Japan:Koizumi should propose U.N. reform(want to be a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council)

In August 1994, Diet members of the ruling coalition of the Liberal Democratic Party, the Social Democratic Party and the now-defunct Sakigake formed a society to ``think about becoming a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council.''

According to the prospectus, the society's objective was to restrain moves by the government and the Foreign Ministry to push the Diet's wish of securing a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council.

It was headed by LDP lawmaker Junichiro Koizumi, who had served as minister of posts and telecommunications in the previous administration of Kiichi Miyazawa.

After the inauguration ceremony, Koizumi said: ``Can Japan do the same things as the five current permanent members if it becomes one? I feel uneasy with the way accomplished facts are progressing even though there is no national consensus or adequate Diet debate.''

After the Iraq war, the Koizumi administration dispatched Ground Self-Defense Force personnel to Iraq in response to overtures from the Bush administration.

During this time, the world underwent a number of drastic changes. So did the United Nations.

Tackling ``new threats'' in the form of international terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and failed states became urgent tasks of the United Nations. International society has yet to reach a consensus on how to proceed with these tasks.

In each case, countries seek the ``official seal of approval'' from the United Nations but rely on the military power of coalitions of the willing and multinational forces. The United Nations can be likened to the imperial court in contrast to the shogunate in feudal times. In other words, although it has ``official status,'' it has no ``official power.''

This is why the United Nations needs to be reformed. In the last decade, Japan's U.N. diplomacy went through twists and turns. Although Japan volunteered to become a permanent member, it learned that no one would support it unless it took the initiative to really sweat some blood. No matter how nice it was to others, no one rooted for it. After all, money (contributions to the U.N. budget) alone was not enough for Japan to win support for a permanent membership.

China and Taiwan still haven't shown any support for Japan's permanent membership.

When Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao met with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder in May, he said that China welcomes Germany playing a greater international role. Observers say the statement implies China's support for Germany's permanent membership to the Security Council. According to reports, Wen also told his German counterpart that unlike Germany, which has settled its past, Japan has yet to do so and is, therefore, not eligible to become a permanent member. The history problem still weighs heavily between Japan and China.

Another major change that took place in the last 10 years is the increase in the number of Japanese people who support Japan's bid for permanent membership. Now, 70 percent support it. The growth is in proportion to those who support Japan's participation in peacekeeping operations.

But what is difficult to understand is Koizumi's outlook on the United Nations. When President George W. Bush visited Japan last fall, even though he spoke about the U.N. machinery, the prime minister steered away from the subject. When U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan visited Japan in February, Koizumi called for the elimination of the enemy nation clause of the U.N. Charter but did not make reference to a proposal to reform the organization or Japan's bid to become a permanent member of the Security Council.

The prime minister no longer needs to worry that ``the government and the Foreign Ministry may push their way under the initiative of bureaucrats.'' He is free to openly present his own visions for U.N. reform and Japan's permanent membership to the Security Council. Furthermore, he may stay in office for another two years before his term expires. Next year marks the 60th anniversary of the United Nations and Japan will celebrate the 50th anniversary as a member of the United Nations the following year. For two years starting next year, Japan will serve on the Security Council as a nonpermanent member. Japan is currently dispatching SDF troops to Iraq for reconstruction. It has also pledged to donate $5 billion to support Iraqi reconstruction. Depending on how it advances diplomacy, it could have a larger say in U.N. reform. What better chance and stage could there be for Koizumi to make himself heard?

The prime minister should attend the U.N. General Assembly in September and present a proposal for drastic U.N. reform. Also in order to overcome ``new threats,'' ``nation building'' and ``personnel training'' have become more important than ever. It is time for Japan to speak out about what role it can play in these areas in words that can win the compassion and support of people around the world.

Actually, the greatest obstacle blocking Japan's U.N. diplomacy in the last decade has been the United States. Although the United States spoke about U.N. reform and showed support for Japan's bid for permanent membership to the Security Council, the two countries never got together for policy talks to coordinate it. It is time to try to break the impasse head-on.

The Bush administration also supports Japan's permanent membership. Condoleezza Rice, who advises Bush on national security issues, also voiced U.S. ``support'' to Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi, when she visited Japan recently.

First, the prime minister should sit down with Bush to discuss U.N. reform so that the two countries can work together to advance reform. The United States must also be feeling the significance of the United Nations once again. Why not take advantage of this change to have the United States focus on U.N. reform? Japan is urged to develop U.S. policy to get across its message. * * * The author is an Asahi Shimbun senior staff writer and foreign affairs columnist.(IHT/Asahi: July 20,2004) (07/20)

When U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan visited Japan in February, Koizumi called for the elimination of the enemy nation clause of the U.N. Charter

I tried to determine what the "enemy nation clause" refers to. It may refer to the following (from Charter of the United Nations) - the wording is a bit dense, but my quick interpretation of it is that it permits actions to be taken against former WW2 enemies without requiring action through the Security Council - but if that is the case, why is Japan worried about it, yet (seemingly) neither Germany nor Italy is worried about it?:

Article 53 in chapter VIII

The Security Council shall, where appropriate, utilize such regional arrangements or agencies for enforcement action under its authority. But no enforcement action shall be taken under regional arrangements or by regional agencies without the authorization of the Security Council, with the exception of measures against any enemy state, as defined in paragraph 2 of this Article, provided for pursuant to Article 107 or in regional arrangements directed against renewal of aggressive policy on the part of any such state, until such time as the Organization may, on request of the Governments concerned, be charged with the responsibility for preventing further aggression by such a state.

The term enemy state as used in paragraph 1 of this Article applies to any state which during the Second World War has been an enemy of any signatory of the present Charter.

Chapter XVII - Article 107

Nothing in the present Charter shall invalidate or preclude action, in relation to any state which during the Second World War has been an enemy of any signatory to the present Charter, taken or authorized as a result of that war by the Governments having responsibility for such action.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.