イベント・セミナー情報

オックスフォード大学名誉教授のウィルフリッド・ナップ氏の来日に伴い、アジア経済研究所にて講演会を開催いたしました。ナップ氏は国際政治（特に中東研究）がご専門です。本セミナーでは、’Escaping’の３つの異なる意味を解説いただき、イラクを中心にリビア、北アイルランド、朝鮮半島の事例についてご講演いただきました。

テーマ
破滅から逃げ切れるか—イラク、リビア、アイルランド、朝鮮半島そしてイラン

>>講演概要（英文）

2007年11月22日 (木曜) 15：00～17：00　（14：30開場）

アジア経済研究所　C21会議室　　
千葉市美浜区若葉3-2-2

ウィルフリッド・ナップ氏（オックスフォード大学　St. キャサリンズ・カレッジ名誉教授）

英語のみ（通訳はありません）

無料

30名

お問い合わせ先 アジア経済研究所　研究支援部　成果普及課 TEL：043-299-9536 FAX：043-299-9726

ESCAPING FROM CATASTROPHE
'Escaping' as used in this lecture has three different meanings:
　

• In Iraq there is already catastrophe: the question is whether we can escape from worse catastrophe
• In Northern Ireland political conflict gave rise to terrorism more than a century ago but there is now good reason to think that we have escaped from catastrophe. How was this achieved?
• Libya was a source of terrorism and was on the way to becoming a nuclear power; in the twenty-first century the Libyan government has changed direction and Libya is seen as a responsible member of the international community. What brought this change of direction?
• North Korea is further advanced than Libya in the development of nuclear weapons but a fragile agreement has now been reached. Have we really escaped from catastrophe?
• The government of Iran is committed to acquiring nuclear power and, it is thought, nuclear weapons. This could be catastrophic; the United States has the means and contingency plans to halt such development by military action. That too would be catastrophic. Is there any escape?

　 The way in which the invasion of Iraq proved catastrophic is now reasonably clear and agreed by most commentators. The lecture will merely highlight some of the more important factors:

• the role of ideology
• the importance of '9/11' as a causative factor
• the mistaken objectives and mistakes of tactics

The questions now are about the future:

• is an orderly withdrawal possible?
• will such withdrawal be determined by the situation in Iraq or by US domestic politics?
• will Iraq divide into separate political entities?
• what are the implications for the region - and beyond?

　

• Compared with Iraq and even Libya, Northern Ireland is a simple case. It is included because the conflict has been so long-lasting ('Irish terrorism' began in 1865 and led to the creation of a special police force) and because some lessons can be drawn from this relatively simple example.
• the importance of religion
• the role played by outside powers (the Irish Republic, the United States, the European Union)
• economic factors
• negotiation

　 The change of direction in Libyan politics raises several important questions:

• what were the domestic reasons, economic and political for the change; what was the importance of sanctions?
• the United States used force against Libya in bombing raids launched from the UK and it is argued that US attacks on Iraq influenced President Qaddafi
• what was required for the UK and the US to be able to negotiate
• the next generation - how important is Qaddafi's son?

　 North Korea has engaged in actions which may be classed as terrorist - notably kidnappings - which have had an important impact in Japan but (in contrast to Northern Ireland and Libya) are little known in Europe/North America. On the other hand, North Korea's apparent nuclear ambitions are of much wider concern.

what are the 'power politics' of the involved powers - North Korea itself, China, Russia, Japan, South Korea the United States?
what is the importance of the second generation? what does Kim Jong Il want for his succession? what has been achieved in negotiations so far? how durable is the present agreement?

　

• what are the origins of Iran's present political ambitions, including nuclear?
• would an Iran with a nuclear capability be a danger?
• what are the timescales for Iranian nuclear development, for economic and political change in Iran, for political change in the United States?
• what are the 'power politics' of members of the Security Council?