l ls t a t e s，l that all states, large a r g ea and nds small, m a l l，a are r ee equal q u a la and nd t h eP a c i f i cd u r i n gt h eC o l dWa the Pacific during the Cold War. r . A According ccording onnt the other, o h eo t h e r，t that h a tl large a r g ea and ndm militarily i l i t a r i l yp powero w e r ‑ too U USS s strategic thinking, that h a tm military i l i t a r yp prer巴 t t r a t e g i ct h i n k i n g，t f u ls t a t e sa r em ore e q u a lt h a no t h e r s，e ful states are more equal than others, espes p e ‑ sence was there toop protect both s e n c ew ast h e r et r o t e c tb o t hU USSa and ndP Pacia c i ‑ cially when ittc comes tood deciding what issa and c i a l l yw heni omest e c i d i n gw hati nd fic interests - inno other words, toom make the ref i ci n t e r e s t s‑i t h e rw ords，t aket h er e ‑ what iss n not secure. Most offt the prevailing w hat i o ts e c u r e . M ost o h ep r e v a i l i n g g i o nm ore s e c u r e . W hile t h i sa ssumption gion more secure. While this assumption definitions d e f i n i t i o n so offs security, e c u r i t y，p particularly a r t i c u l a r l yt those h o s ec crer e ‑ may have validity from the point offv view off m ayh ave v a l i d i t yf rom t h ep o i n to iewo ated since the beginning off t the Cold War, a t e ds i n c et h eb e g i n n i n go h eC old W ar， the United States, ittw warrants further considt h eU n i t e dS t a t e s，i arrantsf u r t h e rc o n s i d have centered onnt the idea offm military h avec e n t 巴r e do h ei d e ao i l i t a r ys strength t r e n g t h 巴 eration before r a t i o nb e f o r ei itt c can an b bee a applied p p l i e dd directly i r e c t l yt too a h eb a s i ce l e m e n to e c u r i t y . M i l i t a r i l y ass t the basic element off s security. Militarily the Pacific Islands. t h eP a c i f i cI s l a n d s . weak countries w eak c o u n t r i e sa r es e e na e i n gu n a b l et are seen ass b being unable too Inn a a w world offn nuclear weapons and transI orld o u c l e a rw eapons a nd t r a n s ‑ protect their p r o t e c tt h e i r b o r d e r s a nd t h u s a e i n g borders and thus ass b being national corporations, itti issd difficult toof find a n a t i o n a lc o r p o r a t i o n s，i i f f i c u l tt i n da v u l n e r a b l e，a vulnerable, and vulnerability isse equated with ndv u l n e r a b i l i t yi q u a t e dw i t h conceptualization off s security wearing a h huc o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o no e c u r i t yw earing a u insecurity. i n s e c u r i t y . ， f If, I h however, owever，o one ne w were ere t too d define e f i n e 8 8 V Vasey a s e yi in nl John o h nC C. .D Dorrance, o r r a n c e，e et ta al.. lT The heS South o u t h P Pacific: a c i f i c :E Emerging 隅e γ' g i n gS Security e c u 刊 かI Issues s s u e sa and ndU.S. U . S .P Policy. o l i c y . B Brassey's r a s s e y ' s( (US) U S )I Incorporated, n c o r p o r a t e d，1990, 1990，p p. .9 99. 9 . 9 9 i ibid., b i d .，p pp. p .7 78-79. 8 ‑ 7 9 . s e c u r i t yi erms o h er e d u c t i o no h o s e security inn t terms off t the reduction off t those elements which threaten the people offa ag given e l e m e n t sw hicht h r e a t e nt h ep e o p l eo i v e n country orr m make them feel insecure, then h e n c o u n t r yo ake t hem f e e li n s e c u r e，t GUNS, BUTTER AND TUNA: ALTERNATIVE SECURITY IN THE PACIFIC ISLAND STATES G UNS.B UTTERA NDT UNA:A LTERNATIVES ECURITYI NT HEP A C I F I CI SLANDS TATES security might look very different indeed. s e c u r i t ym i g h tl o o kv e r yd i f f e r e n ti n d e e d . 125 1 2 5 are the usual institution for the governments g overnmentsa r et h eu s u a li n s t i t u t i o nf o rt h e Taking this kind offa approach requires that T akingt h i sk i n do p p r o a c hr e q u i r e st h a t formation and implementation off s security f o r m a t i o n a nd i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o e c u r i t y t wo a s p e c t so e c u r i t yb i v e np a r t i c u l a r two aspects off s security bee g given particular policy. Inno other words, states are the actors, p o l i c y . 1 t h e rw o r d s .s t a t e sa r et h ea c t o r s . a t t e n t i o n . O ne h a st i t hw hat 'being attention. One has too d doo w with what b e i n g while the people w h i l et h ep 巴o p l eo orr c citizens i t i z e n so off t that h a ts state t a t e s secure' e c u r e 'm means, e a n s .a and nd t the h eo other t h e rc concerns o n c e r n sw who ho w would ouldb beet the h eb beneficiaries. e n e f i c i a r i e s . T The her realities e a l i t i e so off security policy. For the preb benefits e n e f i t sf from r o ms e c u r i t yp o l i c y . F ort h ep r e ‑ interdependence are such, however, that inn i n t e r d e p e n d e n c ea r es u c h .h o w e v e r .t h a ti b e i n gs e c u r e 'i o n c e p t u a l ‑ sent purposes, secure' iss c conceptuals e n tp u r p o s e s . 'being f a c t .s e c u r i t yf o ro n es t a t ei f t e ng u a r a n t e e d security for one state isso often guaranteed fact, i z e di e r m so h ed e g r e eo ized innt terms offt the degree off'insecureness'; i n s e c u r e n e s s ' ; b n o t h e r . byy a another. the reduction offi insecurity issb believed toor ret h er e d u c t i o no n s e c u r i t yi e l i e v e dt e ‑ t h er e l a t i o n s h i pi hich] a p a nr e l i e so h e the relationship innw which Japan relies onnt the s u l ti h ee nhancement o e c u r i t y . T h i s sult inn t the enhancement off s security. This U o ri t se x t e r n a ld e f e n s e . A nothere x a m ‑ USSf for its external defense. Another exam- c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o no e c u r i t yd i f f e r sf romt h e conceptualization offs security differs from the ple, and one off r relevance too t the Pacific Isp l e .a nd o n eo e l e v a n c et h eP a c i f i c1 s ‑ u s u a ls t r a t e g i ca p p r o a c hi h a ti e f i n e s usual strategic approach inn t that itt d defines l a n d s .i h a to s s o c i a t e ds t a t e h o o do r e e lands, isst that offa associated statehood orrf free s e c u r i t yf romw i t h i n .r a t h e rt h a ni e r m so rather than innt terms off security from within, a s s o c i a t i o ni hich t h e1 s l a n ds t a t ei o t association inn w which the Island state iss n not o u t s i d et h r e a t s . M o r e o v e r .i ssumedt h a t outside threats. Moreover, itti issa assumed that t h ep rimary a c t o rr e s p o n s i b l ef o rs e c u r i t y the primary actor responsible for security t h ed e g r e eo e c u r i t yi u n d a m e n t a l l yr e ‑ the degree off s security iss f fundamentally re- p o l i c y . policy. O nee xampleo h i sw ould b One example offt this would bee l a t e dt h ed e g r e et hicha i v e ns t a t ei lated toot the degree toow which a g given state iss T here i n h e r e n tr i s ki h ek i n do There iss a ann i inherent risk inn t the kind off a b l et o n t r o la nd m a n i p u l a t ei t sp o l i t i c a l . able too c control and manipulate its political, s e c u r i t yg u a r a n t e e du nderf r e ea s s o c i a t i o no security guaranteed under free association orr e c o n o m i ca nd s t r a t e g i ce nvironmen economic and strategic environment. The . t T he a s s o c i a t e ds t a t e h o o db e c a u s et h e r ei l w a y s associated statehood because there issa always feeling off'being secure' isse enhanced byyg greaf e e l i n go b e i n gs e c u r e 'i nhancedb r e a ‑ a o s s i b i l i t yt h a tt h ei n t e r e s t so h et wo a p possibility that the interests off t the two ter control over one's environment, while the t e rc o n t r o lo v e ro n e ' se n v i r o n m e n t .w h i l et h e s t a t e sm i g h tb ecomec o n t r a d i c t o r y . T hem ost states might become contradictory. The most l o s so h a tc o n t r o li n e v i t a b l yl e a d st e e l ‑ that control inevitably leads too f feelloss offt d r a m a t i ce xample f rom t h eP a c i f i c1 s l a n d s dramatic example from the Pacific Islands i n g so n s e c u r i t y . T hef i r s tr e q u i r e m e n to ings offi insecurity. The first requirement off w ouldb h a to u c l e a rt e s t i n g . T heU n i t e d would beet that offn nuclear testing. The United a n d o g e n o u sa p p r o a c ht e c u r i t yi h u s ann e endogenous approach too s security iss t thus S t a t e s .B r i t a i na ndF r a n c ea l lc o n d u c t e dn u c ‑ States, Britain and France all conducted nuc- t h a ti a k e sa t sp o i n to e p a r t u r et h er e ‑ that ittt takes assi its point offd departure the re- l e a rt lear tests 巴s t si innt the h eP Pacific a c i f i ci innt the h eb belief e l i e ft that h a tt the h e d u c t i o no n s e c u r i t y .a ndt h a ti i m sa n ‑ duction offi insecurity, and that itta aims atte en- p possession o s s e s s i o n o off n nuclear u c l e a r w weapons eapons e enhances n h a n c e s h a n c i n gc o n t r o lo h es e c u r i t ye nvironment hancing control offt the security environment. . s security. e c u r i t y . E Even veni ifft this h i sw were erei innf fact a c tt r u e( a n d true (and Talking about security also T a l k i n ga b o u ts e c u r i t ya l s or requires e q u i r e st that h a t 1 e l i e v ei o t ) .i i r t u a l l yi m p o s s i b l e I b believe itti issn not), itti issv virtually impossible wee d define both the actors (implementors) off w e f i n eb o t ht h ea c t o r s( i m p l e m e n t o r s )o t r g u et h a tn uc that nuclear 1e a rw weapons eaponsa are r ea ab benefit e n e f i tt too tooa argue security policy and the beneficiaries (those s e c u r i t yp o l i c ya nd t h eb e n e f i c i a r i e s( t h o s e t the h ep people e o p l eo off B Bikini i k i n io oruroa A t o l l .l e t orr M Moruroa Atoll, let that policy isss supposed toob beep protecting). who w hot h a tp o l i c yi u p p o s e dt r o t e c t i n g ) . a l o n ea nyo h eo t h e rp e o p l ei h eP a c i f i c alone any offt the other people innt the Pacific Generally, states are assumed toob beer responsiG e n e r a l l y .s t a t e sa r ea ssumedt e s p o n s i ‑ 1 s l a n d sw hol i v ei e a ro f .o u f f e rf r o mt h e Islands who live innf fear of, orrs suffer from the ble for the security offt their citizens, and state b l ef o rt h es e c u r i t yo h巴i rc i t i z e n s .a nds t a t e e f f e c t so u c l e a rc o n t a m i n a t i o n . T h ee x ‑ effects offn nuclear contamination. Toot the ex- 126 1 2 6 国際協力論集 第 2巻 第 l号 t tent e n tt that h a tn nuclear u c l e a rt testing e s t i n ga and ndn nuclear u c l e a rd defense e f e n s e e n d o g e n o u sa nd t h o s ew hich a are r er relatively e l a t i v e l y endogenous and those which benefit the people offF France, for example, itt o re xample，i b e n e f i tt h ep e o p l eo rance，f m more oree exogenous. x o g e n o u s . I Inng general, e n e r a l，t those approaches h o s ea p p r o a c h e s m ay b e e na e i n ge n d o g e n o u sf o rt h e may bee s seen ass b being endogenous for the which aim atte enhancing autonomy and giving w hicha ima n h a n c i n ga utonomya ndg i v i n g F r e n c h . A h es amet i m e，a French. Attt the same time, asst that h a ts same amep polio l i ‑ the people t h ep e o p l eg r e a t greater 巴rs say a yi inn t the h ef formation o r m a t i o no off c cyy o originates r i g i n a t e sc completely o m p l e t e l yo outside u t s i d eo off F French rench s security e c u r i t yp policy o l i c yc can a nb bees seen e e na assb being e i n gr relativee l a t i v e ‑ P Polynesia, o l y n e s i a，i ittc can a nb bees seen e e na assb being e i n ge exogenous x o g e n o u s l lyym more oree endogenous; n d o g e n o u s ;t those h o s ew which hichl leave e a v es secure c u r ‑ f for o rt the h ep people e o p l eo offt those h o s巴 i islands. s l a n d s . i ity t ym matters a t t e r si inn t the h eh hands ands o off m military i l i t a r ye elites l i t e s F ort h ep e o p l eo h eP a c i f i c，n For the people offt the Pacific, nuclearism u c l e a r i s mi inn particular are g general e n e r a la and ndn nuclear u c l e a rt testing e s t i n gi innp a r t i c u l a ra r e (foreign orro otherwise) are relatively more ex( f o r e i伊 o t h e r w i s e )a r er e l a t i v e l ym oree x ogenous. o g e n o u s examples off e exogenous security, measures x o g e n o u ss e c u r i t y， m easures e xampl巴s o 巴n ouss e c u r i t yi s e ‑ The concept offe endogenous security issu useT hec o n c e p to ndog t a k e ni h en ameo a t i o n a ls e c u r i t yw hich taken innt the name offn national security which ittp provides anna alternative toom milif u lb e c a u s ei r o v i d e sa l t e r n a t i v et i l i ‑ ful because c om巴 f rom，a ndp r i m a r i l yb e n e f i t，a third h i r dp para r come from, and primarily benefit, at tary security, a c concept o n c e p tw which hich i iss f focused o c u s e d t a r ys e c u r i t y， a t ty. y . An An e exogenous x o g e n o u sa analysis n a l y s i so offn nuclear u c l e a rs secure c u r ‑ a almost l m o s te exclusively x c l u s i v e l yo onns t r o n gs t a t e sa ndb u i l t strong states and built i ity t yw would ould c consider o n s i d e rC Cold o l dW ar s t r a t e g yf i r s t， War strategy first, a r o u n dl o g i ci hich 'strong' around logic inn w which iss a a p preres t r o n g 'i r e r e and focus onnt the significance offt the islands inn a ndf o c u so h es i g n i f i c a n c eo h ei s l a n d si quisite for Inno our highly militarized q u i s i t ef o r'secure'. secure¥I u rh i g h l ym i1 it a r i z e d t e r m s o h a t s t r a t e g y . terms off t that strategy. A n d o g e n o u s Ann e endogenous s o c i e t y，t h i sl o g i cc a nb very e r yc convincing, o n v i n c i n g， society, this logic can bee v a p p r o a c hw ouldb e g i nw i t ha x a m i n a t i o no approach would begin with anne examination off particularly iffo one limits one's considerations p a r t i c u l a r l yi n el i m i t so n e ' sc o n s i d e r a t i o n s t h ef e e l i n g so the feelings offs security offt the people offt the is巴c u r i t yo h ep e o p l巴 o h ei s ‑ toot the t h es t a