On July 6, 2011, Dr. Vesselin Popovski, Senior Academic Officer United Nations University, Tokyo delivered a lecture, “Justice and Global Governance”. He explained Nuremburg/Tokyo Achievements in detail. This achievement mainly means that individuals become subject of International Law. And there are differences between ICC and hoc ICTs and also ICC and ICJ. After giving account of differences, he introduced the ICC prospects. At final part of his nice lecture, he mentioned that Justice creates short-term tension, but brings long-term peace. (Eri Iijima)

　On 29 June 2011, Professor Hasegawa lectured on the “Social Constructivism” and “Justice and Democracy for Global Governance”.
　Before he introduced Constructivism, he explained the four theories on international relations: classical realism, structural realism, classical liberalism and neo-liberalism. Constructivism is based on recognition of the important as well as universals and universal factors. The universal factors are Principles (which is universal), Values (which depends on your society or environment), Beliefs, Norms, Laws and Standards. According to the US Declaration of Independence, Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness are certain UNALIENABLE Rights.
　Professor Hasegawa also introduced the three theories of the justice for global governance: utilitarianism, libertarianism and the theory of justice. The “justice as fairness” is the most influential element in the theory of justice which is proposed by John Rawls. According to the “Perpetual Peace” by Immanuel Kant, if national sovereignty were left to the people rather than kings, there would be no war.
(Shogo Yoshida)

　On June 15, Mr. Kazushige Taniguchi, the Special Representative of the World Bank in Japan gave a lecture.
　At first, he explained that developing countries including India and China are now contributing to more than half of the global economic growth. This is the new international order different from the times which developed countries such as the G7 led the world economy. While the economic development of developing countries is remarkable, it is also true that there are more than 1 billion people who have no access to electricity. In addition, he stated that millions of children die every year before age 5. One of the major causes is diarrhea that results in dehydration. Therefore, safe water is effective to reduce the child mortality. This means water and electricity can help. And he explained even if it seems to be a problem of one sector (health), there are many cases which need policy interventions of other sectors (infrastructure, energy). He told charitable works are noble but they alone are not able to reach the sustainable solution. About Japan, he cautioned that Japanese population would be decreasing to 48 million by the end of the 21st century.
　On the economic side, since the collapse of the bubble, there has been a continued increase in the budget while decrease of tax revenues, resulting in the rapid expansion of burden on the future generations. Such a combination would generate a special challenge for the future of Japan.
(Mai Kato)

　On June 8, 2011, Mr. Yasuaki Aihara, Deputy Director of Secretariat of the International Peace Cooperation Headquarters, Cabinet Office, delivered a lecture, “UNPKO and Japan’s International Peace Cooperation”.

　In Part One, as an introduction, he reviewed the historical changes in the nature of world conflicts. Points mentioned were: since mid-1970s and particularly after the end of the Cold War, more intrastate conflicts than interstate conflicts occurred; conflicts often occur in Africa and Asia; various players are involved in recent conflicts; and causes of conflicts have become more complex.

　Secondly, he talked about the history and the characteristics of UNPKO. Legal basis, basic functions, and emergence of multi-functional and robust PKO were covered. Also, the nature of UNPKO was discussed in relation to various concepts related to peace, namely, conflict prevention, peacemaking, peace enforcement, peacekeeping, and post-conflict peacebuilding. Then he presented a model structure of UNPKO mission and stated the relationship between Military, Police, and Civilian Sections, as well as coordination between UNPKO and UN Country Team. He further elaborated on how different actors cover various post-conflict tasks and functions of UN Organizations, WB/IMF, NGOs and UNPKO were discussed. He remarked on contribution of personnel by member countries to UNPKO, and stated that contribution of personnel by Japan was not so large, regardless of its high budget contribution to UNPKO. He added that because of the recent expansion both in functions and in size, securing resources has become a serious problem.

