透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.80.211.101
  • 學位論文

日美安全保障體制之研究─兼論日本P.K.O.體制

A Study of Japan-U.S. Security System-Including Japanese P.K.O. System

指導教授 : 許慶雄

摘要


第二次世界大戰後,日本接受戰敗事實,由盟軍進行佔領,先後完成日本國憲法、簽訂舊金山和平條約及日美安全保障條約,並在盟軍退出、恢復主權之後,即構成維護日本的主要安全保障體制,使日本在無後顧之憂的有利條件下,維持了六十餘年的和平,全力發展經濟,成為經濟大國。 但隨著國際情勢發展,日本極欲走出經濟大國、政治小國的窘境,卻因為在安保體制下,日本憲法第九條與日美安保條約規範內容形成法與政治對立,引發違憲爭議及自衛隊合法性等問題,致使國內存在憲法與條約何者為優位爭論;其後更影響日本自衛隊參與聯合國維和行動之規模與形式,無法獲得國際社會及日本民眾的多數認同,尤其是日本民眾普遍贊成自衛隊參與國際救災及人道救援等行動,但對於其他更積極的維和行動則傾向於維持現行規模,不宜更積極參與,以免觸及修憲及捲入戰爭等嚴肅議題。因此,近期雖積極尋求修憲解決,但由於日本國內對於修憲尚無法取得多數共識,短期之內恐怕無法如願以償。 日美安保體制影響所及不僅是日美雙方,也牽動整個亞洲的和平與穩定,日本為了徹底解決和平憲法與安保條約二個體系對立問題,積極尋求以修憲方式突破瓶頸,並且期望能一舉突破參與聯合國行動時,有關自衛隊派遣各項限制,提昇國際地位,爭取成為聯合國常任理事國。值得吾人注意的是,雖然日本致力維繫日美安保體制運作,現階段對我國而言利多於弊,但由於日本與各鄰國之間仍存在多項領土主權爭議(包含釣魚台),未來如順利完成修憲,解決憲法第九條爭議問題後,日本在安保體制下,除了增強本身防衛實力外,亦會改變其解決領土主權爭議之作為,我國應如何面對?是否有能力因應?實有未雨綢繆預擬解決方案之必要。本文即針對是項體制及參與P.K.O.體制進行探討,期能獲致脈絡,藉供參考。

並列摘要


After the World War II, Japan accepted the fact of defeated and gave the reins of its territory to the Allied Forces. It was during this period that the Allied Forces and Japan came to terms on a new Japanese constitution and signed the Treaty of Peace and the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the US and Japan (hereafter referred to as the Anpo Treaty), which constitutes a major security pillar for Japan after the withdraw of the Allied Forces and the resumption of Japanese sovereignty. Due to the Anpo mechanism, there emerges a contradiction between the Article 9 of its constitution and the new security treaty, giving rise to an internal dispute on the unconstitutionality and the concern over the validity of the Self Defense Forces and causing an argument over the priority of the constitution and the Anpo Treaty. Although Japan is planning to resort to constitutional amendments to solve the problem, due to lack of internal consensus, it remains a long way to go before the controversy could be finally removed. What needs Taiwan’s close attention is that how to respond if Japan successfully solves the contradiction of the Article 9, improves its military buildup and change its measures towards the territorial and sovereignty dispute. Is Taiwan capable of countering Japan in the above-mentioned scenario? Even though the answer remains uncertain to most people, the writer thinks it necessary to propose a possible solution in advance.

參考文獻


3•林金莖•陳水亮(2002)《日本國憲法論》,台北:中日關係研究發展基金會。
7•楊永明(1996)〈國際法中主權概念的地位與演變〉,《台大法學論叢》,第25卷,第4期,pp.77-108。
5•楊永明(1997) 〈聯合國維持和平行動之發展:冷戰後國際安全的轉變〉,《問題與研究」第36卷,第11期,pp.23-40。
4•楊永明(2002)〈冷戰時期日本之防衛與安全保障政策:1945~1990〉,《問題與研究月刊》,第41卷,第5期,pp.13-37。
1•Camilleri and Falk, The end of Sovereignty: The Politics of a Shrinking and Fragmenting world, op. cit.。

被引用紀錄


吳國樑(2016)。日本國家安全保障戰略之研究(2007-2015)〔碩士論文,淡江大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6846%2fTKU.2016.00379
張予馨(2012)。日本防衛體制法理與現實之研究〔碩士論文,淡江大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6846%2fTKU.2012.00789

延伸閱讀