t e sa h ec e n t e ro h巴 w states attt the center offt the world-syso r l d ‑ s y s ‑ lands, rather than those outside. Innt the prol a n d s，r a t h e rt h a nt h o s eo u t s i d e . I h ep r o ‑ t tem. e m . It I ti issp precisely r e c i s e l yb because e c a u s eo offt the h ea attractivet t r a c t i v e cess offs c e s so o r t i n go u te n d o g e n o u sa nde x o g e n o u s sorting out endogenous and exogenous n ness e s so offt the h em military i l i t a r ys security e c u r i t yp paradigm aradigmt h a ti that itt sources offi insecurity, one finds that itti issn not s o u r c e so n s e c u r i t y，o n ef i n d st h a ti o t i m p o r t a n tt e e kn ews e c u r i t ya l t e r n a t i v e s issi important toos seek new security alternatives p o s s i b l et q u a t es e c u r i t ym e r e l yw i t hm i l i ‑ possible tooe equate security merely with mili- i l a c e sw heret h el o g i co i l i t a r ys e c u r i t y innp places where the logic offm military security t a r yp r o w e s s ;o n em ustt a k ea oreh o l i s t i c tary prowess; one must take a m more holistic d o e sn o tw ork，s does not work, such asst the very small Pacific u c ha h ev e r ys m a l lP a c i f i c a p p r o a c h，l approach, looking att p peoples' lives and the o o k i n ga e o p l e s 'l i v e sa nd t h e Island states. Inns such anna analysis, one must I s l a n ds t a t e s . I u c ha n a l y s i s，o n em ust environments innw which they live. e n v i r o n m e n t si hicht h e yl i v e . onnt the one hand consider whether o h eo n eh andc o n s i d e rw hetherv e r ys m a l l very small T herei o u r s ea a r g eg apb etweent h e There isso offc course a l large gap between the s t a t e ss u c ha h o s ei h eP a c i f i ca r ew eak states such asst those innt the Pacific are weak i d e a lo ideal off'being secure' and the everyday realb e i n gs e c u r e 'a ndt h ee verydayr e a l ‑ b e c a u s et h e ya r ep e r i p h e r a lo r，o because they are peripheral or, onnt the h eo other, t h e r， ity off s security politics. We m must inn f fact i t yo e c u r i t yp o1 it i c s . We ust i a c t whether their peripherality makes them weak. w hethert h e i rp e r i p h e r a l i t ym akest hemw eak . think inn t terms off a a 'security continuum' s e c u r i t yc o n t i n u u m ' t h i n ki e r m so The discovery T hed i s c o v e r yt that h a tv very e r ys small m a l ls states t a t 巴sa are r en not o t which spans from the completely endogenous w hichs p a n sf romt h ec o m p l e t e l ye n d o g e n o u s m merely er巴l tiny copies offt the super-powers gives yt i n yc o p i e so h es u p e r ‑ p o w e r sg i v e s toot the completely exogenous. Each security t h ec o m p l e t e l ye x o g e n o u s . E achs e c u r i t y credence toot the concept offe endogenous securc r e d e n c et h ec o n c e p to n d o g e n o u ss e c u r・ policy has elements which p o l i c yh a se l e m e n t sw hicha r er e l a t i v e l ym or巴 are relatively more ity, and allows for the possibility i t y，a nd a l l o w sf o rt h ep o s s i b i l i t yt that h a tt the h e G GUNS, UNS，B BUTTER UTTERA AND NDT TUNA: UNA:A ALTERNATIVE LTERNATIVES SECURITY ECURITYI IN NT THE HEP PACIFIC A C I F I CI ISLAND SLANDS STATES TATES 127 1 2 7 meaning off s security may bee d different for m eaning o e c u r i t ym ay b i f f e r e n tf o r growing, not shrinking, and lanes offs shipping g rowing，n o ts h r i n k i n g ，a ndl a n e so h i p p i n g different countries. d i f f e r e n tc o u n t r i e s . and communication a nd c o m m u n i c a t i o na r ec o n c o m i t a n t l yi m p o r ‑ are concomitantly impor- itt The collapse offt the Soviet Union makes T hec o l l a p s eo h eS o v i e tU nionm akesi tant. isst the sea, not the islands, which iss t a nt . It I ti h es e a，n o tt h ei s l a n d s，w hichi t e m p t i n gt hrowawayt h er u l eb o o k sf o ri n ‑ tempting toot throwaway the rule books for in- offs such o u c hg r e a tc o n c e r n，a great concern, and ndt thus h u si ittw would ouldn not o t t e r n a t i o n a lr e l a t i o n sa nds t a r ta l lo v e ra g a i n . ternational relations and start all over again. b beeg going o i n gt too o of far a rt toos a yt h a ti anyr e s p e c t s， say that innm many respects, Y e t，i Yet, inn t the course offo h ec o u r s eo our u rs search e a r c hf for o ru undern d e r ‑ the security problem inn t the Pacific lies not t h es e c u r i t yp roblem i h eP a c i f i cl i e sn o t s standing t a n d i n go offw what hath has a sc changed, h a n g e d，i itti isse essential s s e n t i a l with the potential w i t ht h ep o t e n t i a lt h r e a ts ucha i t ht h e threat soom much assw with the t l s oi d e n t i f yt h a tw hich h a ss t a y e dt h e too a also identify that which has stayed the p o t e n t i a l l yt h r e a t e n e d . If potentially threatened. I ft this h i si issi innf fact a c tt the h e s a m e . I h i sr e s p e c t，w same. Inn t this respect, wee m must bee c careful ust b a r e f u l c case, a s e，t the existence h ee x i s t e n c eo orr n non-existence o n ‑ e x i s t e n c eo off t the h e not too a allow the magnitude off e events inn n o tt l l o wt h em a g n i t u d eo v e n t si S Soviet o v i e tU Union nions should h o u l dn not o tm make akev very e r ym much uchd difi f ‑ Europe tood disguise the fact E uropet i s g u i s et h ef a c tt h a tt e r t a i n that tooa a c certain f ference. e r e n c e . e x t e n t， t extent, the h e c current u r r e n t f focus o c u s o onn E East-West a s t ‑ W e s t H How owd a c i f i ci s l a n dc o u n t r i e sv iewt h e i r dooP Pacific island countries view their c chumminess humminess c can a ni inn s some ome w ways ays b bee s seen e e na ass o wn s e c u r i t y ? S u l i a n aS uwatibau s u g g e s t s own security? Suliana Suwatibau suggests m merely e r e l yt the h ei inverse n v e r s eo offE East-West a s t ‑ W e s ta animosity. n i m o s i t y t h a tf o rP a c i f i cI s l a n dp e o p l e s，t that for Pacific Island peoples, there h e r ea are r et three h r e e Inn t the Pacific, American Cold War policy I h eP a c i f i c，A merican C o l dW ar p o l i c y g groups r o u p so off "major security issues: issues off m a j o rs e c u r i t yi s s u e s :i s s u e so w as b a s e do h ea s s u m p t i o no S o v i e t was based onn t the assumption off a a 'Soviet political independence, issues offe economic des s u e so c o n o m i cd e ‑ p o l i t i c a li n d e p e n d e n c e，i t h r e a threat', although ， ' t a l t h o u g hw wee h have ave a already l r e a d ys seen e e nt that h a t velopment with social well-being and issues v e l o p m e n tw i t hs o c i a lw e l l ‑ b e i n ga nd i s s u e s e v e ns omeU i l i t a r ya n a l y s t sd i dn o tg i v e even some USSm military analysts did not give off c cultural integrity, resource conservation o u l t u r a li n t e g r i t y， r e s o u r c ec o n s巴r v a t i o n t h a tm i l i t a r yt h r e a tm uch c r e d e n c e . T he that military threat much credence. The and environmental stability."lO a nd e n v i r o n m e n t a l s t a b i l i t y . ，，1 0 p r i m a r yo b j e c t i v eo o1 primary objective offU USSp policy ic yi innt the h eP Pacific a c i f i c these issue areas ei s s u ea r e a sp presents r e s e n t sa ac challenge h a l l e n g et tooc cono n ‑ t h巴s h has a sb been, e e n，a and remains, the protection offs ndr e m a i n s，t h ep r o t e c t i o no sea e a v ventional e n t i o n a lc conceptions o n c e p t i o n so offm military i l i t a r ys security e c u r i t yb bee ‑ l a n e s . T h巴 'threat' t h r e a t ' o o v i e ti n t e r f e r e n c e lanes. The off S Soviet interference c cause a u s et they h e yn neither e i t h e rr rely e l yo onnt the h eu use s eo offf force, o r c e， p r o v i d e da oodc o n c r e t ee nemy，a provided ag good concrete enemy, and ndp perhaps e r h a p s nor n o rd doot they h e yr require e q u i r ei it. t . M Moreover, oreover，r rather a t h e rt than h a n now an new one will have toob beef found. For a n owa ewo n ew i l lh avet o u n d . F ora f focusing o c u s i n go onnp political o l i t i c a li institutions n s t i t u t i o n ss such u c ha assg govo v ‑ time, Libya was a g good candidate, ass w was ibya w as a o o dc a n d i d a t e，a as t i m e，L e ernments r n m e n t sa and nds states, t a t e s，t they take asst h e yt a k ea their h e i rp point o i n t Iraq; more recently, the growing presence off I r a q ;m orer e c e nt 1y，t h eg rowingp r e s e n c eo o offd e p a r t u r et h el i v e so h ep e o p l ei h ei n ‑ departure the lives offt the people innt the in- China has been receiving increased attention. C hinah a sb e e nr e c e i v i n gi n c r e a s e da t t e n t i o n . d i v i d u a lc o u n t r i e s . I h i ss e n s e，t dividual countries. Inn t this sense, they are h e ya r e Increased I n c r e a s e dd rugt r a f f i c k i n ga ndh uman r i g h t s drug trafficking and human rights examples off a ann e endogenous approach too e x a m p l e s o n d o g e n o u s a pproach t E ach o Each off v i o l a t i o n si o u n t r i e sl i k eF i j ia ndP NGa l s o violations innc countries like Fiji and PNG also p r o v i d e a t t r a c t i v e t a r g e t s f o r A merican targets for American provide attractive s e c u r i t yp o l i c y . T h巴 i security policy. The importance offt the Pacim p o r t a n c eo h eP a c i ‑ fic ass a ann e economically dynamic region iss f i ca c o n o m i c a l l yd ynamic r e g i o ni 1 0 S u l i a n aS i w a t i b a u . "Disarmament, 10 Suliana Siwatibau. D i s a r m a m e n t ，S Security e c u r i t y a n dC o ‑ o p e r a t i o ni nt h eR e g i o n :A nO v e r v i e wo f and Co-operation in the Region: An Overview of t h eM a i nS e c u r i t yC o n c e r n so ft h eS o u t hP a c i ‑ the Main Security Concerns of the South Pacif i c . " K e y n o t ea d d r e s sp r e s e n t e dt oA SPA C fic." Keynote address presented to ASP AC 1990，M 1990, Melbourne, e l b o u r n e，A Australia, u s t r a l i a，J JUly, u l y，1990, 1990，p p.5. . 5 . 128 1 2 8 国際協力論集 第 2巻 第 l号 s security e c u r i t yb beginning e g i n n i n gf from rom w within, i t h i n，r rather a t h e rt than h a n f fic, i c，h has two elements which relate too i indea st wo e l e m e n t sw hich r e l a t et n d e a anne exogenous x o g e n o u so one n ef from romw without. i t h o ut . pendence issues innt p e n d e n c ei s s u e si h a tr e g i o n . O nei h a t that region. One isst that PART P ART I I I . III. N NON-MILIT ON‑MILIT ARY ARY C CONCEPONCEP w i t ht h er e d u c t i o n si a n d ‑ b a s e dw eapons with the reductions inn l land-based weapons T TUALIZATIONS UALIZATIONS OF OF S SECURITY ECURITY I HE INN T THE a nd w eapon s y s t e m s， t and weapon systems, the sea has become h es e ah a sb ecome P ACIFIC PACIFIC perhaps more important than ever. Conp e r h a p sm ore i m p o r t a n tt h a ne v er . C o n ‑ ( 1 )P OLITICALI NDEPENDENCEA NDM I L I ‑ (1) POLITICAL INDEPENDENCE AND MILI- sidering the fact that the Pacific covers about s i d e r i n gt h ef a c tt h a tt h eP a c i f i cc o v e r sa b o u t T ARIZATION TARIZATION one-third offt the globe and o n e ‑ t h i r do h eg l o b ea ndt h a ti o n t a i n ss e a that ittc contains sea S i w a t i b a u ' sf i r s tg roup o s s u e sp e r t a i n s Siwatibau's first group off i issues pertains t o l i t i c a li n d e p e n d e n c e . too p political independence. l a n e sl i n k i n gs ome o h em ost d ynamic r e ‑ lanes linking some offt the most dynamic re- I h eP a c i f i c， Inn t the Pacific, g i o n so h ew orld，i gions offt the world, itti issh hard ardt tooi imagine m a g i n et that h a t there are still a n number offt t h e r ea r es t i l la umbero territories e r r i t o r i e sw which hich t h eU n i t e dS t a t e sw ouldb n t e r e s t e di ny the United States would beei interested inna any a r en o ti n d e p巴n are not independent d e n ta and ndw which hichh have aven not o tb been e e n s i g n i f i c a n td i f f e r e n c e si h eh ardwareo h e significant differences innt the hardware offt the a allowed l l o w e dt tooe exercise x e r c i s et h e i rr i g h tt e l fd e t e r ‑ their right toos self deter- p r e s e n ts e c u r i t y 'status present security s t a t u sq quo'. u o ' . B Bases as巴s h have a v e m i n a t i o n . T hef i r s ts t e pt e c u r i t yf o rt h e s e mination. The first step toos security for these b been e e nw withdrawn ithdrawn f from rom t the h eP Philippines, h i l i p p i n e s， a and nd p e o p l e si h ef r巴edomt peoples isst the freedom tood determine e t e r m i n et their h e i ro own wn those inn H Hawaii and Guam may bee r t h o s ei a w a i ia nd G uam m ay b un o run onn owever，c a nn o t p political o l i t i c a lf future. u t u r e . S Security, e c u r i t y，h however, can not l o w e rb u d g e t sw i t hf e w e rt r o o p s，b lower budgets with fewer troops, but u tt there h e r ei iss b e t e r m i n e db o l i t i c a ls t a t u sa l o n e，f status alone, for o r bee d determined byy p political n n d i c a t i o nt h e yw i l ld i s a p p e ar nooi indication they will disappear. . M Moreover, oreover， w without i t h o u tt the h ef freedom r e e d o mt too d determine e t e r m i n et their h e i ro own wn the end offt the Cold t h ee ndo h eC o l dW War ara and nd e easing a s i n go offt tene n ‑ c o n o m i c a nd s o c i a l i identity d e n t i t y i inn c cultural, u l t u r a l， e economic and social attl least one new alternative s sions i o n sh has a sa added ddeda e a s to n en ewa l t e r n a t i v e t e r m s，a terms, a p people can not bees said toob bees secure. e o p l ec a nn o tb a i dt e c u r e . toot the list offU USSm military options innt the Pacit h el i s to i l i t a r yo p t i o n si h eP a c i ‑ Unfortunately, the metropolitan powers with U n f o r t u n a t e l y，t h em e t r o p o l i t a np owers w i t h fic - B Belau, and increased activity atta another f i c‑ e l a u，a ndi n c r e a s e da c t i v i t ya n o t h e r the responsibility for providing for the exert h er e s p o n s i b i l i t yf o rp r o v i d