Fantasy for Permanent Membership

Not realizing or ignoring its difficulty, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe again appealed his determination to make Japan one of the permanent members of Security Council in United Nations. He might have confused that Japan’s status in the world community had been raised by his personal political agenda on security policy. No nation recognizes that Japan has gotten a ticket for the membership with its internally controversial legislation for security, including allowing collective self-defense right. The permanent membership of Japan is a ridiculous illusion inside the mind of Japanese nationalists.

There was a sense of hasting in Abe’s speech in United Nations University in Tokyo on Monday. “It is no longer the time to waste time for discussion. We need to yield concrete outcome,” told Abe. “Based on deep reflection for previous war, Japan made efforts to build a country that would pay respect to world peace, prosperity and rule of law,” added Abe to highlight Japan’s eligibility for the membership.

In the middle of the first decade of twenty-first century, Japan launched a campaign for its permanent membership under Jun-ichiro Koizumi administration. As Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary, Abe conducted the effort in the government of Japan. The greatest sponsor for Japan, with a wrong estimate of bureaucrats, was United States. U.S. at the time supported only Japan for new permanent member of Security Council, knowing all other nations, including other candidates like Germany or India, would firmly oppose. In short, U.S. equivocally opposed Japan’s ticket.

Bureaucrats in Japan often talk Japan’s candidacy in a context of U.N. reform. But, it is not sure what kind of reform Japan is foreseeing. To make Security Council functional in any conflicts, adding new membership will cause further incompetence. If Japan wants to contribute to peaceful solution in international security, it is better for it to say something to U.S. in a friendly manner as a key ally. But it has said nothing even about Okinawa. Nationalistic assertion of Japan’s importance in the world is too blind on its status and nothing but an embarrassment.

Ironic enough, Abe’s speech in U.N. University noted as an expression of his willingness for “deep reflection” on Japan’s past. Over seventieth anniversary statement from the end of World War II, Abe has been considering its expression for the message to Asian nations. Pressures from international community are coming as his idea was revealed from his colleagues. If he wants to contribute international peace and security, he needs to announce appropriate recognition about post-war history of Japan.