There is a strange contrast between Japan's position in the League of Nations and in the United Nations. Japan played an important role for the establishment of the League of Nations, as one of the five victorious countries of the first world war, and took a leading job as one of the five standing committees after it was established. On the contrary, Japan did not participate in the establishment of the United Nations as a defeated country in the second world war, but also was not allowed to join it until eleven years after its establishment. Japan rendered great service to the League of Nations and tried to contribute to its development in the first ten years. But she found herself in a restricted position after the first world war, and had to try desperately to get out from it. Thus, Japan had to set the first example of secession by one of the powers from the League of Nations, and could not avoid placing it in a great difficulty. After the second world war, Japan has eagerly practiced United Nations Centralism as the first principle of her diplomacy. Because of her hard experiences from the first world war until her defeat, she has heartly desired to maintain her peace and security by cooperating the United Nations. As one of the free nations, she cooperates with those nations very closely, but at the same time, she cooperates with Asian and African nations as one of the Asian nations and desires to play a role of communication and mediation as a bridge between the western countries and the A A group. In this sense, Japan can contribute to development of human civilization, to establishment of world peace and to improvement of international cooperation according to her means.
Japan declared her principal policy, called three principles of foreign policy, after entering into the United Nations in 1956. These were United Nations Centralism, Cooperation with the Free World and Maintenance of the Position of Asian Countries. Contradictions of these three principles have been pointed out from time to time, and the United Nations centralism concept has almost been forgotten. Yet, in spite of the changes which have occurred in the United Nations since Japan's entry, Japan has rather effectively adhered to these principles in her actual diplomacy. There are, of course, several resulting questions but it might be worthwhile to consider Japan's United Nations Centeralism diplomacy as one of the fundamental attitudes of diplomacy as a small country.
In this paper, I have limited the meaning of “security” to a narrow and exact sense, and have discussed the question of the United Nations with respect to the security of Japan. I have discussed the question according to the following points and have tried to find the problems of the question. 1. Security of Japan by the United Nations 2. Mutural agreement supplementary to the general security of the United Nations (Japan-American security treaty) 3. Cooperation of Japan in enforcing actions of the United Nations'so-called Japanese cooperation with the United Nations 4. Neutrality of Japan and collective security of the United Nations.
There are two points which determine the fundamental Japanese attitude in the United Nations toward the limitation of armament. One is how it should be and the other is restraint of policy which Japan has actually applied. The first point has several questions. 1. United Nations centralism which the Japanese government proclaimed when Japan entered the United Nations and which Japan has maintained as one of its diplomatic principles. 2. Obligations of chapter nine of the Japanese constitution. 3. National desire to be secured by the United Nations. 4. Experience of nuclear bombs and nuclear test. The second point also has following questions. 1. The Japanese government's idea to elevate Japan's position in international relations. 2. Advancement of rearmament of Japan which raises question about the chapter nine of the Japanese constitution. 3. Step to make security of Japan dependent on American armament. 4. Complicated relations between American military policy and Japanese request for suspension of nuclear test. The Japanese government was distressed by the contradiction between these two points. Its former active attitude about limitation of armament and suspension of nuclear testing has been gradually reduced to a passive one. The government has even lost its independence in offering proposals about it. As a result, the govenment's policy has more and more departed from what it should be, and has therefore separated from Japanese national opinion. This phenomenon was especially remarkable on the subject of limitation of armament. The attitude of the Japanese government about this subject has been changed many times and finally has taken a third person's attitude. Cause of this confusion can be partially found in lacking of fundamental study about this subject. The Japanese government's opinion has lately been limited to suspension of nuclear testing. Moreover even its attitude about suspension of nuclear testing has lost its enthusiasm and individuality, and tries to discharge its duty by concerning itself only with technical matters. The government ought to reconsider seriously how it should be and conditions for it. This will be the problem in future.
This article was written in August 1963, about one month before the openning of the 18th United Nations General Assembly which had been expected to be “South-North Assembly”. Although our study was done upon the same questions which had been said to be the main debates of that Assembly, our analysis is thought to be still avail-able for the today's Japanese Foreign Policy. That is why the Japanese Foreign Policy is fully cleared before the UNGA, as Japanese Government continues to say “it is proceeded in the United Nations”. Our conclusions are as follows: (1) Japan should be a “mediator” between Afro-Asian Group and West because she is located in Asia and also belongs to West economically. (2) “Mediator” must have his fundamental Foreign Policy in long sight. (3) “Mediator” must have his realistic Foreign Policy. (4) Realistic Foreign Policy should be led from the study of the inside of all parties concerned. (5) The study of the inside is usually come from the approach in the back-sence.
