After years of intrigues for and against Germany's admission to the highest UN body, Chancellor Schröder had demanded last December that the expansion of the security council should avoid ,,structural inequalities." ¹⁾During a state visit in Beijing and Tokyo, Schröder stated that new members should have a ,,right to veto"and proposed joint ,,representation"with Japan in the security council. ²⁾Even then international observers considered the German goal, demanding equal status of Berlin (and Tokyo) with the victorious allies of WW II, as adventurous. Even the German opposition, not bashful about great power ambitions, criticized the foreign office , fearing that in case of a diplomatic failure Germany would lose face. This situation has now arrived. Options for expansion proposed by UN Secretary General Annan, do not include the right to veto by new members of the security council. Annan's rejection of Germay's claim has disappointed the hopes of Berlin's foreign policy.

The UN secretary general enjoys German generosity regularly and is always ready to accept even awkward presents provided by Berlin. Thus Annan appeared at a lavish party of the German media and its beautiful people in order to accept a German ,,media award."The award ( ,,Polit-Bambi") was presented to Annan by a German firm conducting discotheque surveys and advertising soaps and brands of beer. The approach of the foreign office (AA) was more respectable. The German media award bearer is immortalized by the AA with the ,,Kofi Annan International Peacekeeping Training Center"worth approximately two million Euro. With this amount Germany, as the biggest donor, finances the ,,Kofi Annan"facility in Accra (Ghana). The ,,Kofi Annan Center"organizes the military training of African soldiers for, among other projects, future missions alongside western intervention forces. The German armed forces provide military standards. Berlin's defense ministry also provides a ,,group of consultants"for the Kofi Annan Center. Until the beginning of the year the relationship between Berlin and Annan was considered especially close.

Since the Secretary General of the UN let it be known that, in principle, he supported German demands for full membership in the UN security council, US media leaked details of benefits accrued to the Annan family from UN resources. Information about the secretary general's son, Kojo Annan, and his dealings with UN business affairs, at an annual salary of 350,000 US dollars, leads to suspicions of corruptibility and is also understood as a warning against further infractions against US interests in the UN. ³⁾Immediately following the publication of the first indication of corruption, Annan made it clear to the relief of US foreign policy and as a defeat for Berlin, that he did not intend to propose veto rights for new members in the security council.

Furthermore, in order to diminish any further German opportunities for advancement in the UN, the Bush administration has attempted to involve third parties. Thus, Washington has been supporting the Japanese demand for full membership in the UN security council. During her recent visit to Japan, the US secretary of state praised Japan, stating that ,,Tokyo is deserving of a place of honor among the nations of the world." ⁴⁾Since Japan and Germany had intended to enter the UN security council jointly, the US offer to Tokyo appeared to benefit Berlin as well.

The opposite was the case and evidently that had been the intention. In fact, immediately after the publication of the American recommendation, regional competitors of Japan responded and pointed to their historical experiences. Under the leadership of the Japanese feudal elite, Tokyo had occupied and plundered the Korean-Chinese mainland and had committed countless atrocities. Even now Tokyo refuses to acknowledge the extent of the damages caused by their aggression and refuses restitution for damages. According to the South Korean press, for that reason Japan is ,,unqualified"for a permanent seat in the UN security council. ⁵⁾The reactions of the People's Republic of China and North Korea are similar. Both states refuse to accept full membership of the former occupier in the highest UN council. In this manner Washington succeeded in mustering China's veto power not only against Tokyo bur also indirectly against Berlin, since both had declared their intention to claim their advancement in the UN jointly.

Sought after exports which until now were unavailable to Beijing could serve the foreign office as a means to negotiate China's renunciation of its veto against Tokyo and Berlin. Weapons and other military supplies produced in Europe could be freed for export in exchange for Germany's goal in the UN. The deliveries of sensitive military equipment are subject to an embargo. During a recent visit to Beijing, the German chancellor conferred with the Chinese leadership about the repeal of the embargo, incurring the serious displeasure of the USA. Thus Berlin has available a new means to apply pressure which intensifies the tension between the USA and the People's Republic of China, but which allows for the possibility to finally attain the ,,major goal"of the foreign office, placing Germany into the elite of nations.

1) Schröder wirbt um Aufnahme in UN-Machtzirkel; RP-Online 07.12.2004
2) Schröder will Veto-Recht im UN-Sicherheitsrat; RP-Online 09.12.2004
3) Security council faces radical change after 60 years of domination by wartime victors; The Independent 22.03.2005
4) USA unterstützen Mitgliedschaft Japans im Sicherheitsrat; RP-Online 17.03.2004
5) Japan unqualified for UNSC seat; The Dong-a Daily 21.03.2005