i n gf o rt h ee x e r - Kwajalein. ‑K w a j a l e i n . cise off t c i s eo r u es e l f ‑ d e t e r m i n a t i o na r em ore i n ‑ true self-determination are more in- Disarmament has also led tooa a n new threat D isarmamenth a sa l s ol e dt ewt h r e a t t e r e s t e di r o m o t i n gt h e i ro wns t r a t e g i ca nd terested innp promoting their own strategic and i h eP a c i f i ci h ef o r mo o l l u t i o n . A innt the Pacific inn t the form offp pollution. Att p o l i t i c a lo b j e c t i v e s，a political objectives, and assa a r result, the peonda e s u l t，t h ep e o l least 巴a s ts some ome o off t the h ed destruction e s t r u c t i o no off c chemical h e m i c a l ples off t p l e so e r r i t o r i e ss u c ha ew C a l e d o n i a， territories such ass N New Caledonia, w weapons eapons a and nd p e r h a p so t h e r sh a sa l r e a d y perhaps others has already F French rench P Polynesia o l y n e s i aa and nd G Guam uam r remain e m a i nu under nder t a k e np l a c ea h eJ o h n s t o nA t o l lC h e m i c a l taken place att t the Johnston Atoll Chemical f foreign o r e i g nr rule. u l e . T The heq question u e s t i o ni isst then h e nw whether, hether， A gent D e s t r u c t i o nS ystem ( J A C A D S ) . T he Agent Destruction System (JACADS). The orr t toow o what hatd degree, e g r e e，t the h ee end ndo offt the h eC Cold o l dW War ar B ush a d m i n i s t r a t i o np l e d g e dt h a tl i m i t a t i o n s Bush administration pledged that limitations h a sc hangedt h ep e r c e i v e dt h r e a tt e g i o n a l has changed the perceived threat toor regional w ouldb l a c e do h eu s eo h ef a c i l i t y，a would beep placed onnt the use offt the facility, and nd s t a b i l i t yp o s e db h ei n d e p e n d e n c eo h e stability posed byy t the independence off t the the Clinton administration seems too b bee u upt h eC l i n t o na d m i n i s t r a t i o ns eems t p ‑ n o n ‑ i n d e p e n d e n tP a c i f i cI s l a n dc o u n t r i e s . non-independent Pacific Island countries. holding those pledges, but the h o l d i n gt h o s ep l e d g e s，b u tt h ep pressures r e s s u r e sf for o r M i l i t a r ys t r a t e g y，a Military strategy, assi ittp pertains e r t a i n st toot the h eP Pacia c i ‑ d disposal i s p o s a lo offw weapons eaponso offm mass assd destruction e s t r u c t i o na are r e G GUNS, UNS，B BUTTER UTTERA AND NDT TUNA: UNA:A ALTERNATIVE LTERNATlVES SECURITY ECURITYI INNT THE HEP PACIFIC ACIFICI ISLAND SLANDS STATES TATES 129 1 2 9 g r e at great. . O Onna a h happier a p p i e rn note, o t e，J Japan's a p a n ' sa about-face b o u t ‑ f a c e t h a tt h e yb s e dt n s u r et h a tJ apan a nd that they bee u used too e ensure that Japan and o onn t h es u b j e c to uc the subject off n nuclear 1e a rw waste a s t ed disposal i s p o s a la att G ermany d o td e v e l o pn uc Germany doo n not develop nuclear 1e a rc capabilities a p a b i l i t i e s sea isse encouraging, The hed dumping umpingo offn nuclear uc 1e a r s e ai n c o u r a g i n g， T 12 their own. T The he c current u r r e n tN North orth K Korean orean o off t h e i ro wn.12 byyR Russia prompted w waste astei innt the h eS Sea e ao offJ Japan a p a nb u s s i ap rompted 1e a rs i t u a t i o na dds a further u r t h e rd dimension i m e n s i o n n nuclear uc situation adds a f indignation and forced Japan too c change its i n d i g n a t i o na nd f o r c e dJ apan t hange i t s the importance offt the Pacific a and ndu underscores n d e r s c o r e st h ei m p o r t a n c eo h eP a c i f i c stance and join the London Dumping Convens t a n c ea ndj o i nt h eL ondonD umpingC onven‑ innU USSs strategy. i t r a t e g y . tion ban onno ocean dumping offn nuclear waste, umpingo uc 1e a rw a s t e t i o nb ano c巴and Perhaps the most significant implication off P erhapst h em osts i g n i f i c a n ti m p l i c a t i o no U n f o r t u n a t e l y，i o e sn o ts eema attt this h i sw writr i t ‑ Unfortunately, ittd does not seem the end offt t h ee ndo h eC o l dW arf romt h ep e r s p e c t i v e the Cold War from the perspective i ing n ga asst though h o u g hR Russia u s s i aw will i l lf follow o l l o ws suit. u i t . T his This the Pacific Islands iss t the possibility that o h eP a c i f i cI s l a n d si h ep o s s i b i l i t yt h a t offt i e a l l yi r o n i c，b iss r really ironic, because e c a u s eJ Japan a p a nw was as a ann a avid v i d they will noo l longer bee v viewed ass h having t h e yw i l ln o n g e rb iewed a a v i n g .... unp promoter r o m o t e ro offt the h es safety a f e t yo offo ocean c e a nd dumping u m p i n g . . u n ‑ strategic significance. Assl long asst there were s t r a t e g i cs i g n i f i c a n c e . A o n ga h e r ew ere til itth happened inni its own backyardY t i li appenedi t so wnb ackyardY two powers competing innt the Pacific for influt wop owersc o m p e t i n gi h eP a c i f i cf o ri n f l u ‑ The other strategic consideration iss t that T he o t h e rs t r a t e g i cc o n s i d e r a t i o ni h a t att l least ass l long ass i ittw was believed ence (or e n c e( o ra e a s ta o n ga as b e l i e v e d perhaps weaponry, and nd t the h ei infrastructure n f r a s t r u c t u r e p e r h a p sw eaponry， a that such as struggle was going on), the h eP Pacific a c i f i c t h a ts u c ha t r u g g l ew asg o i n go n )，t which goes with it, will i l ln not o td disappear i s a p p e a rf from rom w hich g o e sw i t hi t，w I Islands s l a n d sc could o u l dp play l a yo one n es side i d ea against g a i n s tt the h eo other, t h e r， current increased emphat the h er region e g i o nd due u et toot the h ec u r r e n ti n c r e a s e de m p h a ‑ e s s e n t i a l l yc ommodifying t that h a tp perception e r c e p t i o no off essentially commodifying sis byyt the USSm military onnl low intensity cons i sb h eU i l i t a r yo owi n t e n s i t yc o n ‑ t h e i rs t r a t e g i ci m p o r t a n c e . B e l a u，f their strategic importance. Belau, for o re examxam (LIC). ) . T The her resolution e s o l u t i o no offE East-West a s t ‑羽r e s tt tene n ‑ flict f l i c t( L IC s巴dt this h i si innn negotiating e g o t i a t i n gw with i t ht the h eU United n i t e d p pie, l e，u used but s sions i o n sh has a sl led e dn not o tt tooc complete o m p l e t ed disarmament i s a r m a m e n tb u t return S States t a t e sf for o rm more orea and ndm more orea aid i dm money oneyi innr e t u r n rather toop partial disarmament and ac change inn r a t h e rt a r t i a ld isarmamenta nda h a n g ei for military options. I ft the h ev vacuum acuumc created r e a t e d f o rm i l i t a r yo p t i o n s . If For example, a r recent e c e n tU USS r report e p o r t targets. t a r g e t s . F or e xample，a byyt the disappearance offt the S o v i e tt threat' h r e at 'i iss b h ed i s a p p e a r a n c eo h巴 'Soviet suggested that the strategic nuclear 1e a rw weapons eapons s u g g e s t e dt h a tt h es t r a t e g i cn uc n not o tf filled i l l e db ewt h r e a t，t byya a n new threat, then h e nt the h e'commodcommod‑ r remaining e m a i n i n ga after f t e rt the h ec u r r e n tr e d u c t i o n sb e current reductions beer re- i ification' f i c a t i o n 'o off p perceived e r c e i v e ds strategic t r a t e g i cs significance i g n i f i c a n c e d i r e c t e dt oward a r e a so h eT hird W o r l d toward areas off t the Third World directed b becomes ecomesi impossible, m p o s s i b l e，a and would ndw ouldr result e s u l ti innl less e s s c o n s i d e r e dt n s t a b l e，a considered toob beeu unstable, and nda also l s os suggested u g g e s t e d i n t e r e s ti n，a interest in, and nd n noo d doubt oubt l less e s sa aid i df for o rt the h e 11 Ap permanent ban onnd dumping nuclear waste 1 1 A e r m a n e n tb a no u m p i n gn u c l e a rw a s t e came into force onn 2 211 F February atts sea a e ac a m ei n t of o r c eo e b r u a r y 1994. 1994 The 722s signatories toot the London Dumping ConT he7 i g n a t o r i e st h eL o n d o nD u m p i n gC o n ‑ vention had days tooo opt out offt the ban, and n d v e n t i o nh a d100 100d a y st p to u to h eb a n，a t h eo n l yc o u n t r yw h i c hd i ds as R u s s i a . the only country which did soo w was Russia. The Russian government claimed ittc could not T h eR u s s i a ng o v e r n m e n tc l a i m e di o u l dn o t ratify the ban but would e n d e a v o rt too a avoid v o i d r a t i f yt h eb a nb u tw o u l d "endeavor p pollution o l l u t i o no h es e ab u m p i n gw a s t e sa n d off t the sea byy d dumping wastes and o t h e rm a t t e r . "( other matter." ("Russia R u s s i aR Rejects e j e c t sL Law aw B Banning a n n i n g N Nuclear u c l e a rW Waste a s t eD Disposal i s p o s a la e a "T att S Sea" The h eJ Japan a p a n T Times, 叩 e s ，W Wednesday, e d n e s d a y，F February e b r u a r y2 23, 3，1994, 1994，p p.12). . 1 2 ) s smaller m a l l e rP Pacific a c i f i cI Island s l a n dc countries. o u n t r i e s . not a d direct threat toop political indeW While hilen o ta i r e c tt h r e a tt o l i t i c a li n d e h ec o n t i n u i n gf o r pendence inna and offi itself, the continuing forp endencei ndo t s e l f，t 田 e i g nm i l i t a r yp r e s e n c ei the h eP Pacific a c i f i ca also l s o eign military presence inn t nda utonomyo h e a affects f f e c t st the h ei independence n d e p e n d e n c巴 a and autonomy offt the through the process P a c i f i cI s l a n dC o u n t r i e st h r o u g ht h ep r o c e s s Pacific Island Countries 12 Asahi s a h iS Shimbun, h i 隅b u n ，7 7J January a n u a r y1992. 1992 1 2A 1 3 0 国際協力論集 第 2巻 第 l号 o offm militarization. i l i t a r i z a t i o n . M Militarization i l i t a r i z a t i o ni issd defined e f i n e da ass a another n o t h e ra and nd e exacerbating x a c e r b a t i n ge ethnic, t h n i c， r religious e l i g i o u s "the process whereby military values, ideolot h ep r o c e s sw herebym i l i t a r yv a l u e s，i d e o l o ‑ a ndc u l t u r a ld i f f e r e n c e s . M i l i t a r ye x e r c i s e s， and cultural differences. Military exercises, gyya and g ndp a t t e r n so e h a v i o u ra c h i e v ea omi patterns offb behaviour achieve a d domi- m i l i t a r yf a c i l i t i e s，t r a i n i n g，t e s t i n g ，a ndo t h e r military facilities, training, testing, and other n a t i n gi n f l u e n c eo h ep o l i t i c a l，s nating influence onnt the political, social econoo c i a le c o n o . m i l i t a r ya c t i v i t i e sa r et h ep h y s i c a le v i d e n c e military activities are the physical evidence m i ca nd e x t e r n a ll i f eo h es t a t ea nd a mic and external life offt the state and ass a a o i l i t a r i s mi h er e g i o n . T h i sm i l i t a r i s m offm militarism innt the region. This militarism c o n s e q u e n c e，t consequence, the h es structural, t r u c t u r a l，i ideological d e o l o g i c a la and nd h a sb e e nc r e a t e dw i t ht h ee x p r e s sp u r p o s eo has been created with the express purpose off b behavioural e h a v i o u r a lp a t t e r n so o t hs o c i e t ya ndg ov patterns offb both society and gov- e n h a n c i n gt h es e c u r i t yo h er e g i o n，b enhancing the security offt the region, but inn u ti ， 1 3 are 'militarized,.,,13 This can be巴 ernment e rnment a r e' militarized¥T his c a nb fact the reverse has happened. Militarism f a c tt h er e v e r s eh a sh a p p e n e d . M i l i t a r i s m s e e ni x t e r n a lr e l a t i o n s，s u c ha h e US seen inn e external relations, such ass t the US has h a ss p r e a dt h r o u g h o u tt h eP a c i f i c，b spread throughout the Pacific, but u t"it i th has a s r e a c t i o nt ewZ e a l a n d ' sn uc 1e a r ‑ f r e es t a n c巴 reaction tooN New Zealand's nuclear-free stance n not o tr resulted e s u l t e di inni increased n c r e a s e ds security e c u r i t yf for o rt the h er ree ‑ o orrt the h er rapidity a p i d i t yw with i t hw which h i c hF France r a n c ea approached p p r o a c h e d g gion i o nf for o ri itth has a se engendered n g e n d e r e da ag r e a t e rs e n s eo greater sense off F Fiji i j iw with i t hp promises r o m i s e so offa aid i da and n dp plans l a n sf for o ra an naval a v a l i n s e c u r i t y巴 insecurity evident inng growing militarization off v i d e n ti rowingm i l i t a r i z a t i o no f facility a c i l i t ya after f t e ro other t h e rc countries o u n t r i e sp pulled u l l e do u ti out inn ， 1 4 Pacific societies.,,14 P a c i f i cs o c i e t i e s . 