Successive Japanese cabinets gave “United Nations Centralism”, “Cooperation with free world” and “Maintenance of membership in Asia” as three principles of their diplomacy. But, have these three principles played their roles as three poles of Japanese diplomacy without being mutually contradicted? The reporter statistically analyzed the Japanese voting record in the United Nations as a means of answering this question. The reporter explains Japan's position in the United Nations by statistical analysis of Japan's voting samples in seven general assemblies of the United Nations beginning with the general assembly of 1956 after Japan first joined the United Nations. Then the reporter discusses elements of unity and division of AA group in relation to Japan's voting attitude with the same voting samples. The reporter's conclusion is that Japan could not overcome the contradiction of the two principles, “cooperation with the free countries bloc” and “maintenance of membership of Asian country”, and as a result Japanese actual diplomacy has leant toward the “free countries bloc” time after time, and now shows a completely different attitude in voting from the general trend in Asia.
This article raises certain methodological questions related to the evaluation of the prestige of a Member State at the United Nations. There has been much discussion in Japan of the disproportionately low status and international prestige of the country in comparison with its national power. This article sees in the unusual interest of the Japanese in the international “status” of their country the characteristic Japanese trait resulting from its history and the nature of its development in the modern state system. The article discusses the high expectation of the Japanese towards the United Nations, and the objectives which Japan has wanted to achieve through its activities in the Organization. The article points out that because of the ties of Japan to the United States the Japanese diplomacy in the UN has not been as universalist or idealistic as the domestic public opinion has wished it to be. It describes the various activities of the United Nations in which Japan has been involved since its admission in 1956 and notes that Japan's position has slowly but steadily improved over the years. The article also discusses various aspects of Japanese foreign policy relevant to the effectiveness of its UN diplomacy. Certain domestic administrative and political conditions are noted as conducive more to traditional bilateral diplomacy rather than to multilateral UN diplomacy. Difference of views on foreign policy between the parties and even within the government party may be a factor leading to an unclear foreign policy. On the question of nuclear tests, because of strong domestic pressures Japan has taken an independent position in the United Nations. On the question of colonialism, Japan has striven to persuade a less patient group in the Afro-Asian bloc to a more conciliatory point of view but with a limited success. On economic issues, the developed industrial economy of Japan has led it to take a pro-Western view on the subject, though not as noticeably as the Western countries. On the Chinese representation and Korean questions, Japan has in the main followed the US leadership. By and large Japanese policy at the UN has been effective only when there is a concensus in its domestic opinion. Evaluation of Japan's UN diplomacy is sharply divided between the Western countries, which appreciate it highly, and the Afro-Asian countries, which consider it as a black sheep within their group.
The number of the United Nation's members has recently been increasing very rapidly. Moreover, most of those new members are newly developing countries of Asia and Africa. These phenomena naturally have changed the characteristics of the United Nations. In the beginning, the United Nations maintained homogeneity to a point. But, the countries which had common character and which formed the central power in the United Nations, have become a minority. The heterogeneous countries, which are newly developed, have become more than half in number. This character change had resulted in weakening of the United Nations and caused people to talk about a second United Nations. Also, it is reflected in the management of the United Nations because the United States, Britain and other nations of the free bloc can no longer neglect actions of those rapidly increasing new nations in voting and have to answer to requests of those developing countries. Disarmament, Decolonization and Development, which are called the three Ds, are recognized as new tasks of the United Nations. Among them, two are relative to the developing countries. The center of gravity of the United Nations has begun to shift from the East-West relation to the North-South relation. In other words, the focus of the United Nations has shifted toward an economic question. Even the question of limitation of armament, which related to the highest object of the United Nations, is effected by the growth of the developing countries and is discussed in the connection with economic questions. The recent General Assembly focussed on economic development. The countries, which are granted and guaranteed their political independence by the United Nations, are now requesting the United Nations to solve their economic questions also. The proposal for the United Nation's assistance to raise women's status in the underdeveloped countries, which was proposed in the third committee of the 17th General Assembly, symbolizes those countries' request for bread instead of political rights. This 17th General Assembly was called the quiet assembly but this shows that the assembly had complicated and serious economic questions and did not allow anyone to give high tone and wordy political speeches. Thus when the North-South question is becomming significant in the United Nations, Japan might be the one who is in a very difficult situation. About the North-South question, Japan has completely contradicting sides in this question. Because Japan, though being one of the developed countries, still has an underdeveloped element, and she shares her interest with the underdeveloped countries. This question is as important as the question of East-West conflict which relates to peace and stability of the world, and has a direct effect on Japan's existence. Therefore, Japan is now forced to give her own and independent decision, in the precise sense, for the first time after the 2nd world war. Former Minister of Foreign Affaires, Mr. Shigemitsu, expressed Japan's determination to be a bridge between East and West at the time of Japan's affiliation. Now, Japan is faced with testing this determination. This is a really difficult task for Japan but important mission to complete.