　Thirdly, Japan’s international peace cooperation was examined.
He elaborated on the chronology of Japan’s cooperation, approval of PKO law in 1992 and “Five Principles”, three types of cooperation (UNPKO, International Humanitarian Relief Operations, and International Election Observation Operations) two tools of cooperation (Dispatch of Personnel, and Contribution in Kind). He also talked about the work flow, structure and function of the International Peace Cooperation Headquarters, and favorable response of international community to Japan’s cooperation. He briefly introduced liaison and coordination work in Haiti which he performed in March 2010.

　Finally in Part Two, spending few minutes, he introduced his background and personal experience in international cooperation, noted some points and encouraged the students.
(Yukihiko Masuda)

2011 Hosei University
「Global Governance」　

■Lecturer: Prof.Tomonori Yoshizaki
■Date: 25 May 2011
■Contributor: Minshink Kim, Sayuri Maruyama, Eri Iijima

＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
＜講義概要＞

1. Japan as the peace-creating nation.
(1)
This is a pretty new concept. This concept of peace-creating nations is introduced in reports and recommendations of the prime minister office, which means Japan should become a peace-creating nation whose message assents from the expert of the international affairs security studies. The first agenda, like proposed actor implication, is crisis management. After the first came the TSUNAMI on March 11th. We witnessed the many damages and the death of many people and locals affected. Now more than 1,000,000 self-defense forces are now being ported to rescue or reconstruct those who are affected and their accommodations. That is the national crisis. What we think about neighbors like a North Korean missile or “Senkaku issue” like Japan’s silent conflict between these is a hot issue for us. So whether or not we have a good neighbor is a vague good in this study point about our security architecture. The second agenda is civil military cooperation or coordination that is a base clear line. Self-defense forces wear uniforms. They have a special status provided by international law. A person in uniform can carry a gun, or a turretin fifteen or some aircraft which are very dangerous if we misuse them. In that sense, civilians and military are indifferent, but where we talk about the TSUNAMI or Tohoku disaster, global cooperation, in some way or another, for those who are in danger or in trouble. So we will go hand-in-hand in order to overcome disasters or the risk of war. The challenge is civil integration, and the last one is a conclusion about Japan’s soft power.
(2)
The first one question is, “Is a war among major powers unlikely?” About 30 years ago, there was the Cold War in which the US-Soviet nuclear exchange accosted both of the less serious vessels, meanwhile we were thinking about mushroom clouds after nuclear devastation, and that was a simply nightmare. Now, for those we have North Korean challenges or the Chinese-Japanese rivalry, we don’t think about a war coming soon. The second question is, “Do you think it legitimate to take all necessary means in order to stop mass killing or protect innocent civilians like kids or girls in foreign countries?”. Basically, sovereignty means that the sovereign state can enjoy full-state rights. It also means they can say, “No,” to stop incoming forces. So, in that sense, the coming to foreign countries for and use forces is illegal. But, in some cases, we can do it. The last question is, “ What do you think the major role of self-defense forces is?” To be specific, the point in here is that self-defense forces are not using force and using weapons to kill the local people in international operations. That means we will limit ourselves to defending by using weapons. In that sense, if you are in peace operations or refugee camp in a disaster area, and you may happen to be in the same sight as the self-defense forces. In Sudan, Somalia, or Haiti, you may ask self-defense forces to guard you. But what we can provide for civilians is quite limited. If you are in our camp, we can do it. But if you want to be away from self-defense forces camp, we can’t. Basically, the defense of Japan is our main mission, and the peace-keeping operation and international operations are other main missions as well. Also we are very limited in our capacity of using weapons. These are initial thoughts the first kaput of this one. This is Japan as a peace-creating nation. Japan loves the concept of peace. But real challenge question is how to make it happen, and how to make peace in war.