1987 1987i innr response e s p o n s et toot the h ec coups. o u p s . M i l i t a r y s e c u r i t y， p Military security, particularly nuclear a r t i c u l a r i y n uc 1e a r M Militarization i l i t a r i z a t i o ni issn not o ta a p phenomenon henomenonl limited i m i t e d security, has produced a s self-fulfilling prophes e c u r i t y，h a sp r o d u c e da e l f ‑ f u l f i l l i n gp r o p h e ‑ t tooe external x t e r n a lr relations. e l a t i o n s . I Innt the h ep a s tf ewy e a r s， past few years, c hereby t h ep r e s e n c eo i l i t a r yh a r d . cyy w whereby the presence off m military hard- there has been increasing internal t h e r eh a sb e e ni n c r e a s i n gi n t e r n a lu unrest n r e s t ware and personnel has created a s situation w are a nd p e r s o n n e lh a sc r e a t e da i t u a t i o n w hichh a sb e e na c c o m p a n i e db h y s i c a lv i o ‑ which has been accompanied byyp physical vio- which lends itself too m military solutions. w hich l e n d s i t s e l f t i l i t a r y s o l u t i o n s . l e n c ea ndm i l i t a r yc o n t r o. lence and military control. The coups innF Fiji l T hec o u p si i j i Eventual reductions innt tensions E v e n t u a lr e d u c t i o n si e n s i o n sa n d / o rr e u n i ‑ and/or reuni- are clearly one example, a r ec 1e a r i yo n ee xample，b but u tt there h e r ea are r巴 m many any f i c a t i o no h eK oreanP e n n i n s u l a，r fication onnt the Korean Penninsula, resolution e s o l u t i o n m more ore‑ - v violence i o l e n c ea and nds shootings h o o t i n g si innB Belau e l a ua and nd offt the Northern o h eN o r t h e r nT e r r i t o r i e sd i s p u t eb etween Territories dispute between N New ewC Caledonia a l e d o n i aa and ndw ari o u g a i n v i l l e，j war innB Bougainville, just u s t J a p a na ndR u s s i a，r Japan and Russia, reduced military spending, e d u c e dm i l i t a r ys p e n d i n g， t ame a e w . T hese e v e n t sh ave c a u s e d too n name a f few. These events have caused c 10 s i n go a s e si h eP h i l i p p i n e sa ndr e d u c . closing offb bases innt the Philippines and reduc- t h ee x t e r n a la nd r e g i o n a lp owers t a k e the external and regional powers too t take tions elsewhere onnt the Pacific t i o n se l s e w h e r eo h eP a c i f i cR imm ays e r v e Rim may serve a n o t h e rl o o ka h e i ri n v o l v e m e n ti h er e ‑ another look attt their involvement innt the re- t e v e r s es omeo h et r e n d st owardm i l i t a ‑ toor reverse some offt the trends toward milita- g i o n，a gion, and are resulting inn i increasing linkage nd a r er e s u l t i n gi n c r e a s i n gl i n k a g e r i z a t i o ni h eP a c i f i cI s l a n d s，b rization innt the Pacific Islands, but only ifft the u to n l yi h e between political b etween p o l i t i c a la n d / o rs t r a t e g i ca c t i v i t i e s and/or strategic activities Islands themselves I s l a n d st h e m s e l v e sa r en o tu s e da u b s t i are not used ass s substi- a nd c o n c e r n sa nd e c o n o m i ca s s i s t a n c e . I n and concerns and economic assistance. Int e r n a l l y，m ternally, military i l i t a r ys strength t r e n g t hi iss b being e i n gu used s e dt too r reinforce e i n f o r c eu unjust n j u s tc class 1a s sa and nd r racial a c i a ls t r u c t u r e s， structures, p pitting i t t i n g p people e o p l e a and nd f families a m i l i e s a against g a i n s t o one n e 13 1 3 o op pc cit., i ， . tS Siwatibau, i w a t i b a u，p p. .3 3. . 1 4i 14 ibid., b i d .，p p. .9 9. .F For o ra a d discussion i s c u s s i o no of fm militarization i l i t a r i z a t i o n i nt h eP a c i f i c，a l s os e eA n t h o n yP a y n e，"The T h e in the Pacific, also see Anthony Payne, P o l i t i c so fS mal 1S t a t eS e c u r i t yi nt h eP a c i f i c "， Politics of Small State Security in the Pacific", T The he J jllUrnal o u r n a l0 of1c Commmwealth 抑 制 問. w e a l t h仰 and dC Comparative 側 仰r a t i v e Size i z ea and nd S Survival·ur 山 崎l ‑ ‑ The T h e P o l i t i c s :S p e c i a lI s s u e仰m S Politics: Special Issue P o l i t i c so fS e c u r i t yi nt h eC a r i b b e a na n dt h e Politics of Security in the Caribbean and the P a c i f i c，V o lX XXXI, XXI，N No.2, o .2，J July u l y1993. 1993 Pacific, Vol. 目 G GUNS, UNS，B BUTTER UTTERA AND NDT TUNA: UNA:A ALTERNATIVE LTERNATIVES SECURITY ECURITYI IN NT THE HEP PACIFIC A C I F I CI ISLAND SLANDS STATES TATES 131 1 3 1 t u t e sf o rb a s e se l s e w h e r e . C o n s i d e r i n gt h e tutes for bases elsewhere. Considering the inn t the region. A g good example off t this iss i h er e g i o n . A ood e xample o h i si f a c tt h a tt h ef i r s to b j e c t i v eo h en ewU e ‑ that the first objective offt the new USSr refact o u n t r yw hichp prior r i o rt toom meeting e e t i n gw with i t h Japan, a c country which J a p a n，a strategy iss"to t op prevent r e v e n tt the h er ree ‑ g i o n a ld e f e n s es t r a t e g yi gional defense s t r o n go p p o s i t i o nt t sp l a nf o rd umpingl o w ‑ strong opposition tooi its plan for dumping low- e emergence m e r g e n c eo offa a n new ewr rival, i v a l，e either onnt the terrii t h e ro h巴 t e r r i ‑ l e v e ln u c l巴a level nuclear waste innt the northwest Pacific rw a s t ei h en o r t h w e s tP a c i f i c tory t o r y o h e f o r m e r S o v i e t U n i o n o off t the former Soviet Union orr noo a aid toot the region. Japanese gave almost g a v ea l m o s tn i dt h er e g i o n . J a p a n e s e e l s e w h e r e， elsewhere,,,15 . . 1 5 i itt i iss s somewhat omewhat d difficult i f f i c u l tt too b bee unpopularity grew with the driftnet fishing u n p o p u l a r i t yg rew w i t ht h ed r i f t n e tf i s h i n g o optimistic p t i m i s t i ca about b o u tt the h ep possibilities o s s i b i l i t i e sf for o ra a d dee ‑ issues, and although Japan i s s u e s， a nd a l t h o u g hJ a p a nn noo l longer o n g e ru uses s e s m militarized i l i t a r i z e da and nda autonomous utonomousr region. e g i o n . driftnets innt the South Pacific region, distrust i s t r u s t d r i f t n e t si h eS o u t hP a c i f i cr e g i o n，d ( 2 )E CONOMICD EVELOPMENTAND (2) ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND a nds u s p i c i o nr e m a i n . N e e d l e s st a y，t and suspicion remain. Needless too s say, the h e S OCIALW ELLB EING SOCIAL WELL BEING t tendency e n d e n c yo offJ Japan apant tooe export x p o r tw waste a s t ea and ndw wastea s t e ‑ T he i s s u巴so c o n o m i cd e v e l o p m e n ta nd The issues off e economic development and p producing r o d u c i n gi industries, n d u s t r i e s，i increased levels offr real n c r e a s e dl e v e l so e a l s o c i a lw e l lb e i n ga r ep e r h a p st h em osti m p o r ‑ are perhaps the most imporsocial well being estate purchasing and development and e s t a t e p u r c h a s i n g a nd d e v e l o p m e n t a nd t a n ti s s u e sp e r t a i n i n gt e c u r i t yi h er e ‑ tant issues pertaining too s security inn t the re- Japanese tourism development all help too J a p a n e s et o u r i s md e v e l o p m e n ta l lh e l pt g i o nt o d a y . M osto h eP a c i f i cI s l a n d sh a v e gion today. Most offt the Pacific Islands have make the Japanese presence felt, often innl lessm aket h eJ a p a n e s ep r e s e n c ef e l t，o f t e ni e s s ‑ a c h i e v e dp o l i t i c a li n d e p e n d e n c e，b achieved political independence, but u ta are r ea also l s o than-positive terms. t h a n ‑ p o s i t i v et e r m s . h heavily e a v i l yd dependent e p e n d e n to onnf foreign o r e i g na aid. i d . T The hei intron t r o ‑ The overall security interests offJ Japan are T heo v e r a l ls e c u r i t yi n t e r e s t so a p a na r e d duction u c t i o no off c cash a s hi into n t ot the h es subsistence u b s i s t e n c ee econoc o n o ‑ inextricably linked with those offt the United i n e x t r i c a b l yl i n k e dw i t ht h o s eo h eU n i t e d m mies i e so offt the h eP Pacific a c i f i cI Islands s l a n d sC Countries o u n t r i e sh has a sd done o n e States, and external defense iss l left too t S t a t e s，a nd e x t e r n a ld e f e n s ei e f tt that h a t a assm much ucht toou undermine nderminet their h e i ra autonomy utonomya assp polio l i ‑ c o u n t r y . T hes t r a t e g i ci n t e r e s t so a p a nv i s country. The strategic interests offJ Japan vis t tical i c a li independence n d e p e n d e n c eh has a sd done onet toop promote romotei it. t . a i st h eP a c i f i cI s l a n d sl i ei e s o u r c ep r o ‑ a v vis the Pacific Islands lie innr resource pro- Assl long asst the countries offt the region A o n ga h ec o u n t r i e so h er e g i o na are r e c u r e m e n t，o curement, ocean resources (fish) and timber. c e a nr e s o u r c e s( f i s h )a ndt i m b er . dependent onne external powers for the meeting d e p e n d e n to x t e r n a lp owersf o rt h em e e t i n g Inn a addition too t the conflict over driftnetting, I d d i t i o nt h ec o n f l i c to v e rd r i f t n e t t i n g， offe even their most basic needs, they can nevh e yc a nn e v ‑ o v e nt h e i rm ostb a s i cn e e d s，t t tuna u n af fisheries i s h e r i e si inn p particular a r t i c u l a ra are r ea a s source o u r c eo off e r u l yi n d e p e n d e n t，p errb beet truly independent, particularly a r t i c u l a r l yb because e c a u s e c conflict, o n f l i c t，a assl local fisheries o c a lf i s h e r i e sa are r ei increasingly n c r e a s i n g l yi inn ‑ t they h e ya r ev u l n e r a b l et o n f l i c t i n ge x t e r n a li n ‑ are vulnerable tooc conflicting external in- t terested e r e s t e di inng gaining a i n i n ga af foothold o o t h o l di innt the h ep profitable r o f i t a b l e f l u e n c e sa e l la v e r tp o l i t i c a lm a ‑ overt political mafluences ass w well ass t too o J Japanese a p a n e s es sashimi a s h i m i( (raw r a wf fish) i s h )m market. arket . W While hile n i p u l a t i o n . I s l a n dc o u n t r i e st h u so f t e nb e一 nipulation. Island countries thus often be- e environmentalists n v i r o n m e n t a l i s t sw orrya b o u tt h ed i s a p p e a r ‑ worry about the disappear- have inn a accordance with the wishes off t the h ave i c c o r d a n c ew i t ht h ew i s h e so h e a n c eo l u e f i nt u n a，p offb bluefin tuna, people e o p l ei innt the h ef fishing i s h i n gi inn ance donor nations innt the hope offg getting more aid, d o n o rn a t i o n si h eh opeo e t t i n gm orea i d， d u s t r ya r er u s h i n gt e v e l o pa i rf r e i g h t dustry are rushing too d develop air freight and donor countries use aid ass a a w way off a nd d o n o rc o u n t r i e su s ea i da ay o r o u t e st okyot e tt h巴 d routes tooT Tokyo toog get the dwindling supplies w i n d l i n gs u p p l i e s buying friends and promoting their interests b uyingf r i e n d sa ndp r o m o t i n gt h e i ri n t e r e s t s toot the Tsukiji Wholesale t h eT s u k i j iW h o l e s a l eF i s hM arketj u s ta Fish Market just a 1 5A 15 Asahi s a h iE Evening 官 側 仇g M News, ωs ，9 9M March a r c h1992. 1 9 9 2 . l i t t l eb i tf a s t e ra nda i t t l eb i tf r e s h er little bit faster and a l little bit fresher. . S Simii m i ‑ 132 1 3 2 国際協力論集 第 2巻 第 1号 l larly, a r l y，a assp political o l i t i c a lr restrictions e s t r i c t i o n sa and ndd depletion e p l e t i o no off s sirable i r a b l eb but u ti inn r reality e a l i t ye extremely x t r e m e l yd difficult i f f i c u l tf for o r supplies make logging innS Southeast Asia more s u p p l i e sm akel o g g i n gi o u t h e a s tA siam ore many off t the Pacific Island Countries. The m any o h eP a c i f i cI s l a n dC o u n t r i e s . T he and more difficult, Japan has a ndm ored i f f i c u l t，J apanh ast turned u r n e dt tooP PNG, NG， prospects p r o s p e c t sa r eb r i g h t e s tf o rt h eM are brightest for the Melanesian 巴l a n e s i a n F Fiji i j ia and ndt the h eS Solomon olomon I Islands s l a n d sa ass s sources o u r c e sf for o r states - P s t a t e s‑ NG，S PNG, Solomon olomonI Islands, s l a n d s，V Vanuatu, anuatu，N New ew tropical timber. t r o p i c a lt i m b er . Indiscriminate felling inn I n d i s c r i m i n a t ef e l l i n gi C a l e d o n i aa nd F i j i‑ e c a u s et h e ya r ec o m ‑ Caledonia and Fiji - b because they are com- those countries has led too f flooding and soil t h o s ec o u n t r i e sh a sl e dt l o o d i n ga nd s o i l p osedo a r g ev o l c a n i ci s l a n d sw hicha r er i c h posed offl large volcanic islands which are rich depletion, disrupting i s r u p t i n gt the h el lives i v e so off t the h el local o c a l d e p l e t i o n，d inn n i a t u r a lr e s o u r c e s，h natural resources, have ave r relatively e l a t i v巴l yl large a r g e people and dessimating some off t the world's p e o p l ea nd d e s s i m a t i n gs ome o h ew o r l d ' s populations and good soil. The Federated p o p u l a t i o n sa nd g ood s o i. l T he F e d e r a t e d l a s tt r o p i c a lf o r e s t s last tropical forests. States offM Micronesia, Samoa and Tonga have S t a t e so i c r o n e s i a，S amoaa ndT ongah ave I h em id‑1980's，i h ef a c eo o t hg row‑ Innt the mid-1980's, innt the face offb both grow- good soil, but limited land area and natural u tl i m i t e dl a n da r e aa nd n a t u r a l g ood s o i l，b ing anti-Japanese sentiment onnt the one hand, i n ga n t i ‑ J a p a n e s es e n t i m e n to h eo neh and， resources. r e s o u r c e s . These countries are already T hese c o u n t r i e s a r e a l r e a d y and calls for Pacific cooperation onnt the other, a ndc a l l sf o rP a c i f i cc o o p e r a t i o no h eo t h e r， heavily dependent onna aid, imports greatly h e a v i l yd ependento i d，i m p o r t sg r e a t l ye exx ‑ Japan increased its official development J apan i n c r e a s e d i t s o f f i c i a l d evelopment c e e de x p o r t sa nd e c o n o m i cs e l f ‑ r e l i a n c ei ceed exports and economic self-reliance iss assistance a s s i s t a n c e( ODA)t h eP a c i f i cI s l a n d sr e g i o n (ODA) toot the Pacific Islands region perhaps possible p erhapsp o s s i b l eb u ti e a l i t yw ouldb ery but innr reality would beev very ODA b budget t x c e e do nep e r c e n to t st o t a lODA u d g e t tooe exceed one percent offi its total d i f f i c u lt difficult. . T The he r remaining e m a i n i n gs small m a l li island s l a n ds states t a t e s (1.6% inn1990), and has maintained ( 1 .6%i 1990)，a ndh asm a i n t a i n e dt that h a tl level e v e l such s uch a h eM a r s h a l l s，K ass t the Marshalls, Kiribati, i r i b a t i，C Cooks, ooks，N Niue iue ever since. Innr real terms, this issa a r relatively e v e rs i n c e . I e a lt erms，t h i si e l a t i v e l y and Tuvalu, perhaps the real outer periphery, a ndT uvalu，p erhapst h er e a lo u t e rp e r i p h e r y， small amount offm money for Japan, but s m a l la mounto oneyf o rJ apan，b u ti itth has as a are r ed dependent ependent o onn a aid, i d，a and nd i imports m p o r t sa average v e r a g e massive implications for the small economies m a s s i v ei m p l i c a t i o n sf o rt h es m a l le c o n o m i e s five times exports. For these countries, selff i v et i m e se x p o r t s . F ort h e s ec o u n t r i e s，s e l f ‑ offt the Pacific Island Countries. The question o h eP a c i f i cI s l a n dC o u n t r i巴s . T heq u巴s t i o n reliance ass m modern states iss h highly unlikely. r e l i a n c ea odern s t a t e si i g h l yu n l i k e l y . offt the use and o h eu s ea ndp r o p r i e t yo i di eyondt h e propriety offa aid issb beyond the A m more detailed breakdown offg groupings iss A ore d e t a i l e db reakdown o r o u p i n g si s c o p eo h i sp aper . It I ts should h o u l db bee n noted, o t e d， scope off t this paper. shown below. s hownb e l o w . however, that all aid issi inherently political inn h owever，t h a ta l la i di n h 巴r e n t l yp o l i t i c a li C ATEGORY1 1 S e l f ‑ S u f f i c i e n c y :F i j. CATEGORY Self-Sufficiency: Fiji. i n a t u r e，a nature, and innt the case offv very small econondi h ec a s eo erys m a l le c o n o ‑ CATEGORY 2 P Potential Self-Sufficiency: C ATEGORY2 o t e n t i a lS e l f ‑ S u f f i c i e n c y : 17 1 7 mies such ass t those innt the Pacific, m i e ss u c ha h o s ei h eP a c i f i c，p particular a r t i c u l a r N ew C a l e d o n i a， P New Caledonia, PNG, NG， S Solomon olomon I Islands, s l a n d s， c a r em ustb a k e nt v o i dw hati h ev e r ‑ care must beet taken tooa avoid what innt the ver- Vanuatu. V anuatu n a c u l a ri nown a h e nacular iss k known ass t the a i d‑ d e p e n d e n c e 'aid-dependence syndrome'. In the Pacific, where the level off s yndrom巴¥Int h eP a c i f i c，w her巴 t h el e v e lo ODA ODA p per 巴rc capita a p i t ae exceeds x c e e d st that h a to offt the h eG GNP NPf for o r some countries, s ome c o u n t r i e s， t there h e r ei iss a ample mple c cause a u s ef for o r 16 concern. c o n c e r n .16 With orr w without ODA,，s self-reliance iss d dee l f ‑ r e l i a n c ei e W ith o i t h o u t ODA 1 6 M o t o h i k o S a t o . " A i d ‑ I n d u c e d D e p e n d e n c y 16 Motohiko Sato. "Aid-Induced Dependency S y n d r o m ei nt h eS o u t hP a c i f i c "i nY u k i oS a t o， Syndrome in the South Pacific" in Yukio Sato, e ed. d .P Prospects r o s p e c t sf for o rD Demilitarization e 隅 i l i t a r i z a t i o ni inn t the h eS South o u t h Pacific. IPSHU Research Report, No.16. Pac~βc. I PSHU R e s e a r c h R e p o r t， N o . 