As I advised in my previous blog articles, Mr. Yukio Hatoyama, former prime minister of Japan and current president of East Asia Community Institute, is holding a study group meeting regularly, where he is seeking to establish a new political idea based upon fraternity and communitarianism.
The Japanese Constitution and democracy was discussed at Mr. Hatoyama's study group meeting held on July 15th.
Diplomacy & national security will be discussed at the study group meeting to be held in September.
(Photo: Mr. Nobuhiko Suto's Facebook of July 16th 2018)
During a previous study group meeting, I already discussed on Asian collective security with one of study group members who was a minister in the DPJ cabinet and former member of the Japanese parliament. According to him, the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) conducted intra-party discussions on the possibility of Asian regional collective security during and after DPJ was a ruling party (2009 - 2012). He mentioned that there were provisions on regional arrangements in chapter VIII of the UN Charter and that DPJ were discussing how those provisions could be applied and used to realize Asian collective security.
But, DPJ ceded power to LDP in 2012. And, DPJ transformed into the Democratic Progressive Party and then split and joined the Hope Party. Finally, in 2018, they transformed into the Democratic Party For the People (DPFP). During these transforming years, unfortunately, discussions on Asian collective security has diminished and halted.
Currently, not only ruling parties (LDP and New Komei Party) but almost all opposition parties including even the Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP) which is the most liberal party in Japan take it for granted that Japan's security regime should be solely based upon US-Japan Security Treaty although the treaty was made in the era of Cold War based upon confrontation between the East and the West.
The exception is the Japanese Communist Party (JCP), which is maintaining a position that US-Japan Security Treaty should be abolished. But, they don't propose an alternative security arrangement.
Mr. Hatoyama doesn't think the US-Japan Security Treaty should be abolished. But, he thinks that alternative arrangements should be explored and examined to supplement the US-Japan Security Treaty. As the president of East Asian Community Institute which he established in 2013, Mr. Hatoyama has been seeking for establishing a mechanism which prevents a war between East Asian countries and maintains peace forever.
Under these circumstances, I would like to bring up the topic of Asian collective security as an alternative and/or a supplement for the current national security arrangement of US-Japan Security Treaty during coming discussions of Mr. Hatoyama's study group meeting. If Asian collective security is established, China, the U.S., and Asian nations cooperate as the members of the collective security organization and work together to maintain peace and stability of Asia.
My personal concern is that, while Asian collective security would be expected to enhance regional peace and security through cooperation between China, the U.S. and Asian nations, China might oppose the idea of Asian collective security. As you know, China always prefers bilateral diplomatic negotiations. China doesn't like regional issues to be discussed in multilateral negotiations.
Another concern of mine relating to Asian collective security is how effective Asian collective security would be, given the fact that OSCE could not prevent Ukrainian crisis and Russian annexation of Crimea.
Meanwhile, I think that the cooperation and coordination exercised between the U.S., China and South Korea to solve the issue of North Korea diplomatically could be good examples and precedents that can be a basis leading to Asian collective security.
Let me advise you on the discussions of the study group on diplomacy & national security especially regarding Asian collective security from time to time as the discussions develop and proceed.
Thank you.
The Japanese Constitution and democracy was discussed at Mr. Hatoyama's study group meeting held on July 15th.
Diplomacy & national security will be discussed at the study group meeting to be held in September.
(Photo: Mr. Nobuhiko Suto's Facebook of July 16th 2018)
During a previous study group meeting, I already discussed on Asian collective security with one of study group members who was a minister in the DPJ cabinet and former member of the Japanese parliament. According to him, the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) conducted intra-party discussions on the possibility of Asian regional collective security during and after DPJ was a ruling party (2009 - 2012). He mentioned that there were provisions on regional arrangements in chapter VIII of the UN Charter and that DPJ were discussing how those provisions could be applied and used to realize Asian collective security.
But, DPJ ceded power to LDP in 2012. And, DPJ transformed into the Democratic Progressive Party and then split and joined the Hope Party. Finally, in 2018, they transformed into the Democratic Party For the People (DPFP). During these transforming years, unfortunately, discussions on Asian collective security has diminished and halted.
Currently, not only ruling parties (LDP and New Komei Party) but almost all opposition parties including even the Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP) which is the most liberal party in Japan take it for granted that Japan's security regime should be solely based upon US-Japan Security Treaty although the treaty was made in the era of Cold War based upon confrontation between the East and the West.
The exception is the Japanese Communist Party (JCP), which is maintaining a position that US-Japan Security Treaty should be abolished. But, they don't propose an alternative security arrangement.
Mr. Hatoyama doesn't think the US-Japan Security Treaty should be abolished. But, he thinks that alternative arrangements should be explored and examined to supplement the US-Japan Security Treaty. As the president of East Asian Community Institute which he established in 2013, Mr. Hatoyama has been seeking for establishing a mechanism which prevents a war between East Asian countries and maintains peace forever.
Under these circumstances, I would like to bring up the topic of Asian collective security as an alternative and/or a supplement for the current national security arrangement of US-Japan Security Treaty during coming discussions of Mr. Hatoyama's study group meeting. If Asian collective security is established, China, the U.S., and Asian nations cooperate as the members of the collective security organization and work together to maintain peace and stability of Asia.
My personal concern is that, while Asian collective security would be expected to enhance regional peace and security through cooperation between China, the U.S. and Asian nations, China might oppose the idea of Asian collective security. As you know, China always prefers bilateral diplomatic negotiations. China doesn't like regional issues to be discussed in multilateral negotiations.
Another concern of mine relating to Asian collective security is how effective Asian collective security would be, given the fact that OSCE could not prevent Ukrainian crisis and Russian annexation of Crimea.
Meanwhile, I think that the cooperation and coordination exercised between the U.S., China and South Korea to solve the issue of North Korea diplomatically could be good examples and precedents that can be a basis leading to Asian collective security.
Let me advise you on the discussions of the study group on diplomacy & national security especially regarding Asian collective security from time to time as the discussions develop and proceed.
Thank you.