2. Three actors about the peace-creating nation and a new focus on human security and peace-building
(1)
First is the new administrations near the new concept. Under LDP from 1955 to 2009, basically we have the two pillars: self–defense forces for national defense and another one is the dependence of US-Japan security alliance. The focus now is non-traditional security, human security, and peace-building. After the Cold War, we tried to have a new clip about what was happening in this part of globe like North Korean activities and cooperation of the weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, drugs, or human kidnapping. So, the point is here that Japan’s new focus is again a non-traditional aspect of security: civilian-led effort, not military-led effort. Perhaps capacity-building of nation is quite important. We will provide them with vocational training or an opportunity for local factories or an engineer to find their own place in their local committee. A second one is the new government on the new policy tool, like a national security council. Because in 50 years of JDP they have their own assets in capability and network.
(2)
What is the JDA? The answer is Japan Defense Agency. Four years back, we remained the ministry of defense. And from a very bureaucratic point of view, it is a very big change. Before having this name, agency means one of the branches under the prime minister office or cabinet office. That means we can’t have our own finance, so it is a kind of buffer. Why isn’t the JDA ministry of defense considering Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Finance? It is very closely related to the self-defense forces of Japan, and not the army, navy or air force. Self-defense forces became a reality in 1954, nine years after the session of hostility. Now we still have self-defense forces, but we have no army, navy, or air force. We don’t call them army or navy or air force for political reasons. As for the JDA, JDA means we were under the direction of the prime minister office which means we can’t move our forces without the apparent recognition and authorization of the prime minister office. These are the key points of civilian control of armed forces. What happened in the Pacific Ocean War was that we had a Kanto-gun in the Manchuria. There was no political control over the imperial army. That was a disaster. So, regarding the JDA it’s one symbol that the prime minister office is responsible in taking control of all ministry, having the say in budget equipment personal training. Another one is international peace cooperating activity as a primary mission. What does it mean? Peace-keeping is a primary mission. However until 1992, IPCA was something well beyond reach simply because we had gigantic forces in China from 1930 to 1940. We occupy Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia, and we had a direct attack upon Australia, the United States, the British forces, and the Dutch forces. International cooperating activity is very close to the imperialistic coach or aggressions. Before 1992, we had no foreign mission outside our territory except some of the training or ship visit simply because the world didn’t trust us. Now, time have changed. IPCA is now common sense.

3. Our government has three primary objectives in our defense posture.
(1)
First is to eliminate threats. Second is international security environment based in fortune so we’ll cooperate. Last is creating global peace and stability and to secure human security for the first time in our history; this is specified as one of the primary forces: human-centered views and protecting people. That is the essence of the human security concept. To be more detailed, the key word is collecting security and selective security. Collective security is very simple. It is like the UN, so it is very official. However, selective security is very informal concept but pretty new. Presidents Obama and Sarkozy say in the same article that our duty and our mandate under United Nation security council resolution says to protect civilians. It is not to remove Gaddafi by force, but it is impossible to imagine the future of Libya with Gaddafi in power. So, this is very subtle way of saying that we want the regime changed without specific notion of direct involvement of Gaddafi.

4. Legitimacy of Intervention
Next he talked about the legitimacies of intervention. There are five criteria. The first is the thread must be very serious. It means there must be a situation in which the conflict will not be solved without the intervention of international society. The second is that there must be proper purpose like to protect civilians and to stop massive killing or rape. The third is diplomatic and economic parts. If we use armies to stop the conflicts, we have accountableness for international society. We must avoid collateral damage and the damage must be minimum. The last criterion is a balance of consequences; it’s very difficult. The key word of that is to do no harm. To do intervention is to change the local balance of power. We have to think about what will be happen after the intervention. And we have to have responsibility of that.

5. NATO and UN’s Military Diplomacy
Now NATO has the top number of military diplomacies. The second is the UN. NATO and UN’s military diplomacy are increasing this year. NATO and UN work together in the global arena, but the problem is the stuff. Basically highly trained stuff like headquarters come from advanced country. But the UN has the most candidates from India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. Then ask NATO if they have a good relationship between the headquarters and the organization, but to ask UN, they have difficulty make efficient even when they have a larger number of operations.