1 6 . H i r o s h i m aU n i v e r s i t y，A Hiroshima University, August, u g u s t，1991, 1991，p p. .9 97. 7 . 1 7J e r e m yC a r e w ‑ R e i d . E 17 Jeremy Carew-Reid. Environment, n v i r 側 ，隅 抑 止 A Aid id側 anddR Ree g i o n a l gionalism 間 飽 in 帥 t the h eS South o u t hP Pacific. a c i f i c . P Pacific a c i f i cR Research e s e a r c h M o n o g r a p hN O . 2 2 . N a t i o n a lC e n t r ef o rD e ‑ Monograph No.22. National Centre for Development Studies, The Australian National v e l o p m e n tS t u d i e s， T he A u s t r a l i a nN a t i o n a l University, pp. U n i v e r s i t y，1989, 1989，p p .18-19. 1 8 ‑ 1 9 G GUNS, UNS，B BUTTER UTTERA AND NDT TUNA: UNA:A ALTERNATIVE LTERNATIVES SECURITY ECURITYI IN NT THE HEP PACIFIC A C I F I CI ISLAND SLANDS STATES TATES 133 1 3 3 C ATEGORY3 i c r o n e s i a P u b l i c S e c t o r CATEGORY 3 M Micronesia Public Sector vironment - the sea, particularly the use and v i r o n m e n t‑t h es e a，p a r t i c u l a r l yt h eu s ea nd Bloat: Guam, Belau, Commonwealth offt the B l o a t :G uam，B e l a u，C ommonwealth o h e control offp pelagic and seabed resources, and c o n t r o lo e l a g i ca nds e a b e dr e s o u r c e s，a nd Northern Mariana Islands, Federated States N o r t h e r nM ariana1 s l a n d s，F e d e r a t e dS t a t e s maritime spaces. The exclusive economic m a r i t i m es p a c e s . T he e x c l u s i v ee c o n o m i c offM Micronesia, Marshall Islands. o i c r o n e s i a，M a r s h a l l1 s l a n d s . zones (EEZs) offt the Pacific Island Countries z o n e s( E E Z s )o h eP a c i f i c1 s l a n dC o u n t r i e s C ATEGORY4 u b s i s t e n c eA f f l u e n c e :A mer. CATEGORY 4 S Subsistence Affluence: Amer· 2 cover approximately c o v e r a p p r o x i m a t e l y 3 0， 30,OOO,OOOkm OOO， OOOkm2 o off ican Samoa, i c a nS amoa，W Western esternS Samoa, amoa，T Tonga, onga，F French rench o ocean, c e a n，m much offw which iss v very rich inn l living uch o hich i e r yr i c hi i v i n g P o l y n e s i a Polynesia. resources and perhaps a s source off s seabed r e s o u r c e sa nd p e r h a p sa o u r c eo e a b e d C ATEGORY5 e s o u r c eS c a r c i t y :K i r i b a t i， CATEGORY 5 R Resource Scarcity: Kiribati, minerals ass w well. The islands, acting indem i n e r a l sa e l. l T he i s l a n d s，a c t i n gi n d e ‑ T uvalu，T o k e l a u，C ook1 s l a n d s，N i u e，W al. Tuvalu, Tokelau, Cook Islands, Niue, Wal· pendently p e n d e n t l yo n i s o n，t orr i inn u unison, thus h u sh have ave c control o n t r o l l a c ea ndF utuna，P i t c a i r n1 s l a n d s . lace and Futuna, Pitcairn Islands. o over v e ra ann i immense mmense a r e ao e r yv a l u a b l er e ‑ area off v very valuable re- Boom: C ATEGORY6 x p i r i n g R e s o u r c e B oom: CATEGORY 6 E Expiring Resource s o u r c e s . W hile t h ee x p l o i t a t i o np r o c e s si sources. While the exploitation process iss N a u r u . Nauru. still too costly, the day issn not far off when the s t i l lt o oc o s t l y，t h ed ayi o tf a ro f fw hent h e W hile t h ea b o v ec a t e g o r i e sa r eu s e f u lf o r While the above categories are useful for presence offc cobalt-rich manganese nodules inn p r e s e n c eo o b a l t ‑ r i c hm anganesen o d u l e si m akingg e n e r a l i z a t i o n sa b o u tt h eP a c i f i c1 s ‑ making generalizations about the Pacific Is- the seabed will beeo offn not only potential t h es e a b e dw i l lb o to n l yp o t e n t i a lb u t but l a n d s，t lands, they h e ya are r eo offc course o u r s ea att b best e s ts subjective u b j e c t i v e a c t u a ls t r a t e g i cv a l u e . F i s h e r i e sa ndf i s h i n g actual strategic value. Fisheries and fishing a assessments s s e s s m e n t so offr relative e l a t i v ep potential. o t e n t i al Innf fact, . 1 a c t，i itt r i g h t sa r eb r i n g i n gi ore a nd m ore r e ‑ rights are bringing inn m more and more re- i a i dt h a tt h em osto p t i m i s t i cs c e n a r i o sf o r isss said that the most optimistic scenarios for venue, and are also as source for badly needed V 巴n ue，a nda r ea l s oa o u r c ef o rb a d l yn e e d e d t h eP a c i f i c1 s l a n dc o u n t r i e sl i ei h ep r o m o ‑ the Pacific Island countries lie innt the promo- foreign exchange. f o r巴i g ne x c h a n g e . t i o no h es o ‑ c a l l e dM 1RABe conomy，M tion offt the so-called MIRAB economy, MIgra1 g r a ‑ cious manipulation offc control over maritime c i o u sm a n i p u l a t i o no o n t r o lo v e rm a r i t i m e tion, Remittances, Aid and Bureaucracy. The t i o n，R e m i t t a n c e s，A ida ndB u r e a u c r a c y . T he spaces can s p a c e sc a nd o tt u r t h巴rt dooa a l lot toof further the h ep position o s i t i o no off solution too u unemployment for many island s o l u t i o nt nemployment f o rm any i s l a n d s states t a t e ss such u c ha ass K Kiribati i r i b a t iw with i t hl little i t t l el land a n da r e a area countries iss m migration, made easy inn m many c o u n t r i e si i g r a t i o n， m ade e a s yi any IS8 b u tv a s tE EZs.1 but vast EEZs. W With ith t the h ew wealth e a l t ho off t the h e cases byy a associated statehood. The rem ittc a s e sb s s o c i a t e ds t a t e h o o d . T he r e m i t t ‑ o ocean c巴ani innt their h e i rc control, o n t r o l，i itt i iss e essential s s e n t i a lt too t the h e ances from those who have gone abroad too a n c e sf r o mt h o s ew ho h ave g o n ea b r o a dt that the s security e c u r i t yo offt the h eP Pacific a c i f i c1 Island s l a n ds states t a t e st h a tt h e work w orka r ea m p o r t a n ts o u r c eo n c o m ea nd are anni important source offi income and marine environment and its living resources m a r i n ee n v i r o n m e n ta nd i t sl i v i n gr e s o u r c e s f o r e i g ne x c h a n g e . A h es amet i m e，a foreign exchange. Attt the same time, aid helps i dh e l p s beep protected. Moreover, itti issc crucial b r o t e c t e d . M oreover，i r u c i a lt that h a tthe t h e the employment problem through enabling the t h ee mploymentp roblemt h r o u g he n a b l i n gt h e w wealth e a l t ho offt the h es sea e an not o tb beet taken a k e nf from romt the h e1 Island s l a n d maintenance offd disproportionately large govm a i n t e n a n c eo i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l yl a r g eg o v ‑ s states t a t e sb byyo overly v e r l ye eager a g e re external x t e r n a la and ndr regional e g i o n a l ernment bureaucracies with plenty offp paying e rnmentb u r e a u c r a c i e sw i t hp l e n t yo a y i n g p powers owersw who hom move ovei innb before e f o r er regional e g i o n a la and ndl local o c a l jobs. j o b s . The above descriptions all neglect ann e exT he a b o v ed e s c r i p t i o n sa l ln e g l e c ta x ‑ tremely important element off t the island ent r e m e l yi m p o r t a n te l e m e n to h ei s l a n de n ‑ Furthermore, the judiF urthermore， t h ej u d i ‑ 1 8J i mA n t h o n yi nL i mT e c kG h e ea n dM ark1 . 18 Jim Anthony in Lim Teck Ghee and Mark 1. V a l e n c i a，e Valencia, eds. d s . C Conflict o n f l i c tO Over v e rN Natural α ， t u r a lR Resources e s o u r c e s innS South-East Asia the Pacific. u it h eP a c i f i c . U United n i t e dN Naa ‑ i o u t h ‑ E a s tA s iα即and t i o n sU n i v e r s i t y，1990. tions University, 1 9 9 0 . 134 1 3 4 国際協力論集 第 2巻 第 l号 p protective r o t e c t i v em measures easuresa are r ef fully u l l yi innp place. l a c e . T This his inn a a w world where land iss s scarce and suri orld w here l a n di c a r c ea nd s u r ‑ p r o t e c t i o no h em arine e nvironments h o u l d protection offt the marine environment should rounded byy v r ounded b a s tr e a c h e so c e a n . P a c i f i c vast reaches off o ocean. Pacific bees seen not assi individual environmental prob e e nn o ta n d i v i d u a le n v i r o n m e n t a lp ro peoples have traditionally viewed themselves p e o p l e sh avet r a d i t i o n a l l yv iewedt h e m s e l v e s tection t e c t i o na nd/or e c o n o m i cp o l i c i e s，b and/or economic policies, but u tr rather a t h e r ass c a a r e t a k e r so h e i re n v i r o n m e n t sa nd， caretakers off t their environments and, a a r to ndogenousa pproacht h ee n ‑ assp part offa anne endogenous approach toot the en- through a c complex system offt taboos and rei t h r o u g ha omplexs ystemo a b o o sa ndr e l i i-‑ hancement offt the security environment offt the h ancemento h es e c u r i t ye nvironmento h e g i o u sr i t e s，m gious rites, managed anaged t too g guarantee u a r a n t e eb both o t ht that h a t islands; both individually and collectively. i s l a n d s，b o t hi n d i v i d u a l l ya ndc o l l e c t i v e l y . t h er e s o u r c e sa r en o tc onsumedb eyondt h e i r the resources are not consumed beyond their ( 3 ) C ULTURAL I NTEGRITY， R (3) CULTURAL INTEGRITY, RESOURCE ESOURCE a b i l i t yt e p l a c e da nd t h a tp o p u l a t i o n that population ability too b bee r replaced and CONSERV ATION AND E ENVIRONMENTAL C ONSERVA TION AND NVIRONMENTAL does not exceed the ability offt the environment d o e sn o te x c e e dt h ea b i l i t yo h ee nvironment SUST AINABILITY S USTA INABILITY 2o0 toos t u s t a i ni sustain it. t .2 I Inna a s sense, e n s e，t the h eP Pacific a c i f i cI Islans l a n ‑ The final group off i issues mentioned byy T he f i n a lg roup o s s u e sm e n t i o n e db d e r sw erep r a c t i c i n gs u s t a i n a b l ed evelopment ders were practicing sustainable development Suwatibau iss t those off c cultural integrity, reS uwatibau i h o s eo u l t u r a li n t e g r i t y，r e long before that term was invented. l o n gb e f o r et h a tt ermw asi n v e n t e d . W estern Western source conservation and environmental suss o u r c ec o n s e r v a t i o na nd e n v i r o n m e n t a ls u s m odels o d e v e l o p m e nt models off ' 'development' 'a and nd ' 'modernization' m o d e r n i z a t i o n ' tainability. The coming offt the cash economy t a i n a b i l i t y . T hec omingo h ec a s he conomy have presented a c challenge too t the Pacific h ave p r e s e n t e da h a l l e n g et h eP a c i f i c has done much too b break down traditional h as d one m uch t reak d own t r a d i t i o n a l 'caretaker' c a r巴t a k e r 'a approach, pproach，b both o t hi inn r regard e g a r dt too t the h e family f a m i l ys t r u c t u r e sa ndr o l e si h eP a c i f i c，j structures and roles innt the Pacific, just u s t use offn u s eo a t u r a lr e s o u r c e ss uch a i m b e ra nd natural resources such asst timber and a a si t h e rd e v e l o p i n gc o u n t r i e s，a ass i itt h has inn o other developing countries, and nd minerals, and through the development m i n e r a l s， a nd t h r o u g h t h e d evelopment those who suffer most assa a r result are women t h o s ew hos u f f e rm osta e s u l ta r ew omen offt tourism. The ability offt the Pacific Island o o u r i s m . T hea b i l i t yo h eP a c i f i cI s l a n d and children. The struggle toob balance tradia ndc h i l d r e n . T h巴 s t r u g g l et a l a n c et r a d i ‑ Countries toos successfully meet C o u n t r i e st u c c e s s f u l l ym eett h a tc h a l l e n g e that challenge tiona I v values and roles with the demands off t i o n a l a l u e sa nd r o l e sw i t ht h ed emands o will tooa a g w i l lt r e a td e g r巴ed great degree determine e t e r m i n et their h e i rf future, u t u r e， the cash economy isso occuring throughout the t h ec a s he conomyi c c u r i n gt h r o u g h o u tt h e both inn t terms offc control over their own reb o t hi erms o o n t r o lo v e rt h e i ro wn r e ‑ life with serious implications for the future off l i f ew i t hs e r i o u si m p l i c a t i o n sf o rt h ef u t u r eo sources and innt terms offt the everyday lives off s o u r c e sa ndi e r m so h ee verydayl i v e so 19 1 9 Pacific cultures. P a c i f i cc u l t u r e s . the people. t h ep e o p l e . F Families a m i l i e sa and nd t traditional r a d i t i o n a lp power ower s structures t r u c t u r e s One result offg global environmental abuse iss O ner e s u l to l o b a le n v i r o n m e n t a la b u s ei a nd r o l e sa r en o tt h eo n l yv a l u e sb e i n g and roles are not the only values being the phenomenon known assg global warming, t h ep henomenonk nowna l o b a lw arming，o orr threatened. Inns spite offt the brilliant range off t h r e a t e n e d . I p i t eo h eb r i l l i a n tr a n g eo t h eg r e e n h o u s ee f f e ct the greenhouse effect. . It I ti iss n now ow b believed e l i e v e d cultural diversity innt the region, most Pacific c u l t u r a ld i v e r s i t yi h er e g i o n，m ostP a c i f i c t h a ta that a 2 2° C Cr rise i s ei inna average v e r a g et temperature e m p e r a t u r ea and nda a cultures c u l t u r e ss h a r ea t r o n gt i et h el a n da ndt h e share as strong tie toot the land and the four meter rise inn s sea level would f o u rm e t e rr i s ei e al e v e lw ould r e s u l ti result inn n a t u r a le nvironment . T This hish hardly a r d l ys surprising u r p r i s i n g natural environment. s e v e r eo ven c a t a s t r o p h i cd amaget any orre even catastrophic damage toom many severe 19 Francis X.. H Hezel, e z e l， S SJ. J ." "Culture C u l t u r ei inn C Crisis: r i s i s : 1 9 F r a n c i sX T Trends r e n d si h eP a c i f i cT o d a y " . J innt the Pacific Today". Journal OUrl 叫 1o offt the h e P a c i f i cS o c i e Pacific Society, No.61 か， N O . 