N. Ganesan Director
Prof. N. Ganesan
Hiroshima Peace Institute
Easily recognizable however is the incidence of conflict in international and domestic society which might range from crisis situations high intensity conflicts to low intensity disputes. Wars, subversion, sanctions, border and maritime disputes, intimidation, nuclear blackmail are among others major causes of concern to the security and survival of states which have an impact on local societies. Equally important are the role of trade protectionism, structural dependence and vulnerabilities which pit the less developed nations against the developed states. Worthy of mention is also the clash of ideas, norms, values and the issue of morality in international politics.
Most states in Asia are recent post-colonial constructs grappling with issues of nationhood on the one hand and the centrifugal forces of religious and ethnic sectarian violence and secessionism on the other often against the backdrop of state repression. Increasingly, attention has also come to focus on land reforms, environmental conflicts, labour unrest and other centre-periphery tensions. Not to be forgotten entire processes of conflict is the human condition which raises issues like humanitarian intervention in sovereign states and the doctrine of non-interference.
The traditional focus on conflict and peace situations has generally been among and within the sovereign states. In a globalized world, attention has also increased on the role of transnational phenomena such as illegal migration, piracy, narcotic trade, terrorism, and political activism.
While the examination of the roots and the dynamics of conflict are central research questions, equally important are the measures and approached taken to resolve, regulate, moderate and also avoid conflict situations. Thereafter, it is also important to building upon the peace situation.
The Conflict and Peace Studies Program centres around these issues. It seeks to propound broad generalizations about conflict and peace situations based on comparative analysis. The Conflict and Peace Studies Working Group coordinates this program. The group organizes specific research projects around which members, along their areas of expertise, converge.
Members of APISA are welcome to establish their own research group under the Conflict and Peace Studies Program. Applications should be directed to the Director.
Edited by N. Ganesan and Sung Chull Kim
State Violence in East Asia is the publication arising from a project with a similar title that was funded by the Hiroshima Peace Institute. The project involved two workshops that were hosted in December 2009 in Hong Kong and September 2010 in Seoul. The first workshop was co-hosted with the City University of Hong Kong and the second was hosted in collaboration with the Korean Institute of National Unification (KINU). Both workshops were also generously co-funded by the Asian Political and International Studies Association (APISA) and the German Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (KAS). The book presents theories that deal with state violence, especially that which occurred during the time of state formation and regime transition or consolidation. It also has seven chapters that detail state violence in East Asia ?three cases from China, Japan and South Korea in Northeast Asia and five cases from Cambodia, Indonesia, Myanmar, the Philippines and Thailand in Southeast Asia. This volume highlights the political and cultural dynamics that lead to state-sanctioned violence and discusses ways to prevent such incidents in the future.
Link to publisher
International Relations in Southeast Asia
Edited by N. Ganesan and Ramses Amer
Hugh S. & Winifred B. Cumming Memorial Professor of International Affairs
University of Virginia
East Asia Regionalism
Edited by N. Ganesan and Colin Dürkop
This edited volume is the outcome of a workshop that was jointly organized by the Hiroshima Peace Institute and the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung in December 2010. The immediate motivation for the workshop was the general feeling among us that whereas there was a tremendous amount of regional activities tending in the direction of East Asian regionalism, there was an equal amount of dissonance that could be observed. In other words, although participating countries in the regionalist process were generally enthusiastic about achieving a measure of regional coordination, their efforts were not always congruent or convergent. In fact there seemed to be many instances where the policy initiatives of one country appeared to be at odds with that of another. In light of this situation we decided to host a workshop in Hiroshima and gather feedback from prominent scholars in the field about the preferred directions of individual countries.