6. Cause of Conflicts and New Challenges
In Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, and Somalia there is pre-modern conflict because there is a serious lack of good governance or lack of human security. New national program guideline has the incline of human security. Interventions by industrial advanced powers like the U.S., the UK, or France are done in the case of Libya. The important point is that for the UN and Britain, this is a post-modern conflict. However, for the countries to be affected, it is a pre-modern conflict. There are frequent challenges that include natural disaster because within five years we have many natural disasters that attack the countries seriously.

Questions:
1. Is the global power major war power or not?
2. What is the case of Libya, focusing on the civilians?
3. Law of self-defenses?

Answer
1- No major power is not major war because they know that if there is war, lots of people will die.
• Limited war may happen or scare.
2- Limited necessary means
The Security Council has the only organization that shows legitimacy of all necessary means, but it depends on the political situation. In most cases we think about the United Nations’ and Security Council’s resolutions.

Questions to Mr. Yoshizaki
1. How does NATO use these bombs – for attacking people or protecting people?
-We have very limited information about the number of suffered people by NATO’s action. But, basically NATO has a mission doing legitimate operation.

2. What is the difference between a peace-creating nation and a peace-building nation?
-Peace-making is politicized in order to have new name. Peace-creating is not normal concept, because creating peace isn’t used in determination: it’s a new approach or kind of passion under government.

3. Why should we care more about humanitarian intervention or the human right issues? And what is the turning point in our attitude?
-Turning is cold war. During war, we care most about nuclear issues or arm aggression. But, after the cold war, we can employ some force in order to have good governance. Peace-keeping-operations is obvious example. But sovereignty nation still have highest authority to say NO even though they have bad report of governance. There is need for international community to go beyond the traditional lines of understanding.
The next turning point is Kosovo and humanitarian intervention doctrine was tested.

4. Do you think that Japan defense-forces should have an army or navy force?
-We will not have arm forces in order to have settlement of international dispute. If Japanese say that we should be more responsible for army or navy force of the size of separate forces equipment for itself. (MINSHIK KIM)

■Lecturer: Prof. Hasegawa
■Date: 18 May 2011
■Contributor: Aimi Ezawa, Yuka Hirakawa, Soichiro Hirabayashi

＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
＜講義概要＞

At the beginning of the class, Mr. Yukio Yamazaki, Mr. Shintaro Otuka came and introduced themselves. We looked at how global governance development. There are “Realism”, ”Liberalism”, ”Neo-Marxism”, ”Constructivism”, and “Functionalism”.

We started from Realism. Realism has three basic points. First, foreign policy is governed by objective laws. Secondly, the states are primarily motivated by the desire for military and economic power and security. At the last, it is anarchy , it means power politics. We have to recognize about realist approach. Key actor is international system, and sovereign states. We view of the individual about power-seeking, selfish, and antagonistic, and also view of the state about seek power, unitary actor with a defined national interest.
Realist thought basically three components. There are Classical Realism, Neo-Classical Realism, and Neo-Realism. Classical Realism concerns two things. Machiavelli’s theory is “Nation state leaders pursue national interest and adapt to the changing political power configurations”. Hobbes said “”Power decides things”.
Rousseau’s theory is about anarchy. Morgenhaus who wrote the book “politics among nations” is Neo-Classical Realist. He says international law is created by human nature; international politics is governed by power and interest. They are who Realism has four thought. 1. Security of state remains the supreme goal in a world of anarchy. 2. Self-interest and power are the primary motive of human and State behavior. 3. People and nations continue to act in order to maximize their own self-interest. Responsibility of leaders is to safeguard the power and security of state. Rousseau says there is no human nature; anarchy- fear, jealousy, suspicion and insecurity. Morgenthau says in this politics among nations, international laws are created by human nature; international politics is governed by power and interest. He says “Politics is governed by objective laws with roots in human nature”, “The concept of interest in terms of power which infuses rational order”, “Power is to control to man over man. Not fixed once and for all”, “Universal moral principles nation is not synonymous with the moral laws that govern the universe” and “Autonomy of the political sphere and the power of nation”. “Political realism is based on a pluralistic conception of human nature.” “Political man is a beast with no moral restraints.” Then, he also says the statesman must think in terms of the national interest; conceive as power among other powers. The popular mind, unaware of the statesman’s thinking, reasons more often than not in the simple moralistic and legalistic terms of absolute good and absolute evil.”
One of the popular Neo-Realist is Kenneth Waltz. He wrote the “theory of international politics”. He says that everyone says there is anarchy, but if you look at carefully, even this anarchy, society has systems. We have to recognize states maximize security and there is an international system. He says bio polar system is most stable system because unit polar system is no one checks.
There are three common principle of school of Realism. First one is called “statist” which state is the main actor and its sovereignty supreme. Secondly, their goal is survival; state security is its principal interest. Last one is self-help. Security is achieved only by self-help because of the international structure like North Korea. So, anarchy is not chaos. Population and size of territory, resources, economic strength, military capability, and competence are important to fight. “Nation State’ action can be explained by the pressures exerted on them by the international competition, which limits and constraints their choices.”