6 1( (Vo1.l6, V o1 . l6， N No.4), o . 4 )，J January a n u a r y 1994, 1994，p p.141. . 1 41 . 0 peoples, countries and communities, ass w well p e o p l e s，c o u n t r i e sa nd c o m m u n i t i e s，a e l l 2 20 0i ibid b i d . . .• p p..142. 1 4 2 . G GUNS, UNS，B BUTTER UTTERA AND NDT TUNA: UNA:A ALTERNATIVE LTERNATIVES SECURITY ECURITYI IN NT THE HEP PACIFIC A C I F I CI ISLAND SLANDS STATES TATES 135 1 3 5 assa agricultural and social systems innt the Pacia g r i c u l t u r a la nds o c i a ls y s t e m si h eP a c i ‑ water and resources, putting pressure onnt the w a t e ra ndr e s o u r c e s，p u t t i n gp r e s s u r eo h e f i c . It fico I ti issp predicted r e d i c t e dt that h a tT Tokelau, o k e l a u，M Marshall a r s h a l lI Iss ‑ limited resources offt those islands not directly l i m i t e dr e s o u r c e so h o s ei s l a n d sn o td i r e c t l y lands, Tuvalu, Line Islands and Kiribati l a n d s， T uvalu， L i n e I s l a n d s a n d K i r i b a t i affected byy s sea level rise. a f f 巴c t e db e al e v e lr i s e . T This h i sw would ould i inn would cease tooe exist and the economic zones w ouldc e a s et x i s ta ndt h ee c o n o m i cz o n e s t u r nl e a dt oree n v i r o n m e n t a ld e g r a d a t i o n turn lead toom more environmental degradation off m many off t the remaining island countries o any o h er e m a i n i n gi s l a n dc o u n t r i e s and migration, creating a r recurring cycle off a nd m i g r a t i o n，c r e a t i n ga e c u r r i n gc y c l eo would have toob beer redrawn, assm many outlying w ouldh avet edrawn，a anyo u t l y i n g 233 refugees and environmental destruction. r e f u g e e sa nde n v i r o n m e n t a ld e s t r u c t i o n .2 211 islands would disappear. i s l a n d sw ouldd i s a p p e ar .2 A According c c o r d i n gt too o one n en newspaper ewspaper a article, r t i c l e，t the h e P PART ARTI IV. V .C CONCLUSION: ONCLUSION:W WHERE HERET TO? O? m members embers o off t the h eA Alliance l l i a n c eo off S Small m a l lI Island s l a n d ( 1 )S ECURITYC ONCERNSI HEP ACIFIC (1) SECURITY CONCERNS INNT THE PACIFIC States doomed too e ecological, social and a r ed oomed t c o l o g i c a l，s o c i a la nd S t a t e s "are I HEF UTURE INNT THE FUTURE e c o n o m i cc a t a s t r o p h ei h ef o r e s e e a b l ef u ‑ economic catastrophe inn t the foreseeable fu- T hei s s u e sa ndp r o b l e m sm e n t i o n e di h e The issues and problems mentioned innt the t u r e . " S omei s l a n d sa r ea l r e a d yf e e l i n gt h e ture." Some islands are already feeling the l last a s tp pages a g e sa are r ee examples x a m p l e so offt the h ek kinds i n d so offi issues s s u e s e f f e c t so e al e v e lr i s e，a effects offs sea level rise, and even threend e v e n "aat h r e e w which hich a are r et r u l ya f f e c t i n gt h es e c u r i t yo h e truly affecting the security offt the foot rise inno ocean levels would f o o tr i s ei c e a nl e v e l sw ouldr e n d e r7 i l ‑ render 722m mil- P a c i f i cI s l a n ds t a t e st o d a y . T heya r et h r e a t s Pacific Island states today. They are threats l i o np e o p l eh o m e l e s si hina，11 lion people homeless innC China, 11 m million i l l i o ni inn w hich m ay h ave t h e i ro r i g i ni o l dW ar which may have their origin inn C Cold War nd 8 i l l i o ni gypt，o orrf four o u r B Bangladesh, a n g l a d e s h，a and 8 m million innE Egypt, p o l i t i c sa ndc o m p e t i t i o n，b politics and competition, but u tw which hicha are r ea also l s oa a t times i m e st the h ei island s l a n ds states' t a t e s 'e entire n t i r ep population o p u l a t i o no off p product r o d u c to offt the h es t r o n gf o r c e sf o rW e s t e r n i z a ‑ strong forces for Westerniza- 2 3m i l l i o n . 23 million.,,22 ，，2 2 t i o na nd e c o n o m i c 'development' tion and economic inn k keeping development 'i e e p i n g Needless toos say, these changes innt temperaN e e d l巴s st a y，t h e s ec h a n g e si e m p e r a with demands offt the capitalist world-economy w i t hd emandso h ec a p i t a l i s tw orld‑economy t u r ea nds e al e v e lw oulda l s oh avea e v a s ‑ ture and sea level would also have a d devas- too w which even the countries off t the outer t hich e v e nt h ec o u n t r i e so h eo u t e r t a t i n ge f f e c to h ew o r l d ' sc u l t u r a lh e r i t a g e . tating effect onnt the world's cultural heritage. p e r i p h巴r periphery ya are r en not o ti immune. mmune. T These hese t threats h r e a t s W hilet h ee n t i r eP a c i f i cr e g i o nh a sa o p u l a ‑ While the entire Pacific region has a p popula- t a k e d i f f e r e n t f o r m s : p o l i t i c a l， e take different forms: political, economic, c o n o m i c， t i o no n l y5 i l l i o np e o p l e，i tion offo only 5 m million people, itt c contains o n t a i n sa a c u l t u r a la nds o c i a ld i s r u p t i o nb r o u g h to cultural and social disruption brought onnb byy r rich i c hc cultural u l t u r a lh heritage, e r i t a g e，i including one-third off n c l u d i n go n e ‑ t h i r do t h ei n c r e a s i n gm i l i t a r i z a t i o no h er e g i o na nd the increasing militarization offt the region and the world's known languages inn M Melanesia t h ew o r l d ' sk nown l a n g u a g e si e l a n e s i a i t ss o c i e t i e s，d its societies, dependence onn f foreign aid and e p e n d e n c eo o r e i g na i da nd alone. The inevitable changes inna agricultural a l o n e . T h巴 i n e v i t a b l ec h a n g e si g r i c u l t u r a l d i s r e g a r df o re n v i r o n m e n t a la ndc u l t u r a li n ‑ disregard for environmental and cultural in- and water systems would lead too m massive a nd w a t e rs y s t e m sw ould l e a dt a s s i v e t e g r i t y . T het h r e a t sa r ei e n s ea r o d u c t tegrity. The threats are inna as sense ap product migrations offr refugees too i islands with more m i g r a t i o n so e f u g e e st s l a n d sw i t hm ore o h eo l dw orldo r d e r，b offt the old world order, but they have not disu tt h e yh a v en o td i s ‑ 2 211 P Peter e t e rH Hulm. u l m . A A C Climate l i 桝 α t eo off C Crisis: r i s i s :G Global l o b a l 門M ηg a nd t h eI s l a n dS o u t hp α ，c i f i c . S o u t h Wa South Warming and the Island South Pacific. P a c i f i c R e g i o n a l E n v i r o n m e n t P r o g r a m m e， Pacific Regional Environment Programme, 1989. 1 9 8 9 . 2 222 I International n t e 門 叫t i 側 α 1H Herald e r a l d T Tribune, r i b u n e ， 18 18 F February e b r u a r y 1992. 1 9 9 2 . appeared with the emergence offt the new one. a p p e a r e dw i t ht h ee m e r g e n c eo h en ewo n e . Inn s sum, things both have, and have not I um，t h i n g sb o t hh ave，a nd h ave n o t changed inn t the Pacific. c h a n g e di h eP a c i f i c . It I ti iss f fairly a i r l yc certain e r t a i n 23 op cit., ， . tH Hulm. u l m . 2 3o pc i 136 1 3 6 国際協力論集 第 2巻 第 l号 t that h a ti independence n d e p e n d e n c ea and nd m militarization, i l i t a r i z a t i o n，e econoc o n o ‑ t tions i o n s( (TNCs) T N C s )b back a c kt toot the h ef fore. o r e . H owa r et h e How are the m i cd e v e l o p m e n ta nde n v i r o n m e n t a lc o n c e r n s mic development and environmental concerns r e l a t i o n sb etweenv e r ys m a l ls t a t e sa n dT NCs relations between very small states and TNCs w i l lc o n t i n u et h et o po h巴 P will continue too b bee a attt the top offt the Pacific a c i f i c t v a l u a t e d，w toob beee evaluated, when the resources available hent h er e s o u r c e sa v a i l a b l e security agenda. s e c u r i t ya g e n d a . T here a r e，h There are, however, owever，t three h r e e toot the former far exceed those offt the latter? t h ef o r m e rf a re x c e e dt h o s eo h el a t t e r ? a aspects s p e c t so off t the h ee emerging m e r g i n gw world orld o r d e rw hich order which H ow c a nT NCs b o n t r o l l e d， p How can TNCs bee c controlled, particularly a r t i c u l a r l y a r el i k e l yt a r t i c u l a rm eaningf o rt h e are likely toob beeo offp particular meaning for the w hent h e ya r ec l o s e l ya l i g n e dp o l i t i c a l l ya nd when they are closely aligned politically and P a c i f i cI s l a n dC o u n t r i e s . T hese a r e( 1 )t h e Pacific Island Countries. These are (1) the e c o n o m i c a l l y w i t h t h e l a r g e r c o u n t r i e s ? economically with the larger countries? d r a m a t i ci n c r e a s ei h en umbero m a l la nd dramatic increase innt the number offs small and W hatc a nv e r ys m a l ls t a t e sd a k ea dvan What can very small states doot toot take advan- v e r ys m a l ls t a t e sw orldwide， ( states worldwide, (2) 2 )t the h eg growr o w ‑ very small t a g eo h ep o t e n t i a lb e n e f i t so h eT NCs tage off t the potential benefits off t the TNCs i ing n gt tensions e n s i o n sb between etweenN North o r t ha and ndS South o u t ha and nd( 3 ) (3) w i t h o u ts a c r i f i c i n ga l lt h e yh ave i e t u r n ? without sacrificing all they have inn r return? t h eg rowinga w a r e n e s so h ei m p o r t a n c eo the growing awareness offt the importance off A t r a t e g i cc o n c e r n st u r nf romq u e s t i o n so Asss strategic concerns turn from questions off e n v i r o n m e n t a li s s u e s . environmental issues. n u c l e a rs t r a t e g yt h o s eo o wi n t e n s i t y nuclear strategy too t those off l low intensity T hef i r s ta r e af o rc o n s i d e r a t i o ni h a to The first area for consideration isst that off w a r f a r e，a warfare, and concerns over Cold ndc o n c e r n so v e rC o l dW War ari ideolod e o l o ‑ t h ei m p l i c a t i o n so h ec r e a t i o no umerous the implications offt the creation offn numerous g gyy a are r er replaced e p l a c e db byyt those h o s eo over v e re economic c o n o m i cd difi f ‑ n ews t a t e sf o rt h ea l r e a d ye x i s t i n gs m a l la nd new states for the already existing small and h ec o n t r o lo h eT NCsi r u c i a l f ferences, e r e n c e s，t the control offt the TNCs issa a c crucial m i c r o ‑ s t a t e s . T h i sq u e s t i o nc a no o u r s eb micro-states. This question can offc course bee i s s u ef o rv e r ys m a l ls t a t e sw i s h i n gt a i n ‑ states wishing toom mainissue for very small f ramedi h ec o n t e x to h et r e n d st owardi n framed innt the context offt the trends toward in- t a i ne v e na e m b l e n c eo u t o n o m y . tain even as semblence offa autonomy. t e g r a t i o na ndf r a g m e n t a t i o ni orldp o l i t i c s . tegration and fragmentation innw world politics. o r t h ‑ S o u t h T he r e m a i n i n gi s s u ea r e a s， N The remaining issue areas, North-South It I tc can a na also, l s o，h however, owever，b beec considered o n s i d e r e df from romt the h e t e n s i o n s a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o n c e r n s， a tensions and environmental concerns, are r e p perspective e r s p e c t i v eo offt the h ep political o l i t i c a ll legitimacy e g i t i m a c yo offv ery very s e p a r a t eb u tr e l a t e d，c separate but related, centering e n t e r i n go onn t the h eo one n e s m a l ls t a t e s . We aves e e nt h a tw h i l ep o l i ‑ small states. We h have seen that while poli- h hand ando onnt the h eq question u e s t i o no offc control o n t r o lo over, v e r，a and den dd e ‑ t i c a lt h e o r ya l l o w sf o rt h ee x i s t e n c eo ery tical theory allows for the existence offv very pendence onn n natural resources byy t the counp e n d e n c eo a t u r a lr e s o u r c e sb h ec oun s m a l la n dw eaks t a t e s，s small and weak states, strategic t r a t e g i ct theory h e o r yd does o e s t r i e so h es o ‑ c a l l e dT hirdW orld，a tries offt the so-called Third World, and ndo onnt the h e n not. ot Will the creation offa an new generation off . W i l lt h ec r e a t i o no ewg e n e r a t i o no o other, t h e r，t the objective importance offp protecting h eo b j e c t i v ei m p o r t a n c eo r o t e c t i n g very small states mean merely the creation off v e r ys m a l ls t a t e sm eanm e r e l yt h ec r e a t i o no and sustaining those resources. North-South a nds u s t a i n i n gt h o s er e s o u r c e s . N o r t h ‑ S o u t h a n new variation onn t the old set off m military a ew v a r i a t i o no h eo l ds e to i l i t a r y tensions encompass a w whole range offi issues, t e n s i o n se ncompass a hole r a n g eo s s u e s， alliances? Probably, but a l l i a n c e s ? P r o b a b l y，b u ti ittm may aya also l s ol lead e a dt too some s omeb but u tn not o ta all l lo offw which hicha are r er related e l a t e dt toor ree ‑ n new ewo ones n e sw which hichf focus o c u so onn a a p positive o s i t i v ea applicap p l i c a ‑ s source o u r c ep preservation r e s e r v a t i o na and ndg global l o b a le environmental n v i r o n m e n t a l t tion i o