Japan pushes for permanent membership on the UN Security Council

Says a nation that only half the contribution compared to Japan.

In 2013, the top 10 providers of assessed financial contributions to United Nations peacekeeping operations were the United States (28.38%), Japan (10.83%), France (7.22%), Germany (7.14%), the United Kingdom (6.68%), China (6.64%), Italy (4.45%), the Russian Federation (3.15%), Canada (2.98%), and Spain (2.97%).

Click to expand...

That is only for Peacekeeping operations alone. UK and France has a lower GDP compared to PRC and yet they make a larger contribution and they actively send their troops. Pretty shameful if you ask me.
The total can be found in the link below.

SamuraiBlue said:

Says a nation that only half the contribution compared to Japan.



That is only for Peacekeeping operations alone. UK and France has a lower GDP compared to PRC and yet they make a larger contribution and they actively send their troops. Pretty shameful if you ask me.
The total can be found in the link below.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Considering those are the nations that caused the most wars and subjected the most people to brutal colonial occupation, they should fork out much than they already have. And of course an individual of your background likes the notion of sending troops to foreign countries; it's a relief for your neighbours that you don't have that privilege nor capability, though - and preferably never will again.

Edit: Also, 2 x 6.64 = 13.28 ≠ 10.83

SamuraiBlue said:

I really do not care if Japan obtains a permanent seat on the UNSC or not.
The two bits I have is that the other 4 permanent members of the UNSC besides US pays far less in maintaining the UN compared to Japan and yet they act as if they are the only players in the game.
I say place your wallet where your mouth is or step down graciously so that nations making far more contributions to maintain the system have a more active voice.

Click to expand...

See #34
There is much more to maintaining UN besides paying for peace keeping operations.

delft said:

See #34
There is much more to maintaining UN besides paying for peace keeping operations.

Click to expand...

?????????

And you'll find within the link that Japan is second following the US, third is Germany, forth is France and fifth is UK in contribution of 2013 UN overall budget.

PRC is sixth only contributing half of that of Japan.

jobjed said:

Considering those are the nations that caused the most wars and subjected the most people to brutal colonial occupation, they should fork out much than they already have. And of course an individual of your background likes the notion of sending troops to foreign countries; it's a relief for your neighbours that you don't have that privilege nor capability, though - and preferably never will again.

Edit: Also, 2 x 6.64 = 13.28 ≠ 10.83

Click to expand...

Nobody actually reads the link I provided I see.

SamuraiBlue said:

I really do not care if Japan obtains a permanent seat on the UNSC or not.
The two bits I have is that the other 4 permanent members of the UNSC besides US pays far less in maintaining the UN compared to Japan and yet they act as if they are the only players in the game.
I say place your wallet where your mouth is or step down graciously so that nations making far more contributions to maintain the system have a more active voice.

Click to expand...

SamuraiBlue said:

Says a nation that only half the contribution compared to Japan.


That is only for Peacekeeping operations alone. UK and France has a lower GDP compared to PRC and yet they make a larger contribution and they actively send their troops. Pretty shameful if you ask me.
The total can be found in the link below.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

SamuraiBlue said:

?????????

And you'll find within the link that Japan is second following the US, third is Germany, forth is France and fifth is UK in contribution of 2013 UN overall budget.

PRC is sixth only contributing half of that of Japan.

Click to expand...

SamuraiBlue said:

Nobody actually reads the link I provided I see.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

For someone who claims to not care if Japan's voted a permanent seat on the UNSC, your actions suggest the opposite. Also, let's have no delusions about Japanese support for the UN, since 1) generations of Japanese leaders and citizenry felt it was in its national interests to do that, and 2) the US wanted Japan to do it.

Back to the OT, Japanese leaders are once again pushing for a permanent seat on the UNSC, and it's not clear what PM Abe can do to slay China's veto. What's different this time?

UN contribution is adjusted by, among other factors, the per capita income of the country.

I wouldn't worry Samurai, considering how Abe is handling your economy, Japan will pay less to UN very soon.

China is still a developing country. Our GDP per capita is only a mere fraction of that of the US, Japan, or France for that matter.

Contributions per head, or contributions as a percentage of an average person's income, should be a better measure of China's contribution.