i think Japan deserves a seat in the permanent security council. Japan pledges lots of money to the UN and its relief effort is always on top of most countries in the security council.

doesn't the US support this idea?

ooops. wrong forum! sorry

its all about prestige.

i posted this in the wrong forum. sorry Koreans.

Yor are forgiven.
Getting to the topic, i think Japan should lick Chinese @$$ first and make Chinese happy if they ever aspire to be a member of UN Permament Security Council.

And, I think you should lick my balls.

Nobody wants Japan as a member of the UNSC. Not USA, Not France, Not the UK, Not Russia, Not China.

Do you even have balls to speak of?
However, if you do have them by any chance, then let my dog please you.

I do, and that's the only opinion that even matters.


I would but I think that your mom would get jealous.

actually no lol. Your decision doesn't really matter because it doesn't mean squat in this debate. Japanese don't make the decisions. The 5 P members of the UNSC do.

Ahh.. But, see that's where you're wrong. I'm a US citizen, and America's opinion matters the most.

as I previously stated. It is not in U.S interest to allow Japan a seat on the UNSC. Plus the UNSC is pretty useless anyone.

Not to worry! It was your mom who gave him to me after she got tired of it.

I dunno, the UNSC perm members are the only ones allowed to legitimately make nuclear weapons. It's the main reason why Japan doesn't have them. If Japan did, then Asian members might queit down some.

UNSC is not useless,it is that Japan is useless in UNSC because it always follows US.

again you are dreaming lol. USA does not want Japan or anyone else to have nukes.

The US is more inclined to want to Japan to have nukes over other Eastern Asian nations. Aren't ethnic Japanese the only Asians in the Senate anyways? And, you have Japanese people in the Republican party, which currently rules the executive branch and congress? Even if dems when you also have Japanese Democratic Senators. You have no Chinese or Koreans in the Senate. None.

Maybe if more Japanese are voted into congress and get into cabinent, we might see the US encourage the UNSC to let Japan to become a member. You see how friendly the US is to Isreal because of the amount of Jews in politics.
The US only does business with China because its good money. But, in the US, it's US citizens with Japanese ethnicity that are the only eastern asians with the resources to make it into the senate. Imagine if the number of Japanese in the Senate equaled the same number there are as Jews in congress. Imagine how that'd benefit Japan.

I consider japan to be pretty much nuclear. It has the nuclear tech and has the nuclear fuel to process into weapons grade. It won't be that hard for it to become nuclear if it wants to.

That's why the US might want Japan in. It'd give them more pull in the UNSC.

A single veto by any current UN Security Council Members is all it takes to frusturate Japan, Brazil, or India's attempt to became a new member of the council.

That is why Japan has no hope at all.

China is *not* going to allow either Japan nor India to become a permanent member in the UN Security Council (UNSC). It is the matter of strategic and political reality. Imagine what would happen if Japan and India are in the UNSC. China would be surrounded by adversaries on all sides: Russia to the north, Japan to the east, and India to the southwest. All of them are competing against China to become the regional superpower. All of them are wary of China. All of them are adversaries of China. If all of them are permanently on the UNSC, either of them will be able to override China in any likely event of regional conflict and competition.

Of course, the US would love to see that happen, to see the four powers having a catfight and China being permanently contained. However, it does not matter if the US wants to put Japan on the UNSC. China is not stupid. China will not let that happens, and China has the *veto* power! Ta-da! And because China has the veto power to protect its own interests, China does not have to take $hits from the US (or Japan or India.)

So, it does not matter if Japan (or India) ever tries to make China happy in order to persue the permanent UNSC membership, China will ultimtely veto to protect its own regional powers and interests. In fact, even if Chinese and Japanese do not have that much bad blood between us (like we are now,) China will still not allow Japan to become a permanent UNSC member. (The bad blood between China and Japan certainly gives China more reason to veto Japan.) China, in defense of its own intereests and powers, will definitely use its final veto power to deny Japan's (or India's) chance of gaining a permanent seat on the UNSC in the end.

Imagine if you live in a neighborhood, and you have some very unfriendly neighbors, and you live right in the center of all those neighbors You and one other neighbor are the only people that have guns (i.e., power) in the neighborhood and protect your own interests. Would you want all your unfriendly neighbors to get guns (i.e., the same power) to neutralize your regional power -- especially when you live right in the center of all of them?

The way it is now, it is U.S. and Britain on one side. China and Russia on the other. France in the go-between. It really doesn't matter because all it takes is a single veto. But only one country has the means and power to take action regardless of U.N. approval or not. So, ultimately for resolutions that you really want passed, the U.N. is completely useless as an organization.

If China vetos Japan's entry into the UNSC, what exactly can the US do to change it? Invade the UN or China? *Nothing*, really. And you know China *WILL* veto on this matter, regardless of what the US wants or does not want.

Japan knows it's hard to get a seat in UNSC but they still demand the support from US.

US at heart doesnt hope Japan as a member of UNSC and Japan knows that but they still demand the support from US.

Japan knows how important he is in the American global strategy and he want to get something from US in turn.

It softens the ground or the second demand if it fail to get a seat in UNSC.

The second demand is what Japanese really wants,that is,the change of role that Japan plays in the US-Japan security framework.

Japan want to normalize and rebuild his military force.

yes, forcing members into the U.N. is something not even the U.S. can do.

anyway, this Security Council business has already been put to rest.



http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9785603/site/newsweek/

I know everything from the shrine visits to whatever else has been rehashed a lot here already. but the fact remains that japan continues to have an image problem still in Asia. And its funding is not going to change anything because its neighbors are growing richer.

