Europäische Union - Japan. Der strategische Aufbau politischer Beziehungen in drei Dimensionen

Abstract

Die vorliegende Doktorarbeit befasst sich mit dem dynamisch-strategischen Aufbau europäisch- japanischer Diplomatie nach dem Ende der Ära des Kalten Kriegs im Zeitraum der Jahre 1991 bis 2006. <br /> Erforscht wurden die ersten fünfzehn Jahre sicherheitspolitischer Interaktion der aufstrebenden Partner Europäische Union (EU) und Japan mit Hilfe herausgearbeiteter “drei Dimensionen“. Die erste Dimension deckt seit 1991 den rein bilateralen Auf- und Ausbau institutioneller Strukturen mittels aktiver Gipfeldiplomatie auf höchster, nämlich der Ebene der Staats- und Regierungschefs („Institutionelle Dimension“) ab. In der zweiten Dimension wird die sich seit 1996 herauskristallisierende europäisch-ostasiatische interregionale Sicherheitskooperation („Regionale Dimension“) dargestellt, in deren Kontext wechselseitigem multilateralen Krisen- und Aufbauengagements Nippon sich als einer der größten Geber auf dem Westbalkan (Europas damals "brennender Hinterhof"), und im Gegenzug die EU sich als nicht minder gewichtiger Stabilitätsakteur in Nordkorea und Ost Timor (inklusive Aceh/Indonesien, Japans zu jener Zeit „bedrohlicher Krisenbogen“) im Rahmen des „Cross Regional Support“ bewährte. Die dritte Dimension etablierte sich seit der Millenniumswende im globalen multilateralen Kontext („Globale Dimension“). Im Zuge des „Managing Global Order“ wurde diesbezüglich u.a. in den geostrategisch wichtigen Krisenherden Sri Lanka und Afghanistan (Friedens- und Wiederaufbaudiplomatie) sowie sektoralen Zukuftsfeldern wie (vorlaufend) bei der Bewältigung der Asienfinanzkrise (globale Finanzstabilitätsdiplomatie), der Etablierung des Kernfusionsversuchsreaktors „ITER“ (Diplomatie für künftige Energiesicherheit), der Umsetzung des Kyoto Protokolls (Weltklimadiplomatie) und des Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs (Diplomatie für Weltstrafgerichtsbarkeit und Menschenrechte) maßgeblich kooperiert, wenn nötig sogar ohne den beiderseitigen trilateralen Sicherheitsgaranten USA. <br /> Die Arbeit ist überdies eingebettet in einen historischen Kontext (1543-1945/90) europäisch- japanischem Werte- und Kulturaustauschs, dessen Fortsetzung im Ausblick der Arbeit mit Blick auf mögliche Varianten fortgeführter, mittel- bis langfristig ausgerichteter sicherheitsstrategischer Fundamentalkooperation (Stichwort "Vista-Verschiebung von Europa nach Ostasien" - Aufbauend auf Nippons direkter, maßgeblicher und nachhaltiger Föderung europäischer regionaler Integration im Zeiraum 1991 bis 2006 durch "Fittrimmen" des Balkans -wie auch anderer im Jahr 2004 beigetretener Staaten des einstigen Warschauer Pakts und des Baltikums- für einen künftigen EU-Beitritt: Welche Rollen für Japan und die EU bei der Schaffung einer Ostasiatischen Gemeinschaft ab 2006/11 im wirtschaftlich boomenden, sicherheitspolitisch jedoch stets auch fragilen Fernost?) anskizziert wurde.

