[Today's Lisa Zei Topic] Is Japan's criticism of the United Nations just a defense of the United States?
I visited the United Nations about 20 years ago. It is located in New York, USA, which consists of 193 member countries in 2020 from 51 countries after the war. The purpose of existence is for international peace, development of friendly relations between countries, resolution of international problems, and international cooperation. Six major organizations, many affiliated organizations and auxiliary organizations are located, and many specialized organizations and related organizations are working together to form a virtually huge and complex United Nations system.
I saw an article in a recent survey that Japan had the lowest rating for the United Nations. why?
Japan originally had a long-cherished desire to join the United Nations. It was finally approved in 1956, with the three principles of diplomacy: 1. United Nations centrism 2. Maintaining its position as a member of Asia 3. Cooperation with liberal nations, and making "United Nations centrism" a pillar of Japanese diplomacy. However, young people have great interest and expectations for UN agencies, the number of Japanese who actually work at the UN is extremely small. Despite Japan's heavy reliance on security, economic activity and social affairs, few are involved.
Japan has provided a considerable amount of funding to UN. However, in recent years there have been criticisms as to whether it is worth the financial burden. Is it really meaningful for Japan to contribute? Japan interprets it as Japan's diplomacy that makes use of the United Nations and diplomacy to realize the purpose of the United Nations in return for paying funds. In other words, Japan's interpretation of "contribution" is thin. Meanwhile, the United Nations has emergency financial assistance as well as regulation, monitoring and coordination of Japan's actions. In other words, it is different from what Japan thinks of "contribution."
Despite the fact that the United Nations is tackling global issues around the world and its staff from each country is active in various fields and countries, the number of Japanese UN staff is very small compared to other countries. It's not that the Japanese government hasn't done anything. So far, they have taken various UN-related measures to raise the interest of young people. Recruitment information, actual status reports, lectures by related parties, etc. Although the number has increased a little. It is still less than the number that leads to "contribution". This is because in order for Japanese to apply, they must have a minimum master's degree in the profession and have a few years of work experience in a particular field. Japan is good at expanding the amount of "knowledge" throughout the so-called student period, but is not good at applying it in the actual field and in a foreign language.
Whether you know the background or not, or apart from that, the Japanese people's evaluation of the United Nations is very low. The Japanese said, "We are paying a lot of money, but it's only a disadvantage to Japan." "Only the permanent members of the United Nations can be useful." "The United Nations has contributed to peacekeeping more than before." There are many opinions such as "No". Another reason for this is the support and information from the Japanese government, which truly received the WHO's initial misjudgment on COVID-19.
Apart from the US president's suspension of funding to WHO and regret to the United Nations, it seems that this problem still remains in Japan.
Comments
Post a Comment