Posted on 06/09/2005 5:50:34 AM PDT by Righty_McRight
TOKYO (Reuters) - Japan may have to settle for second-class status in an expanded U.N. Security Council, given opposition from China and half-hearted U.S. support for its bid to gain permanent membership of the elite body, analysts said.
Japan, along with Germany, Brazil and India, on Wednesday dropped demands for veto rights in their joint effort to expand the powerful 15-member body and gain permanent seats on it.
While many countries agree on increasing membership on the council as it still reflects the balance of power at the end of World War II, the current five permanent members are reluctant to grant veto powers to newcomers.
The 10 non-permanent members rotating for two-year terms do not have veto rights.
"I think it's a proposal that would win the support of many nations," Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said.
"I think the current members with veto powers have reservations about their vested interests being infringed upon."
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told her Japanese counterpart last week that Washington supported Tokyo's bid but could not back the four nations' resolution, which at the time included veto rights, Japanese media reported recently.
"We knew all along that the United States was not crazy about reforming the Security Council," a Japanese diplomat said.
Japan has stepped up its decade-old drive for a permanent seat, eager to win diplomatic recognition equal to its economic clout and what it sees as a well deserved position for footing about 20 percent of the world body's bills.
The effort was given new momentum by U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who unveiled two proposals for expanding the council's membership earlier this year.
Among other permanent members of the council, France and Britain support the candidacies of the four countries, known as the Group of Four (G4), while China opposes any seat for Japan and Russia's position is unclear.
"We think the move by a few countries to forcefully push through such an immature plan has already derailed the U.N. reforms from the right track," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Jianchao said, referring to the G4's revised proposal.
"Like many countries, China expresses concerns about it and firmly opposes the move by these few countries."
SEEKING INFORMATION, NOT STATUS
Japan argues that given its recent record of committing troops to play a greater role in global security, it should have a say as a permanent member on the council, which is empowered to make decisions on war, sanctions and peacekeeping.
France announced on Wednesday that it would co-sponsor the new draft resolution, which states that consideration of the veto would be postponed until a review in 15 years.
While some conservative commentators have criticized membership without veto rights, analysts and officials said what was important was to be in the inner circle of decision-making among the world's biggest powers.
Yasuhiko Yoshida, a professor at Osaka University of Economics and Law, and who worked for various United Nations institutions for over 20 years, said it was information that Tokyo wanted, not the veto power.
"We don't need superpower status. What we need is information," he said, referring to how the current permanent members begin with informal consultations among themselves on issues to be brought to the Security Council.
"In the past, Japan had to wait outside in the corridors to catch other ambassadors coming out of the council meetings to gather information."
Japanese officials said the G4 still had a long way to go in its bid, which must first clear the hurdle of winning a two-thirds majority among the 191-member General Assembly.
And for Tokyo, the final step of having two-thirds of member nations, including all five permanent Security Council countries, ratify a change in the U.N. Charter may prove to be the most challenging given strong anti-Japan sentiment in China.
Japan's U.N. bid was one factor that triggered often violent anti-Japanese protests in Chinese cities in April, and millions of Chinese have signed an online petition against giving Tokyo a permanent seat.
"We still have a way to go. We must continue to work hard to seek support," Senior Vice Foreign Minister Shuzen Tanigawa said when asked about the prospects for Tokyo's bid.
See, having Japan and India as permanent members would make sense, so, naturally, it will never happen in the UN.
Giving new members veto power would basically ensure that the Security Council would never pass anything important, which might be a good idea.
The record is certainly improving, but their forces need to be freed from the strictures they operate under.
Give them a permanent seat without the veto and see how that works out for a few years.
I think they should take the new members in and kick China off.
My first option is to disband the entire organization, rip down it's buildings, impound the cars until the parking tickets are paid and expell the anti-American members from our land. (I'd salt the land where the building stands but since we can reuse the land I'll forego that symbollic step)
Get rid of France.
We can still veto this expansion can't we? This isn't really going to happen is it?
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.