Liberalism is a theory that both within states and good governance between states and peoples world wide. And people as well as the states can improve their conditions and expand freedom through democracy.
There are two Liberal Philosophers who advocated these theory: Hugo Grotius and Emanuel Kant. Emanuel Kant’s idea is “while the prince and the head of state would declare war, if left to people, there will be no more war for them to go”
For Liberalism, there is a notion that state must have government that exercise sovereignty over People and Territory. A system of state is that a society of states with common interests and common values to be found by a common set of rules in their relations. Nation states and other actors to recognize common norms, rules and interests.
And there are main points of Liberalism: Cooperation, collaboration, interaction for common good and mutual interests. Increased independent.
Neo-Liberalism’s idea is that all citizens are equal before courts, have equal rights to education, free press, religious toleration. (Aimi Ezawa)

2011 Hosei University

「Global Governance」

■Lecture: Prof.Hasegawa
■Date: 11 May 2011
■Contributor: Mai Kato, Yukihiko Masuda, Akiho Terauchi

＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
＜Ⅰ．講義概要＞
1.New Global Threats
Kofi Annan, the secretary-general of United Nations, has established the high level panel of experts to come and find out what is the newly emerging issue that confronting the world. They identify several new threats and challenges. There are nuclear, radiological, chemical and biological weapons. However, they did not emphasize on the danger of peaceful development of nuclear energy. Probably they somehow thought that Chernobyl nuclear incident that took place in 1986 was an isolated case. However, what happened in Chernobyl happened in Fukushima too. Nuclear energy problem is a big problem not only Fukushima of Japan. It is a global issue. We have interstate conflicts, intrastate conflicts and genocides. Human being has a capacity of hate as much as for love. And most powerful force of action according to psychologist is not desire but it is fear. So we have always remember, this also impact on the conduct of international relations. United Nations decided to establish international criminal court, ICC in 1998. ICC was created to bring about more justly world and punish the bad leaders who commit genocide, war crime and crimes against humanities. We also have continued problem of not just poverty but in the equality. The poverty alone does not create the conflict. An economic difference brings about a conflict. So ODA is necessary. We have a transnational organize crimes. So we have to looking to the economic globalization, particularly neighbor movement and impact of population dynamics.

2. The Purpose of Global Governance.
(1)It is to regulate the excess of Westphalian acts and globalization process. It is to think global governance is made to address. Westphalian acts meaning is acts and behavior of nation states. There is no authority to regulate conducts of individual nation stats.
(2)Guard dignity and self-determination of people.
This is as first emancipated by the president Woodrow Wilson in 1917 in his 14 points.
(3)Realize more equitable and sustainable growth.
The catchword is sustainability.
(4)Maintain freedom and the rule of law.
It is not the rule by individuals.
(5)Balance national and human security.
People are important. National and human security, the concept emerge new paradigm.
(6)Maintain accountability of politician and business leaders.
The government and government leaders have to account to the people what they do. If you go to developing countries, nobody questions Prime Minister.

