スプラウトにおける対外政策研究の再検討の試み(2) : パワー概念の覚醒と受容の観点から
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
This is the second serial paper which re-examines the contribution of Harold and Margaret Sprout's foreign policy studies in the American international theory. The Sprouts are pioneers who interpret the concept of power as a behavioral relationship, not as a quantifiable mass, and who insinuate this reinterpretation into the foreign policy studies. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate the development of the Sprouts' foreign policy studies from the viewpoint of their awakening and acceptance of power concept, prior to my forthcoming articles which inquire into the detail of an organic connections between their reinterpretation of power concept and foreign policy studies. Therefore, I will place the focus upon the Sprouts' early writings (1931-1949). It will be useful, then, to make distinction between the following three questions. The first question to be discussed is when the Sprouts became conscious of power concept. We have good reason for thinking that the Sprouts have already been awakened by this concept since the early 1930s. Harold discussed the contribution of political geography to political science in his "Political Geography as a Political Science Field" (1931), in which we can ascertain an emerging argument which could be interpreted as a power theory, although he did not use the term "power." The next question is how the Sprouts have come to accept this concept into their academic field. For the Sprouts, the first use of the term "power" was detected in The Rise of American Naval Power: 1776-1918 (1939) and Toward a New Order of Sea Power: American Naval Policy and World Scene, 1918-1922 (1940). After that, the first conceptual use of this term was recognized in Harold's "Book Review: Nicholas J. Spykman's America's Strategy on World Politics" (1942). Further, the first systematic discussion of power have begun with Foundations of National Power: Readings on World Politics and American Security (1945). In any case, it must be noted that they threw new light on this concept, saying "the role of power is basic to any discussion of international politics." There is a further question which needs to be clarified. It is why the Sprouts have come to believe the necessity of reinterpreting power concept. In Harold's review article of "In Defense of Diplomacy" (1949), detonated by Hans J. Morgenthau's Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace (1948), the Sprouts have began to reinterpret the concept of power. The Sprouts' strong concern was to reconstruct the most reliable methodology for estimating and comparing the power of states. Their conspicuous need, above all, was the need for a conceptual structure and methodology to explore and analyze the nature and role of power in foreign policy. Detailed arguments upon these organic connections between their reinterpretation of power concept and foreign policy studies await my forthcoming papers.
著者
関連論文
- 国際理論研究におけるパワー概念の「アメリカ的受容」(4) : その意義(真柄欽次教授山田政美教授大野浩教授松岡紘一教授ロード・バーナード教授退職記年号)
- スプラウトにおける対外政策研究の再検討の試み(2) : パワー概念の覚醒と受容の観点から
- スプラウトにおける対外政策研究の再検討の試み(1) : その国際政治学の理論体系に注目して(第I部 北東アジアの国際関係)
- 国際理論研究におけるパワー概念の「アメリカ的受容」(3) : パワー論争の多元化と収斂(浅野雅巳教授・鈴木登教授御退職記念号)
- 総合政策学的アプローチの可能性 : 地域の安全保障をめぐって(総合政策学)
- 国際理論研究におけるパワー概念の「アメリカ的受容」(2) : パワー論をめぐる7潮流
- 国際理論研究におけるパワー概念の「アメリカ的受容」(1) : 先行研究との対話