<strong>European Union - Japan. The strategic build-up of political relations in three dimensions : Studia Diplomatica 1991-2006: A review with outlook in a historical context</strong><br /> The given German language PhD-thesis, supervised by Prof. Dr. Ludger Kuehnhardt (Head of the Center for European Integration Studies “ZEI”, University of Bonn), co-supervised by Prof. Dr. Michael Reiterer (Head of the European Union Delegation to Switzerland and Liechtenstein, University of Innsbruck) and sponsored by the Canon Foundation in Europe (Amstelveen, the Netherlands), was thoroughly being dealt with from mid 2006 onward, officially submitted end of 2009 and -after successful oral examinations in mid 2010- published online end of 2010. <br /> The research covers European Union (EU) - Japan security diplomacy between 1991 and 2006, i.e. the era in international relations following suit the “cold war”. Whilst focusing these initial 15 years on “forward, upward, onward together” striving for political interaction between Brussels and Tokyo, with help of “three dimensions” discovered, verifiable evidence was to finally be delivered that the given process had been a deliberate product of a mutually pursued systematic and strategic approach.<strong> </strong>Whereas the first dimension, focusing the uppermost top level of summit meetings of the heads of state and government, scrutinized the establishment and expansion of purely bilateral institutional structures (“Institutional Dimension”) since 1991, within the second dimension a special focus had been placed on multilateral European-East Asian interregional cooperation (“Regional Dimension”) shaping out since 1996 the interplay of crisis prevention- and development commitment by Japan as the world`s third biggest peace building donor in the Western Balkans (Europe`s these days burning backyard) and -in return- of the EU as a by no means less counting stability actor in North Korea and particularly in East Timor (including also successful peace diplomacy for Aceh/Indonesia: East Asia`s then most destabilizing crisis spots) within the frame of “Cross Regional Support”. With the millennium turn and also propelled by the September 2001 terrorist attacks in the USA, the third dimension was born offering the stage for the meanwhile grown up security actors Brussels and Tokyo to proactively strive for roles of wider global stability and peace. In five researched upon significant fields of multilateral global cooperation (“Global Dimension”), both new strategic partners closely cooperated and remarkably succeeded inter alia in delicate areas and subjects of crisis within the framework of “Managing Global Order”. Often, but not always (!) in accordance with both side`s trilateral security guarantor Washington, these were taking place in Sri Lanka and Afghanistan (geopolitical peace diplomacy) and also covered concerted and massive efforts to master security challenges such as tackling the Asian Financial Crisis 1997/98 (world financial stability diplomacy), establishing the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor “ITER” in France (future energy security diplomacy) and the International Criminal Court in the Netherlands (global criminal jurisdiction diplomacy), and finally pushed crucially for implementing the Kyoto-Protocol to help save the world´s climate (counter-global warming diplomacy). <br /> Framed in a historical context dating back some 400 to 450 years (1543-1945/90) linked with an outlook covering options for continued exchange of stability values between “East and West” (such as parliamentary democracy, balance of powers, rule of law, human and civil rights, market economy, free media and citizens` principles) in the future (shifting the security focus from Europe towards East-Asia, and centering from the year 2011 onward around the potential mid to long term build-up of an East-Asian Community with debatable roles of Tokyo and -community building experienced- Brussels as a lively and expected response to Nippon`s proactive Western Balkan peace building activities 1991-2006, which for its part had aimed to essentially and strongly help the “black sheep” of Europe to get -meanwhile each by each- mentally prepared and physically fit to join successfully the rules -and interests- based peace project and actor EU one day, like Nippon`s beforehand offered generous and strategic economic aid mainly to the former Warsaw Pact -and to some extent also Baltic- states promoting their final EU-accession in 2004), the PhD-thesis further attempted to answer the following key questions: 1) Who was the holder of ownership, the “driving force” behind the strategic build-up of political relations?, 2) have political dialogue and cooperation up to the year 2006 made the EU and Japan (starting out 1991 and labeled “nobody”) finally arrive as credible political-security actors (individually as well as in partnership) on the stage of international relations?, 3) what was the proper share of the USA?, and 4) what were the results delivered by the continuous interplay of mutual perceptions displaying the grand lines of European-East Asian intercultural divides and conflict?