MUCH OF the talk about reform at the United Nations leaves out two key players that are not even part of the Security Council: Germany and Japan. These two nations have suffered in the post-World War II order because the international community has not afforded them the importance and attention they deserve. Not only are Germany and Japan missing from the Security Council, but their military forces are not as developed as they should be, and the two also lack diplomatic clout in the global arena. In a world dominated by sub-national threats like terrorism and drug-trafficking, however, the United States should actively encourage more assertive international roles for Germany and Japan to allay some of the pressure that comes from dealing with these problems.
World War II laid the foundations for the world's current international structure. Part of that basis included eliminating the militarism thought to pervade German and Japanese societies. Since the victorious powers had to punish someone for the calamity that had befallen the world, their marginalization of Germany and Japan seemed logical at the time. As historian John Keegan writes about one aspect of the larger solution, "The imposition of Stalinism east of the Elbe after 1945 solved the 'German problem' which had transfixed Europe since 1870."
Decisions from 1945, however, are a problem in 2006. Germany and Japan both want to be a part of the Security Council and have aptly demonstrated in recent decades that the only thing they want to foster in the world is peace and prosperity. They are not the same nations that once threatened the rest of the world. Why continue to punish them for past actions when they have shown a dedication to appropriate behavior in the modern world?
What does "punishment" exactly mean in this case? Germany and Japan do not have nuclear weapons, do not have aircraft carriers, do not have significant airlift capabilities and generally retain their armed forces for defensive purposes. This last military component has changed in recent times, however, as is evidenced by German involvement in several peace-keeping operations, including Afghanistan. Nevertheless, where Germany and Japan do "flex their muscles," it is usually in the context of larger international agreements; they are almost never expected to act as unilaterally as the United States does in the Middle East or as France does in Western Africa.
"Well," you might ask, "why should Germany and Japan be allowed to act unilaterally?" The answer is not because they can but because if they were allowed to act unilaterally, it would be better for the world. Japan and Germany have the second and third largest economies in the world, respectively, have large populations (around 80 million in Germany and 130 million in Japan) and are financial and industrial giants. They have the capacity to undertake more global responsibilities if international and -- even more critically -- domestic opinion allowed them.
What are the benefits for us? President Bush has already labeled China a "strategic competitor" and, in that context, making Japan stronger seems reasonable in order to counter-balance the Chinese. Does it make sense that the nation which pioneered carrier warfare has no aircraft carriers? Allowing the Japanese to beef up their military forces and doctrine might mean that the United States does not have to be in the frontline if and when China causes problems in the Far East. There are currently no similar issues in Europe with which Germany could help, but more independent German military cooperation against potential terrorists and rogue states could diminish American burdens. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Bush have had warm diplomatic ties; before becoming Chancellor, Merkel wrote that "dictators understand only the language of threat" and supported German military participation in Iraq. It is unlikely that this relationship will produce a fundamental strategic shift for German foreign policy, but it's a start.
In many ways, the United States is the world's police. It cannot, however, solve all global problems on its own, and to expect the United States to do so is unreasonable. Encouraging the active buildup of German and Japanese power should be seen as an opportunity rather than a liability. The United States can strengthen its relationship with those two nations, and they in turn can further the interests of the international community in more tangible ways.
Erald Kolasi is a Cavalier Daily Viewpoint Writer.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | YesterdayLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 4 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