no offs security, e c u r i t y，s seeking toor reduce insecurity e e k i n gt e d u c ei n s e c u r i t y c concerns. o n c e r n s . r a t h e rt h a ni n c r e a s ea rmaments rather than increase armaments. u t u r eo concerns are global and involve the future off c o n c e r n sa r eg l o b a la ndi n v o l v et h巴 f S Similarly, i m i l a r l y， s some environmental ome e n v i r o n m e n t a l T hec r巴a The creation offn new t i o no ewv very e r ys small m a l ls states t a t e sa also l s o t h ee n t i r eh umanr a c e，w the entire human race, while others h i l eo t h e r sa are r ev very e r y b brings r i n g st the h ep problem roblemo offt transnational r a n s n a t i o n a lc corporao r p o r a ‑ l o c a la nd s p e c i f i ci a t u r e . N o r t h ‑ S o u t h local and specific inn n nature. North-South G GUNS, UNS，B BUTTER UTTERA AND NDT TUNA: UNA:A ALTERNATIVE LTERNATIVES SECURITY ECURITYI IN NT THE HEP PACIFIC ACIFICI ISLAND SLANDS STATES TATES 137 1 3 7 issues and environmental concerns would i s s u e s a nd e n v i r o n m e n t a lc o n c e r n sw ould w asj u s ta a s t eo hati t o r ef o rt h ef u ‑ was just at taste offw what issi inns store for the fu- each exist without the other, t h e r，b but u tt their h e i rm mutual u t u a l e a c he x i s tw i t h o u tt h巴 o ture. Itto offc course goes without saying that t u r e . I o u r s eg o e sw i t h o u ts a y i n gt h a t presence makes both more serious. p r e s e n c em akesb o t hm ores e r i o u s . the cost offm military conflicts such asst these iss t h ec o s to i l i t a r yc o n f l i c t ss u c ha h e s ei T he c o n t r a d i c t i o n si n h e r e n ti h es t r u c The contradictions inherent inn t the struct u r eo h ec a p i t a l i s tw orld‑economy w hich ture off t the capitalist world-economy which huge and the potential for both human and h uge a nd t h ep o t e n t i a lf o rb o t hh uman a nd environmental destruction immense. e n v i r o n m e n t a ld e s t r u c t i o ni m m e n s e . create and maintain poor areas inn t the c r e a t e a nd m a i n t a i n p o o r a r e a s i h e The non-military (at least for the present) T he n o n ‑ m i l i t a r y( a tl e a s tf o rt h ep r e s e n t ) resource-rich 'south' and rich areas innt the inr e s o u r c e ‑ r i c h' s o u t h 'a ndr i c ha r e a si h ei n ‑ component iss t the division between the rec omponent i h ed i v i s i o nb etween t h er e ‑ dustrialized are nothing new. Until d u s t r i a l i z巴d 'north' n o r t h 'a r en o t h i n gn e w . U n t i l source haves and have-nots. I fo one nea assesses s s e s s e s s o u r c eh a v e sa ndh a v e ‑ n o t s . If recently, the socialist inn e 1y， t h e s o c i a l i s t 'south' s o u t h ' i eastern a s t 巴r n r e c e nt haves and have-nots onnt the basis offr relative h a v e sa ndh a v e ‑ n o t so h eb a s i so e l a t i v e Europe centered onn t the Soviet Union. ToE urope c e n t e r e do h eS o v i e tU n i o n . T o ‑ possession and/or access toow wealth, then h e nt the h e p o s s e s s i o na nd/ora c c e s st e a l t h，t day, the new European includes, h en ew E uropean 'south' s o u t h 'i ndudes，b but u t d ay，t North becomes the haves and the South the N orth b ecomes t h eh aves a nd t h eS o u t ht h e does not center on, the CIS. h eC I S . d o e sn o tc e n t e ro n， t This new T his n ew have-nots. f If, I h however, owever，o one n et takes a k e sr resource e s o u r c e h a v e ‑ n o t s . ， 'south' presents ac challenge toot the developing s o u t h 'p r e s e n t sa h a l l e n g et h ed e v e l o p i n g scarcity ass t the determining factor, then h e nt the h e s c a r c i t ya h ed e t e r m i n i n gf a c t o r，t countries off w what has traditionally been c o u n t r i e so hat h a st r a d i t i o n a l l y b een p o s i t i o n sa r er e v e r s e d ;t h eS o u t hb ecomest h e positions are reversed; the South becomes the known asst the k nowna h eT hirdW o r l do o u t h，a Third World orrS South, and ndt the h e haves and the North the have-nots. This h aves a nd t h eN orth t h eh a v e ‑ n o t s . T his redirection offe economic aid and political enerr e d i r e c t i o no c o n o m i ca i da ndp o l i t i c a le n e r ‑ a rgument i e l e v a n tt h eP a c i f i cw i t hr e ‑ argument iss r relevant too t the Pacific with re- g gyyf from romt the h e'old o l ds south' o u t h 't toot the h e'new' n e w 'i increases n c r e a s e s g ard t h ep r o t e c t i o na nd e x p l o i t a t i o no gard too t the protection and exploitation off t h e s巴 p pressures. r e s s u r e s . M Moreover, oreover，t the h ed delineation e l i n e a t i o n these pelagic' resources and deep sea minerals, the p e l a g i c 'r e s o u r c e sa ndd e e ps e am i n e r a l s，t h e off 'north' and noo l longer adheres too n o r t h 'a nd 'south' s o u t h 'n o n g e ra d h e r e st o control offm marine spaces and the phenomenon c o n t r o lo arines p a c e sa ndt h ep henomenon national boundaries, innp part ar result offt the ina r ta e s u l to h ei n ‑ n a t i o n a lb o u n d a r i e s，i 244 offm mineral-dependence. o i n e r a l ‑ d e p e n d e n c e .2 crease inn i internal divisions inn c countries off c r e a s ei n t e r n a ld i v i s i o n si o u n t r i e so It I ti issd difficult i f f i c u l tt toop predict r e d i c th how owt these h e s ek kinds i n d so off both regions. Ass a a r result, the affluent eleb o t hr e g i o n s . A e s u l t，t h ea f f l u e n te l e ‑ divisions will manifest themselves inn t the d i v i s i o n sw i l lm a n i f e s tt h e m s e l v e si h巴 ments offb both North and South are joined inn m entso o t hN ortha ndS o u t ha r ej o i n e di 'Greater Pacific'. G r e a t e rP a c i f i c ¥ It I th has a sa already l r e a d yb been een s sugu g ‑ opposition too t the less affluent elements off o p p o s i t i o nt h el e s sa f f l u e n te l e m e n t so g e s t e dt h eP a c i f i cb ieweda o n s i s t i n go gested the Pacific beev viewed assc consisting off b o t h g r o u p s . both groups. Moreover, changes inn t the M oreover， c h a n g e s i h e t h r e ep a r t s :t h eI s l a n dC o u n t r i e s，S three parts: the Island Countries, Southern o u t h e r n structure and role off t the state and the inn ‑ s t r u c t u r ea nd r o l eo h es t a t ea nd t h巴 i R im a nd N o r t h e r nR i m . I h et r i ‑ p a r t i t e Rim and Northern Rim. Inn t the tri-partite crease innn non-state actors innt the world-system c r e a s ei o n ‑ s t a t ea c t o r si h ew o r l d ‑ s y s t e m Pacific, the h eI Islands s l a n d sl lie i巴 i innt the h ep periphery, e r i p h e r y，w with i t h P a c i f i c，t has served toof further accentuate these trends h a ss e r v e dt u r t h e ra c c e n t u a t et h e s et r e n d s s omeo h ei n n e r ‑ p e r i p h e r ya ndo t h e r s，m some onnt the inner-periphery and others, more ore and differences. a ndd i f f e r e n c e s . removed from economic affairs offt the worldr emovedf rome c o n o m i ca f f a i r so h ew o r l d ‑ T he m i l i t a r yi m p l i c a t i o n so h ea bove The military implications off t the above system, onn t the outer-periphery. The s ystem，o h eo u t e r ‑ p e r i p h e r y . T he c coo unun t r e n d sh ave a l r e a d yb een a d d r e s s e d ;i trends have already been addressed; itt i iss 24 William Ophuls, Ecology co l o g y聞 andd t the h eP Politics o l i t i c s0 of1 2 4W i l l i a mO p h u l s .E S Scarcity. 印 刷t y . S San a nF Francisco: r a n c i s c o :W W.H. . H .F Freeman r e e m a na and n d C ompany，1977, Company, 1977，p p.212. . 2 1 2 . likely l i k e l yt h a tt h er e c e n tw ari h eP e r s i a nG u l f that the recent war innt the Persian Gulf 138 1 3 8 国際協力論集 第 2巻 第 1号 t tries r i e so onnt the h eS Southern o u t h e r nR Rim imr represent e p r e s e n ta a r range a n g e v i s i o na l o n ga ore o e s se a s t ‑ w e s ta x i s vision along a m more orr l less east-west axis f from r o mt the h ei inner-periphery n n e r ‑ p e r i p h e r yt too s semi-periphery, e m i ‑ p e r i p h e r y， w hichc e n t e r e do a p a no n es i d ea ndt h e onn] Japan onno one side and the which centered w h i l et h o s eo h eN o r t h e r nR Rim imr range a n g ef from r o m while those onnt the Northern U n i t e dS t a t e so h eo t h e r . A o n t r a d i c t o r y United States onnt the other. A c contradictory t h es e m i ‑ p e r i p h e r yt h ec e n t 巴 r . the semi-periphery toot the center. m o d e lw ould b o r i z o n t a ld i v i s i o nw hich bee a a h horizontal division which model would It I th has a sb been e e ns suggested u g g e s t e dt that h a tb byy u using s i n gt the h e s p l i tt h er e g i o na r o u n dt h ee q u a t or . I h i s split the region around the equator. Innt this a above b o v巴 g groupings, itti issp possible tooi identify two r o u p i n g s，i o s s i b l et d e n t i f yt wo m o d e l，t h ed e v e l o p e dc o u n t r i e ss u c ha a p a n model, the developed countries such ass] Japan potential sub-systems: one with the semip o t e n t i a ls u b ‑ s y s t e m s :o n ew i t ht h es e m i ‑ a ndt h eU n i t e dS t a t e sw ouldb o i n e di h e beej joined innt the and the United States would peripheral Asian countries such assK Korea and p e r i p h e r a lA sianc o u n t r i e ss u c ha oreaa nd n o r t hi p p o s i t i o nt n i t e dg r o u po north inn o opposition too a a u united group off Singapore clustered around Japan and the S i n g a p o r ec l u s t e r e da r o u n d] a p a na nd t h e r e s o u r c e ‑ r i c hc o u n t r i e ss u c ha n d o n e s i a， resource-rich countries such ass I Indonesia, other with those offL Latin American clustered o t h e rw i t ht h o s eo a t i nA mericanc l u s t e r e d Brasil and perhaps China innt the South. The B r a s i la ndp e r h a p sC hinai h eS o u t h . T he around the a r o u n dt h eU S . T hec r e a t i o no AFTA nd US. The creation offN NAFT Aa and latter model would present a m myriad offp pracl a t t e rm o d e lw ouldp r e s e n ta yriado r a c ‑ t h ep r o p o s a l sf o ra a s tA sian E conomic the proposals for a E East Asian Economic tical problems innt terms offc cultural, economic t i c a lp r o b l e m si e r m so u l t u r a l，e c o n o m i c G roup ( EAEG) t e n dt u p p o r tt h i sv iew， Group (EAEG) tend too s support this view, and political differences and would therefore a ndp o l i t i c a ld i f f e r e n c e sa ndw ouldt h e r e f o r e although clearly the role offC China isso offv vital a l t h o u g hc l e a r l yt h er o l eo h i n ai i t a l most likely center onnt the use and control off m o s tl i k e l yc e n t e ro h eu s ea ndc o n t r o lo importance. Moreover, itt i iss s still i m p o r t a n c e . M oreover， i t i l lu unclear· n c l e a r 'common' resources such asst those offt the sea common'r e s o u r c e ss u c ha h o s eo h es e a w hat u m b r e l l ao r g a n i z a t i o n ss u c ha PEC what umbrella organizations such ass A APEC and tropical forests, with the 'southern' side a ndt r o p i c a lf o r e s t s，w i t ht h e' s o u t h e r n 's i d e ，a l t h o u g hi a r dt m a g i n ea very e r y w i l lb r i n g will bring, although itti issh hard tooi imagine av stressing development and the streso p m e n ta nd t h e 'north' n o r t h 's t r e s s t r e s s i n gd e v巴l i n f l u e n t i a lr o l ea nyt i m ei h en e a rf u t u r e . influential role any time innt the near future. sing greater environmental protection. s i n gg r e a t e re n v i r o n m e n t a lp r o t e c t i o n . T her o l eo h eP a c i f i cI s l a n dC o u n t r i e si The role offt the Pacific Island Countries inn Due too t their station' role, the D ue t h e i r 'gasoline g a s o l i n es t a t i o n 'r o l e，t h e t h ea b o v eg r o u p i n gi n c l e a r，a l t h o u g hs ome the above grouping issu unclear, although some Pacific Island Countries are often not consiP a c i f i cI s l a n dC o u n t r i e sa r eo f t e nn o tc o n s i ‑ I s l a n dC o u n t r i e sa r ec l e a r l yc l o s e rt h eU n‑ Island Countries are clearly closer toot the Un- dered toob beei individual players innt the Pacific d e r e dt n d i v i d u a lp l a y e r si h eP a c i f i c i t e dS t a t e st h a no t h e r s . O h eP a c i f i cI s l a n d ited States than others. Offt the Pacific Island power game, and innf fact may not even p owerg ame，a ndi a c tm ayn o te v e nb beec cono n C o u n t r i e s，o Countries, only n l yP PNG NG i iss a a m member ember o offA APEC, PEC， sidered assa a g group. I ft the h eI Island s l a n dC Countries o u n t r i e s s i d e r e da r o u p . If a nd t h e r巴 s eemst i t t l ei n t e r e s to onn t the h e and there seems too b bee l little interest a are r ea able b l et too c commodify ommodify p perceived e r c e i v e de ecological c o l o g i c a l p a r to h eA PEC c o u n t r i e st h a n g et h a t part off t the APEC countries too c change that i importance m p o r t a n c ea assw well e l la assp perceived e r c e i v e ds strategic t r a t e g i ci m ‑ im- s i t u a t i o n . It situation. I tc can a nb beea also l s ob beea argued r g u e dt that h a tw with i t h p o r t a n c e，t portance, they h e ym may ayb beea able b l et tooi increase n c r e a s et their h e i r f few ewe exceptions, x c e p t i o n s，t the alliances and leanings off h ea l l i a n c e sa ndl e a n i n g so v visibility i s i b i l i t yi inn t the h ew world-system. o r l d ‑ s y s t e m . T This h i sc could o u l d the Island Countries does not make very t h eI s l a n dC o u n t r i e sd o e sn o tm ake v e r y r result e s u l ti inng greater r e a t e ra autonomy utonomya and ndm more orec control o n t r o l much difference tooa anyone, with the possible m uchd i f f e r e n c et nyone，w i t ht h ep o s s i b l e o over v e rt their h e i rd destinies, e s t i n i e s，o orra attl least e a s ti inna anni increase n c r e a s e exception offt the Islands themselves. e x c e p t i o no h eI s l a n d st h e m s e l v e s . i innt the h ea amount mounto offe economic c o n o m i ca assistance s s i s t a n c et they h e yr ree ‑ With orr w without the Islands, one possible n ep o s s i