Does Japan deserve a permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council?

Monday 20th October, 07:00 AM JST

Latest 15 of 39 Total Comments Show All

EurajReturns at 09:27 PM JST - 22nd October

I don't see the point. It would be the same as giving the US 2 seats...

The US already has a second seat. It's called "Great Britain." Japan, with its large economic power and political power, should be permanent on the council, if nations like China and its human rights abuses can. "Deserve" is a POV-ridden term.
usaexpat at 05:35 AM JST - 24th October

One word for the naysayers: China. Now if China has a permanent seat than pretty much any warlord or maybe even Kim Jong Il should be allowed to as well since obviously the standards aren't very high. I don't personally put a whole lot of faith in the UN anyway but if we are going to play the game then certainly the world's second largest economy deserves a seat at the table. Japan has given up agression, has had no armed conflicts and has not threatened its neighbors for 60+ years. Rehashing WWII is a pretty weak argument after all of these years please find a new reason and maybe you will bring me around.
RakishGadfly at 11:22 AM JST - 24th October

Gotta echo what others have said - if whitewashing your past, warmongering, massacres and human rights abuses are reasons not to have a UNSC seat (assuming these actually apply to Japan), then what the heck is China doing there?
usaexpat at 11:57 PM JST - 24th October

Well the moderator felt I was off topic in addressing reddragonguy's claims so lets try to word it this way and stay on topic. The assertion that China stands up for the oppressed and therefore deserves a seat on the UN council is laughable. What China did in supporting crazy KIm's father in the Korean war wasn't sticking up for the oppressed it was merely sticking a thumb in Amrica's eye and flexing their muscles for their own interests. The PRC has no legitimacy and doesn't belong on the UN security council. Either give their seat to Japan or give it back to the ROC whose seat it rightly is.
gonemad at 12:51 AM JST - 25th October

the UNSC is a panel intended to achieve quick decisions. As such, it's size of 5 permanent and 10 non-permanent members can be considered already too large. When your intention is focused on quick decisions, experience tells you should not have more than 7 to 9 people in your body. Growing the number of members makes just it less effective. The concept of having permanent members on this panel is flawed as well and especially so when they only represent the powers of more than half a century ago, but not today's. If you add new powers today, you will have to do so again in 50 years. So there is neither a reason to increase the UNSC itself nor having more permanent seats at the expense of non-permanent members.

That said, Japan does have a large economic power, but no political equivalent of that power. The UNSC is a political organ, not an economic one. At least each of the current permanent members represent(ed) some larger groups of states to some extent. But what would Japan stand for, considering it's strained relations with all of it's neighbors? From that point of view, many other states would have a clear precedence.
Zurg at 09:35 AM JST - 25th October

Of course they deserve it. They may have been a threat over half a century ago, does not mean they should crouch to their knees. ............. With Japan celebrating their rich 2000 year history, and China boasting of their wonderful 6000 year history. Not to forget, Mongolia and Korea have a long endeavor history of 8000 year. ................ Japan has been able to take all of the Asian countries on One Island. In other words, they are an immigrant Island. Thus representing Asia?.?. ............... It's China that is the threat in ALL of Asia, and around the world. Tainting food and clothing is not the way a leading country should exemplify them selves as a leading nation. ** ................. **Japan deserves it and is a must for the UN to succeed as something to be reckoned to.
mushroomcloud at 05:37 AM JST - 26th October

"Japan deserves it and is a must for the UN to succeed as something to be reckoned to"

Other than voting in line with every US sponsored resolution, what value does Japan add?

China and Russia will unfortunately never allow Japan on the UNSC. It is simply Japan's pipe dream.
okapake at 10:05 AM JST - 26th October

Zurg - Think China has been around longer than Korea. 8000 years? You got to be kidding.

Japan is now beginning to have it's own "tainted food" problems - Itoham - home-grown and nobody to blame it on. Water from Japan's own wells!

And look, Australia is going to take over Japan's pledge for fuel to North Korea because Japan refuses. A likely world player!
ptolemy at 02:01 PM JST - 26th October

You bet Japan does, and so does Iran, Burma (Miyanmar), Cuba and Sri Lanka.

How many roads must a man walk down...
Shumatsu_Samurai at 09:52 PM JST - 26th October

defying the UN on issues like whaling

Better that violating human rights like China does every day.
Shumatsu_Samurai at 09:54 PM JST - 26th October

At least each of the current permanent members represent(ed) some larger groups of states to some extent.

Huh? Who do Russia and China represent apart from themselves? No one, that's who.
cwhite at 10:29 PM JST - 26th October

What value does Russia or China bring? Anyway, why would Japan want to be on the UN anyway, waste of money and resources for such a small country. Amazing that countries like the UK and Japan can be so successful while others with ample natural resources manage to live in poverty and make religion the main factor to start wars in the 21st Century.
Ah_so at 05:16 AM JST - 27th October

Japan would add no value to the security council and would not like the burden of making controversial decisions. J

Simply having (for now) the world's 2nd largest economy is not in itself a qualification for a permanent UN seat. If anyone is to get a seat, it should be India. However, Pakistan would kick up too much of a fuss.
grgrgrangry at 04:43 PM JST - 17th March

Well,I dont think theres a reason to stop them.... The Japanese now are inocent for the wars and they pay over 16% for the UN y not.
grgrgrangry at 04:53 PM JST - 17th March

Why not make voting for China if people think they should have permenant seat because they are invading East Asia.