3. What is Global Governance.
(1) The textbook p.38 says “A post-Westphalian world border is in the making as sovereign statehood is transformed by the dynamics of globalization. A conceptual shift from geopolitics to global politics.” So what does that mean? Baylis and Smith says that is a transition pace from Westphalian. Until Thirty Years’ War, it was dominated by Roman Catholic empire. All these races are ruled by kings and other groups. So people in this era stood up and said “No. It’s us who were going to decide. That is the beginning of the concept of nation state. Westphalian treaty was signed in 1648, saying it’s a community that has its own sovereignty. It’s very important for you to understand the concept of sovereignty. It’s sovereignty rests with people. Until World War 2, in Japan sovereignty rested with emperor. Now if you go to Australia, sovereignty has been of England but it’s a nominal. Sovereignty is the supreme power.
(2)”Global Governance is not the same as world government…two other essential elements: Networks among agents, and norm – standard of expected behavior. Examples of formal global governance are such international organizations as WTO, IMF and emerging ICC.” So they say global governance is not same as global government. What is the difference between the global governance and the global government? We have not reached or established global government as we have Japanese government. Yet global governance is now in the making because we have networks of agents and also networks of norms and standards. What are the norms and standards? The standards can be indicative physically but norms are not physically visible. Norms is code of conduct. Norms are developed to soft law. We have standards.
(3) Let us look at also what global governance means. It’s significance. “Global Governance includes formal… as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions have agreed to, or perceive to be in their interest.” This is in Commission on Global Governance in 1995. They tried to establish definition of global governance.
(4) “Global Governance is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and cooperative actions may be taken on global scale.”
(5) Global governance involves ensemble of actors. These actors participate in policy and decision making procedures, and international regimes aimed at regulating economy, financial, commercial and technological globalization. The core of globalization processes is a largely deregulated capitalism, mainly dominated by financial flows and markets, the so-called shareholder capitalism. Globalization is also supported by neo-liberalism which is the only surviving hegemonic ideology in today’s world after the collapse of communism. But, globalization has turned upside-down and the institutional architecture created after World War 2 has become inadequate. Yet, universal political and legal principals, as expressed in the UN Charter, the major conventions and resolutions dedicated to justice, human rights or economic and social process, still provides a legitimate normative framework for global governance. These principals have been neglected by the powerful actors of neo-liberal globalization. Legitimate global governance can be realized only if it is reconstituted to serve the common good and benefit of human kind as a whole. Legitimate global governance must be based on statehood and the principals of democratic and participatory politics. New institutional configurations is required to ensure public interest over corporate interest, with an effective trade-off between economic growth and social regulations.

4. Globalization and Global Governance.
(1) It is the management of information and knowledge about global tool – democratic principles, norms and standards, human rights, and international laws and legal practices.
(2) It means emergence of international and global organizations to facilitate global governance.

5. Theoretical Foundations for Global Governance.
(1) Peace treaty of Westphalia and Osnabruck. It was concerned with territoriality, which is political community with fixed border, sovereignty rests with states or government has supreme and exclusive authority, and country is independent and nation state as independent, autonomous, political, economy and social activities with the border.

6. Initial international diplomacy.
Purpose is three.
(1) Negotiation for safeguarding national security and national interest. These are the two if you keep walking on maintain the national security and interest, but as liberalist found out in fact you have to also walk together by pursuing common interest thorough international corporation. You can increase first national interest and then national security.

7. Theories
(1) We have theories of global governance, Realism, Liberalism, Neo-Marxism, Constructivism, Functionalism, International regimes, Global public goods.