b l e W ith o i t h o u tt h eI s l a n d s，o scenario for the future would beea av vertical s c e n a r i of o rt h ef u t u r ew ouldb e r t i c a ld i ‑ di- c ceive. e i v e . ， f If, I h however, owever， t the h e p perceptions e r c e p t i o n s o off s strategic t r a t e g i ca n d / o re c o l o g i c a ls i g n i f i c a n c ef a d e， and/or ecological significance fade, GUNS, BUTTER AND TUNA: ALTERNATIVE SECURITY IN THE PACIFIC ISLAND STATES G UNS，B UTTERA NDT UNA:A LTERNATIVES ECURITYI NT HEP A C I F I CI SLANDS TATES 139 1 3 9 巴c o g n i t i o nt h eI s ‑ i ay b h a tw hatever r ittm may beet that whatever recognition the Is· o e r ys m a l ls t a t e si orld o i l i t a r y very small states inn a a w world off m military off v l a n d sw ere a b l巴 t lands were able too a achieve byy p playing one c h i e v eb l a y i n go n e a nde c o n o m i cg i a n t s，t and economic giants, then itti issi inevitable h e ni n e v i t a b l et that h a t side against the other during the Cold s i d ea g a i n s tt h eo t h e rd u r i n gt h eC o l dW ar War w e c o n s i d e rw hati a c tw ean b h e wee r reconsider what inn f fact weem mean byy t the w i l lb o s t，a will beel lost, and ndt they h e yw will i l la again g a i nb beef forgotten o r g o t t e n t erms o v e r e i g n t yi o d a y ' sw o r l d . term sovereignty innt today's world. b byym most osto h er e s to h ew o r l d ̲ T hel a t t e r offt the rest offt the world. The latter S e c u r i t ya nds o v e r巴i Security and sovereignty are offc course fun· g n t ya r eo o u r s ef u n ‑ a l t e r n a t i v em ayt u r no u tt l e s s i n gi alternative may turn out toob beea a b blessing inn damentally related concepts. When thinking d a m e n t a l l yr e l a t e dc o n c e p t s . W hent h i n k i n g d i s g u i s e，h disguise, however, because ittm may mean owever，b e c a u s ei aym eant that h a t about global environmental issues and eco· a b o u tg l o b a le n v i r o n m e n t a li s s u e sa nd e c o ‑ the Pacific Island States will beel left alone too t h eP a c i f i cI s l a n dS t a t e sw i l lb e f ta l o n et cide, itth has become popular toos speak offe ecolo· c i d e，i a sb ecomep o p u l a rt p e a ko c o l o ‑ develop their own independent alternative inn d e v e l o pt h e i ro wni n d巴p e n d e n ta l t e r n a t i v ei gical security, and some scholars are involved g i c a ls e c u r i t y，a nds omes c h o l a r sa r ei n v o l v e d which may lie the key tooa anna autonomous fu· w hichm ayl i et h ek 巴Y t utonomousf u in creating legal and institutional frameworks I I Ic r巴a t i n gl e g a la ndi n s t i t u t i o n a lf rameworks t u r e ̲ ture. for the implementation offe ecologically secure f o rt h ei m p l e m e n t a t i o no c o l o g i c a l l ys e c u r e ( 2 )R ETHINKINGS OVEREIGNTY (2) RETHINKING SOVEREIGNTY regimes based onne existing legal and political r e g i m e sb a s e do x i s t i n gl e g a la ndp o l i t i c a l T hec o n s i d e r a t i o no e c u r i t yi h eP a c i f i c The consideration offs security innt the Pacific 255 institutions. i n s t i t u t i o n s .2 A Attt the h eo other t h e re end ndo offt the h es spec· p e c ‑ I s l a n d si n e v i t a b l yl e a d st h er e a l i z a t i o nt h a t Islands inevitably leads toot the realization that t trum, rum，s some propose that weeb begin byye estab· omep r o p o s et h a tw e g i nb s t a b a eww aym ustb o u n df o rd e f i n i n gi n d e ‑ a n new way must beef found for defining inde· lishing a n new vision offs sovereignty which in· l i s h i n ga ewv i s i o no o v e r e i g n t yw hichi n ‑ p e n d e n c ea nds o v e r e i g n t y . S ov巴r pendence and sovereignty. Sovereignty, e i g n t y，a assa a eludes more than c l u d e sm oret h a nj u s th umansi t sf r a m eo just humans inni its frame off c conceptual o n c e p t u a lt tool, o o l， i involves complete control n v o l v e sc o m p l e t ec o n t r o l r e f e r e n c ea ndi o tt h o u g h to i x e d，t reference and issn not thought offi innf fixed, ter· e r ‑ a n d / o ra u t h o r i t yo omeone( e . g .t h ep e o p l e ) and/or authority offs someone (e.g. the people) r i t o r i a lt e r m s . M ische，f ritorial terms. Mische, for o re example, xample，p prop· r o p ‑ o o m e t h i n g( e . g .t h es t a t e )o v e rs o m e t h i n g orr s something (e.g. the state) over something o s e st h a tw ustf i r s tr e c o g n i z et h ei n d i v i s i ‑ oses that weem must first recognize the indivisi· else 巴 l s e( (e.g. e . g .t territory). e r r i t o r y ) . I Inherent n h e r e n ti innt the h ec concept o n c e p t b i l i t yo c o l o g i c a ls o v e r e i g n t yi l o b a l bility off e ecological sovereignty inn a a g global i iss t the h ea ability b i l i t yf for o rd defense; e f e n s e ;s state t a t es sovereignty, o v e r e i g n t y， s e n s ea l t e r n a t i v et h ep o l i t i c a ld i v i ‑ sense ass a ann a alternative toot the political divi· for example, has assa a p prerequisite the ability f o re xample，h a sa r巴r e q u i s i t et h ea b i l i t y s i o n sw hich i n d i c a t ep o l i t i c a ls o v e r e i g n t yi sions which indicate political sovereignty inn t e f e n do n e ' sb o r d e r s . T hec o n t r a d i c t i o n s tood defend one's borders. The contradictions 266 t h ei n t e r n a t i o n a lc ommunityo t a t e s .2 the international community offs states. i n h e r e n ti h i si d e ao o v巴r inherent innt this idea offs sovereignty have been e i g n t yh aveb e e n T The he r redefinition e d e f i n i t i o no off s sovereignty o v e r e i g n t yi iss m most ost underscored byyt the realization that there iss u n d e r s c o r e db h er e a l i z a t i o nt h a tt h e r ei t threatening h r e a t e n i n gt toot those h o s es t a t e sf o rw hicht h et r a ‑ states for which the tra· n e f e n s ef r o mn u c l e a rw ar noo d defense from nuclear war. . E Even ven f for o r d i t i o n a lc o n c e p t sa nd d e f i n i t i o n sc o n t i n u et ditional concepts and definitions continue too are not extremely ys small m a l lo orrw weak, eak， s states t a t e sw which hicha r en o te x t r e m巴l b oreo e s su s e f u l :t h es t a t e sa h ec e n beem more orrl less useful: the states attt the cen· i itts seems eems s silly i l l yt too t think h i n kt that h a tm military i l i t a r yo orr a any ny o other t h e rk kind i n do offn national a t i o n a ld defense e f e n s ec can a nc cope o p ew with i t h t the h em myriad yriad o off m military i l i t a r ya and nd e environmental n v i r o n m e n t a l 2 5F o re x a m p l e，s 25 For example, see e eA Alexander l e x a n d e rS S. .T Timoshenko. i m o s h e n k o . " I n t e r n a t i o n a lE n v i r o n m e n t a lL awa n dt h eC o n ‑ "International Environmental Law and the Con· c e p to fE c o l o g i c a lS e c u r i t y ' ¥ B γ cept of Ecological Security". Breakthrough, ' e a k t h r 側 ， gh ，V Vol. ol . No.4; Vol. 111 ,N No.1 Summer/Fall, 10, 1 0，N o4 ;V oL1 ， O . 1S u m m e r / F a l l，1989. 1989 2 6 P a t r i c i aM i s c h e ." E c o l o g i c a lS e c u r i t yi na n 26 Patricia Mische. "Ecological Security in an I n t e r d e p e n d e n tW orld'¥ B Interdependent World". Breakthrough, 陀a kthrough ，V Vol. ol . 10, 1 0， N No.4; o. 4 ;V VoLl1, oL11 ，N No.1 O . 1S Summer/Fall, u m m e r / F a l l，1989, 1989，p p.10. . 1 0 . 目 threats plaguing global society. I f ， h however, owever， t h r e a t sp l a g u i n gg l o b a ls o c i e t y . If, w r es t i l lt e r i o u s l yc o n s i d e rt h em eaning weea are still toos seriously consider the meaning 140 1 4 0 国際協力論集 t ter e ro offt the h ec capitalist a p i t a l i s tw world-economy_ o r l d ‑ e c o n o m y ̲ F Followollow 第 2巻 第 1号 1 u m .t h eP a c i f i c1 s l a n dC o u n t r i e st h u s thus Inn s sum, the Pacific Island Countries ing this logic itti is, i n gt h i sl o g i ci s .o u g h tt e .l e a s tt h r e a t ‑ orro ought toob be, least threat- b ecome a oodp l a c et e g i nt h i n k i n ga b o u t become a g good place toob begin thinking about ening for the newly independent states which e n i n gf o rt h en ewlyi n d e p e n d e n ts t a t e sw hich new definitions for not only security, n ew d e f i n i t i o n sf o rn o to n l ys e c u r i t y .b u t but are confined too p peripherality byyt the a r ec o n f i n e dt e r i p h e r a l i t yb h ep present r e s巴n t s o v e r e i g n t ya elL T hev ery s m a l li s l a n d sovereignty ass w welL The very small island s y s t e m ̲ system_ s t a t e sa r et o os m a l la nds p r e a da p a r t‑ nd states are too small and spread apart - a and T heP a c i f i cI s l a n ds t a t e sa r ea are ann巴 example xampleo off The Pacific Island states s h a r et o og r e a ta ependenceo h eo c e a n‑ share too great a d dependence onnt the ocean - the latter, making t h el a t t e r .m akingt h a tr e g i o na oodp l a c巴 t that region ag good place too t b l et r o t e c tt h e i re nvironment o too b bee a able too p protect their environment onn seek for anna alternative approach_ Moreover, s e e kf o ra l t e r n a t i v ea p p r o a c h ̲ M o r e o v e r . t h e i ro wn̲ J o i n te f f o r t ss uch a h eS outh their own_ Joint efforts such ass t the South t h eP a c i f i ci oodc a n d i d a t ef o rt h i ss e a r c h search the Pacific issa ag good candidate for this P a c i f i cN u c l e a rF ree Z one T reaty a nd t h e Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty and the b e c a u s e .t r a d i t i o n a l l ys p e a k i n g .i e g i o n because, traditionally speaking, itti issa a r region C o n v e n t i o nf o rt h eP r o t e c t i o no a t u r a lR e ‑ Convention for the Protection offN Natural Re- composed offp pockets offi individual sovereignc omposedo o c k e t so n d i v i d u a ls o v e r e i g n ‑ s o u r c e sa ndE nvironmento h eS o u t hP a c i f i c sources and Environment offt the South Pacific ties t i e s( e ̲ g ̲i s l a n ds t a t e s )i a s ta r e ao l o b a l (e_g_ island states) inna av vast area offg global R e g i o na e l la e g i o n a lo r g a n i z a t i o n ss uch Region assw well assr regional organizations such commons (the c ommons ( t h es e a ) ̲ W henc o u n t r i e sd e s t r o y sea)_ When countries destroy a h eF orum F i s h e r i e sA gency d e m o n s t r a t e ass t the Forum Fisheries Agency demonstrate t h e i ri n d i g e n o u sp e o p l e sa l o n gw i t ht h e i r their their indigenous peoples along with t h er o l巴 f the role for collective action toop protect the reo rc o l l e c t i v ea c t i o nt r o t e c tt h er e ‑ forests innt the name offd development, they aref o r e s t si h en ameo e v e l o p m e n t .t h e ya r e sources and environment offt the region_ Ultis o u r c e sa nde nvironmento h er e g i o n ̲ U l t i c ondemn巴d f o rh uman r i g h t sv i o l a t i o n sa nd condemned for human rights violations and mately, the ability tood doot this effectively will m a t e l y .t h ea b i l i t yt h i se f f e c t i v e l yw i l l d 巴v elopment r a c i s m ̲ development racism_ W hen c ompanies o When companies orr beet the key toot the security offt the states innt the b h ek eyt h es e c u r i t yo h es t a t e si h e governments force communities innd developing g overnmentsf o r c ec o m m u n i t i e si e v e l o p i n g region and for that reason, taking am mutuallyr e g i o na ndf o rt h a tr e a s o n .t a k i n ga u t u a l l y ‑ countries tooa accept toxic wastes which would c o u n t r i e st c c e p tt o x i cw a s t e sw hichw ould supportive endogenous approach toot the estabs u p p o r t i v ee ndogenousa pproacht h ee s t a b never bee a allowed inn t the country off o origin, n e v e rb l l o w e di h ec o u n t r yo r i g i n . lishment offr regimes and institutions innt the rel i s h m e n to e g i m e sa ndi n s t i t u t i o n si h er e ‑ they t h e ya r ea c c u s e do a c i s m . 'ecological are accused offr racism, e c o l o g i c a la aparp a r gion isse essentiaL g i o ni s s e n t i a l theid' orr 'toxic terrorism'_ t h e i d ' o t o x i c t e r r o r i s m ' ̲ Since these S i n c e t h e s e The Pacific Islands, inn t T he P a c i f i cI s l a n d s .i h e i r 'caretaker' their c a r e t a k e r ' accusations and the acts which provoke them a c c u s a t i o n sa ndt h ea c t sw hichp rovoket hem approach toot the environment, have the basis a pproacht h ee n v i r o n m e n t .h avet h eb a s i s occur within the o c c u rw i t h i nt h eb o r d e r so n d i v i d u a lc o u n ‑ borders offi individual coun- for a u uniquely Pacific approach toot the Westf o ra n i q u e l yP a c i f i ca pproacht h eW est‑ t r i e sa nd i n v o l v es p e c i f i cg roups o e o p l e s tries and involve specific groups offp peoples ern concepts off s sovereignty and security_ e r nc o n c e p t so o v e r e i g n t ya nd s e c u r i t y within states, they can beee explained without w i t h i ns t a t e s .t h e yc a nb x p l a i n巴dw i t h o u t that approach inna a T hec r e a t i v ea p p l i c a t i o no h a ta pproachi The creative application offt adjusting a d j u s t i n go ur i d e a sa b o u th ow s t a t e sa nd our ideas about how states and collective, endogenous fashion may provide a c o l l e c t i v e .e ndogenousf a s h i o nm ayp r o v i d ea s o v e r e i g n t yo p e r a t e ̲ If sovereignty operate_ I fi instead n s t e a do offi individual n d i v i d u a l way for the Pacific Islands toom maintain their w ayf o rt h eP a c i f i c1 s l a n d st a i n t a i nt h e i r groups, however, the g r o u p s .h o w e v e r .t h et a r g e t so evelopment targets off d development integrity and autonomy innd dealing with securi n t e g r i t ya nda utonomyi e a l i n gw i t hs e c u r ‑ r a c i s m o o x i c t e r r o r i s m a r e a c t u a l l y terrorism are actually racism orr t toxic ity and other vital concerns innt their i t ya ndo t h e rv i t a lc o n c e r n si h e i rr e g i o n ̲ region_ 'sovereign states', wee m must s o v e r e i g ns t a t e s ' .w ust s start t a r tc changing hanging either the definitions, e i t h e rt h ed e f i n i t i o n s .o l s et h er u l e s ̲ orre else the rules_