Kunnasta kaupunginosaksi – kunnanhallituksen joutsenlaulu

Työn tarkoituksena on selvittää kunnanhallituksen jäsenten kokemuksia kuntaliitosprosessista ja kunnan viimeisen toimintavuoden johtamisesta sekä selvittää, mitä opiksi otettavaa tästä kuntaliitoksesta on. Tutkimus on luonteeltaan laadullinen, ja tutkimusmenetelmänä on käytetty teemahaastattelua. Tutkimusaineisto kerättiin haastattelemalla erään, kuntaliitoksessa mukana olevan kunnan yhdeksää kunnanhallituksen jäsentä. Tutkimuksen perusteella kuntaliitoksesta päättäminen on raskas prosessi johtaville luottamushenkilöille, jotka joutuvat tekemään päätöksensä monenlaisten paineiden alla. Asioita, joihin tulee erityisesti kiinnittää huomiota, ovat tiedottaminen, aikataulu ja päätöksenteon perustana olevien tietojen riittävä analyysi. Aikaisemmin tehtyjen kuntaliitosten kokemusten hyödyntäminen helpottaa asioiden hoitamista.

Exiles and Constituents: Baltic Refugees and American Cold War Politics, 1948- 1960

This dissertation explores the complicated relations between Estonian, Latvian, and Lithuanian postwar refugees and American foreign policymakers between 1948 and 1960. There were seemingly shared interests between the parties during the first decade of the Cold War. Generally, Eastern European refugees refused to recognize Soviet hegemony in their homelands, and American policy towards the Soviet bloc during the Truman and Eisenhower administrations sought to undermine the Kremlin’s standing in the region. More specifically, Baltic refugees and State Department officials sought to preserve the 1940 non-recognition policy towards the Soviet annexation of the Baltic States. I propose that despite the seemingly natural convergence of interests, the American experiment of constructing a State-Private network revolving around fostering relations with exile groups was fraught with difficulties. These difficulties ultimately undermined any ability that the United States might have had to liberate the Baltic States from the Soviet Union. As this dissertation demonstrates, Baltic exiles were primarily concerned with preserving a high level of political continuity to the interwar republics under the assumption that they would be able to regain their positions in liberated, democratic societies. American policymakers, however, were primarily concerned with maintaining the non-recognition policy, the framework in which all policy considerations were analyzed. I argue that these two motivating factors created unnecessary tensions in American policy towards the Baltic republics in the spheres of psychological warfare as well as exile unity in the United States and Europe. Despite these shortcomings, I argue that out of the exiles’ failings was born a generation of Baltic constituents that blurred the political legitimacy line between exiles who sought to return home and ethnic Americans who were loyal to the United States. These Baltic constituents played an important role in garnering the support of the United States Congress, starting in the 1950s, but became increasingly influential after the 1956 Hungarian Revolution, despite the seemingly less important role Eastern Europe played in the Cold War. The actions of the Baltic constituents not only prevented the Baltic question from being forever lost in the memory hole of history, but actually created enough political pressure on the State Department that it was impossible to alter the long-standing policy of not recognizing the Soviet annexation of the Baltic States.

Remembering the War and Aggression: A Discourse Analysis of Japan’s State Apologies and Commemoration Speeches on August 15th 1995-2015

Memories of historical injustices affect contemporary politics from local to global level. In East Asia, questions of commemoration and historical responsibility have turned into international and domestic controversies. The main focus has been and still is in apologies conducted by Japanese prime ministers in regards to the war, aggression and colonialism during the era of Imperial Japan. Although it is granted that state apologies are not a crucial part of reconciliation, they can be analysed as a linked but separate process within the context of memory and international relations. The purpose of this study is to examine the discourses of history in Japanese prime ministers’ commemoration speeches on Memorial Ceremony for the War Dead from 1995 to 2015 in order to analyse how the Japanese government is reflecting on its past. In particular, attention is paid on what is being commemorated and how, whether it is the war and its victims or Japan’s post-war era of peace. As an apology is a reciprocal activity, responses from Japan’s most vocal former victims, South Korea and China, were also examined. Discourse analysis was used to identify and examine the different representations of the past. In addition, the apology statements of Japanese prime ministers were analysed in the Many to Many apology framework developed by Tavuchis (1991). Primary material consisted of 21 prime ministers’ speeches from the annual Memorial Ceremony for the War Dead on August 15th and from three apology statements made in 1995, 2005 and 2015. Further international context was primarily collected from newspaper articles of The New York Times and The Times throughout the examined period. It can be concluded from the findings that in the official Japanese remembrance of the past war from 1985’s annexation of Taiwan to the atomic bombings in 1945, both discourses that reinforce apology and remorse over Japan’s past aggressions and discourses that consciously avoid doing so are used. The commemoration speeches and apology statements consistently assert that Japan has acknowledged its past and expresses regret over the acts of aggression. At the same time, the speeches and statements strengthen the narrative that Japan was a victim of circumstances as well as turn the focus on post-war peace-making or on Japan’s own victimhood.