Ultimately, it is *CHINA*, not the US, that will decide if Japan gets that seat. Or more accurately, it is China that will decide Japan will *NOT* get the permanent seat in the UNSC. Neither will India.



Japan *and* India!?!? What the heck in their mind would make them even think China would ever allow *both* Japan and India to become permanent UNSC members?!?! Japan and India must be very politically naive if they thought China would allow that to happen.

Maybe China could be bribed somehow.

It is not that simple. None of the five wants Japan join in them.

Bribing China will not change that the political and strategic reality of allowing China to be surrounded by adversaries with UNSC veto powers to neutralize any advantage China has in the UN and on the international scene. It is just not going to happen.

I think this is right. Japan knows it cannot get in. The military normalization is what they are after. Same thing with the command of troops in South Korea. Both want their security in their own hands. The U.S. will have to play its cards carefully to keep its status.

The bid for permanent member of UNSC is a play together with the territorial conflicts with its neighbours.According to the recent report of redeployment of US base in Japan,it confirmed that Japan wouldn't be considered as a ally under the protection of US any more and they would cooperate to form a new frame on the equal footing. The Japanese provides US with 6.1 billion dollars for the redeployment of US base and demands a new mechanism to replace the former one.It means that Japan has more say and more space left to its military expansion.

Ultimately, America should LEAVE Asia. The dominance of the white power in the world, a legacy of the colonial age and Western conquest, perpetuated by the Western mass media propaganda and American military might, must be brought to a definitive end and full closure. Asian people have to control our own destinies... and White men and Americans will have to stay out of it.

Great post.

I think Japan doesn't deserve the seat. There's too many political issues it needs to sort out. And unlike those obscure island nations that are easily swayed by the Yen, China has a strong mix of economic and political clout that will prevent Japan from getting that seat.

Anyway, I can't see how the money spent is worth it in the end - does the average Joe even care about the Security Council? It's an ineffective and obscure organisation anyway. The French complained (as they always do) about what the U.S. had done in Iraq, yet what good did that do? Having a seat in the Council won't put Japan on an equal footing with all the nations there - certainly not the U.S.

If I was the one making the decisions, I'd focus more on the problems at home. A shrinking population is a much bigger concern than a seat.



China doesn't have the balls to say "NO" to India's face. That's disappointing, considering the racket the Chinese made about Japan's bid.

i never thought Russia would be a challenge or considered a threat to China at all. i thought Russia and China have been boosting up relationships and foreign exchange has never been better. didnt Russia and China hold a joint military excercise 2, 3 years ago?

i dont think India will make it to the PSC. Japan, on the other hand more than deserves that title. just because Japan doesn't have a huge military (other than the SDF) doesn't mean it cant take a seat in it.

the UN should kick France out and let Japan in.

hell no. if any one should have a seat, its Canada.

Dude, America isn't necessarily a "white" country first off. Second, America's presence is nothing like that of colonial Europe. At least every country has a say in their own affairs. Even if America influences their decisions, it doesn't dominate them as there's no official political control between the US and its allies.



I disagree. America isn't some white conspiracy that some of you make it out to be. It's a democracy where anyone has the ability to participate provided they're citizens. That's why things like the black vote or hispanic matter in the US. Politics in America isn't monopolized by any "race" like some people make it out to be.
The US, inspite of what anyone thinks, is the most heterogenous nation. In most countries, everyone looks pretty much the same comparing to the Americans who are more varied than any other people.


India has nukes.


Doesn't the US hold joint military exercises with China NOW?


Yes, those froggies. Eff the French.

russia's doin militar exercises with China now, not the US

I thought the two countries still trade officers and what not. PLus, China still hosts US troops. They don't have bases, but they have a few.

That is true. Canada came up with the idea of UN Peace Keepers.

Japan on the other is not suppose to have an official standing military. So how can Japan be in the UNSC? Some people argue that Japan has the right because it contributed to peace within the last 60 years. How so? By not invading or start another war like it did 60 plus years ago? Most countries meet that criteria.

Japan can cut down its funding on UN if it wants to. Of course, for every choice, there are consequences.

not true dude. politics in America is still a white ruled institution. remmeber going thru all the senators and there is only 5-6/100 non-white senators. Hollywood movies still have their white dominated stories.. even in asian based stories: Ju-on, Ring, Starship Trooper, Fast and Furious Tokyo Dift etc. It will be a while before it's called a true heterogenous country.

Bayard, I'm not going to lie, not everything in the US is fair. However, the US is predominantly white (81.7%), so it's going to reflect that in media and politics. That's life, that isn't necessarily discrimination but maybe it'd better reflect the population if only 81 or 82 senators were white. But, this 18.3 percent could vote non-whites if they wanted.
Yet, inspite of its short-comings at least in the US, politicians and newspapers and such are punished for open racism. In China you had a newspaper that referred to Condelezza Rice as a Chimpanzee, in Japan there's Ishihara, in France there was the issue with a law being passed banning burkas in public schools, and in Austrailia and Europe you had whites attack Arab neighborhoods. And, this all takes place in the 21st century.
The US isn't perfect, but I'd still say it's thoe most cosmopolitan, most heterogenous, and least racist nation in the world.


Here's a list of some of the non-white senators' websites, you can look them up:
Daniel Kahikina Akaka
Maria Cantwell
Daniel K. Inouye(Played in "The Next Karate Kid" as himself).
Mel Martinez
Robert Menendez
Barak Obama
Ken Salazar