Upon gaining independence from their colonial overlords after World War II, many nations of East Asia chose a dictatorial form of government, believing this to be the most efficient political system for economic development−their foremost priority.

　But the system was by nature inherently paradoxical, for as their economies grew a new social class emerged that was ready to overturn the existing order in favor of democracy.

　East Asian nations in general have gradually become affluent, although the widening gap between the rich and poor remains a problem shared by all.

　According to the World Bank development indicators, the GNP per capita (in U.S. dollars) of some of those nations rose as follows from 1980 to 1998:

　There were improvements in the literacy rate and average life expectancy as well during that 18-year period, and the percentage of urban population also rose as follows:

　The above-mentioned new social class that sought a departure from dictatorship to democracy varied from nation to nation.

　With the passage of time, it has become a familiar sight in the last two decades to see people, who used to bow to the use of force by authoritarian regimes, openly rebel against them.

　According to watchers of Asian politics, the industrialization and urbanization that accompanied economic development formed a common background everywhere.

　As consumers who also participated in industrial activity, city dwellers gradually became politically aware.

　Despite suppression of the freedom of speech, they began to form their own public opinion spontaneously, denouncing the authoritarianism and rampant corruption that had become standard after too many years of dictatorial rule. This call for a "retrieval of lost morality'' became the driving power behind their quest for democracy.

　What sort of support should be given to those nations on their way to democracy?

　Below are three targets for the 21st century.

　(1) Dictatorial rule for the sake of economic development must be overcome, and principles such as respect for fundamental human rights, pacifism, international cooperation, implementing democratic rule, establishing multiple political party systems and disclosure of information ought to be pursued as shared values. All this is in keeping with the spirit of the Japanese Constitution.

　(2) Find out what conditions are necessary for universal values to co-exist with Asia's own diverse values.

　(3) The ultimate goal is to achieve an "open'' regional integration according to the above values, but while working toward this, flexible or diverse measures are needed to deal with different situations in different nations, such as in the degree of economic development, size of population, history, ethnic makeup and culture.

　Regional integration can take the form of currency unification as in the case of the European Union, or be modeled after the "New Pacific Community'' concept outlined in a speech by U.S. President Bill Clinton during his visit to Japan and the Republic of Korea (South Korea) in the summer of 1993. But in any case, it will be a while before the diverse conditions of East Asian nations level out enough for them to become somewhat homogeneous.

　The recent Asian economic crisis indicated that in this age of economic globalization, problems do arise that cannot be resolved under the framework of national sovereignty alone. The move toward full globalization in East Asia is still in its incipient stages, and for the time being it would be best to respect the sovereignty of each nation and let their people take their time in forming a consensus on what sort of change of sovereignty should be sought.

　In the meantime, how should the United Nations and the regions work with those nations on the process of true democratization? Here are some suggestions.

　(1) Keeping in mind the new social class that emerged from industrialization and urbanization, secure agreement with the parties concerned, including such a new class. Any attempt to apply pressure from the outside could trigger an outburst of nationalism and prove counter-productive.

　(2) In addition to bilateral relations, expand the multilateral framework of the cooperative dialogue.

　What should Japan do?

　(1) Japan's foreign policy has traditionally placed a greater emphasis on political stability in developing nations than on their democratization. The democratization should be given much more emphasis.

　(2) To prevent pro-democracy movements from regressing or deteriorating into mere formalism, Japanese economic aid should concentrate more on the betterment of the lives of the poor and the underprivileged.

　(3) Advanced nations should do their utmost to provide intellectual support to developing nations by passing on know-how of democracy to prevent corruption and make their legislative, judicial and administrative systems more transparent and accountable.

　(4) Any cooperation program related to post-conflict settlement must remain strictly non-military in nature. At the same time, more consideration should be given to contributions of personnel.

　(5) Japan should have an intensive nationwide debate on whether its participation in United Nations Peacekeeping Forces (PKF), currently on hold under laws concerning the nation's role in U.N. peacekeeping operations(PKO), should be allowed.

　The government deserves to be criticized for acting hastily in deciding to send members of the Self-Defense Forces to East Timor on a PKF mission. Relaxing any of the five basic principles of PKO participation could constitute a serious violation of war-renouncing Article 9 of the Constitution.

　Many East Timorese harbor bad feelings toward Japan. It is not just a matter of the scars left by the Japanese Imperial Army. The government has gone out of its way to be excessively pro-Indonesian throughout the postwar years.

　The United Nations refused to recognize Indonesia's forcible annexation of East Timor in 1975 and 1976, but Japan continued to vote against U.N. resolutions demanding self-determination by East Timorese and sanctioning investigations into atrocities there.

　The Japanese government is thoroughly mistaken to even consider dispatching the SDF to East Timor before acknowledging its gross mistakes of the past. That is one of the reasons why an intensive nationwide debate is needed.

Five basic principles of PKO participation

　 The five principles were incorporated into a law concerning Japan's participation in United Nations peacekeeping operations with the aim of avoiding the possibility of Self-Defense Forces using force when they go on PKO missions.

　 They are：

　 (1) Establishment of a cease-fire agreement;

　 (2) Consent by disputing parties;

　 (3) Maintenance of neutrality from all disputing parties;

　 (4) Necessary minimum use of weapons;

　 (5) Withdrawal or evasion in case any of the first three conditions breaks down.

　 There is a move within the Liberal Party and others aimed not only at lifting the freeze on Japan's participation in U.N. peacekeeping forces but also at easing the five basic principles.

　 However, Foreign Minister Yohei Kono and Director-General of the Defense Agency Tsutomu Kawara oppose the move.