Reflections on the Fourth Owada Chair
The Path to Peace Through Cross-Disciplinary Exchange
Tomomi Sugimoto
First-year Master’s Student, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences
The University of Tokyo
In 1795, Immanuel Kant argued in his work “Perpetual Peace” that peace between nations should be established as a lasting system rather than just a temporary ceasefire. More than 200 years later, the realization of this ideal remains a crucial challenge for the international community. Today, with the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the situation in Palestine-Gaza, divisions and confrontations in the international community are deepening, and the world stands at a historical turning point.
In this context of global challenges, the Fourth Owada Chair was held at the University of Tokyo’s Komaba Campus in November 2024 and addressed a fundamental question: how can Kant’s vision of perpetual peace be achieved in our time? As the United Nations approaches its 80th anniversary in 2025, there is growing criticism that the organization, particularly its core institution, the Security Council, has become ineffective in maintaining international peace and security. This program offered a valuable opportunity to examine both the potential and limitations of peace operations in international society through the complementary lenses of international politics and international law.
The program began on the first day with the Opening Remarks by Professor Hisashi Owada on the history and institutional development of UN peacekeeping, followed by a Principal Speech by Professor Mitsugu Endo on the changing nature of armed conflicts in Africa and the evolution and challenges of peace operations. On the second day, a four-hour discussion was held among students majoring in international politics and international law. Students from the University of Tokyo and Waseda University participated from Japan, while Leiden University was represented by students with diverse cultural backgrounds—including those from the Netherlands, Turkey, and Taiwan.
The discussion centered on three main points: (1) the concept of peace operations, (2) the UN’s institutional framework, and (3) the role of political will. The most animated debates emerged around the effectiveness of the existing UN security framework, particularly since modern conflicts have shifted from interstate to intrastate in nature. Key points of discussion included the importance of developing strategic partnerships with regional organizations such as the African Union, and the need to plan operations based on a realistic assessment of the UN’s available capacities. These discussions explored ways to implement effective peace operations while striking a balance between idealistic goals and practical realities. The exchanges of opinions revealed how perspectives from international politics and international law can complement each other, contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of problems and their potential solutions. As Professor Owada described it as ”cross-cultural academic training”, the discussion represented a collaborative process where participants from different cultural and academic backgrounds intersected and sometimes conflicted, leading to deeper mutual understanding beyond mere comparison of viewpoints.
Through participation in this program, I gained numerous insights, but I would like to highlight two main points. First, the perspectives, priorities, and evaluation criteria for understanding phenomena vary significantly across disciplines. For example, when addressing the fundamental question ‘What is peace?’, from an international politics perspective, peace is viewed as “the absence of war” or “a state where negotiation between nations is possible,” whereas international law approaches the discussion through normative frameworks established by the UN Charter and international treaties. Understanding and respecting these different positions while engaging in dialogue to form common ground is essential for solving complex international issues. Second, enhancing the effectiveness of peace operations requires a perspective that bridges theory and practice. Professor Endo’s lecture vividly illustrated the complexities of conflict zones, demonstrating the necessity of a comprehensive approach that encompasses political and social contexts beyond legal frameworks. In the student discussions, it was highlighted that states’ political will is cultivated based on their historical experiences. This insight provides crucial considerations that cannot be overlooked when developing effective peace operations.
Building on what I learned from this program, I would like to express my future aspirations. As Professor Owada emphasized, effective international dialogue requires both the ability to deeply understand others’ positions and to logically present one’s own views. Through continued engagement with people from diverse specialities and cultural backgrounds, I aim to develop the ability to find creative solutions that leverage diverse perspectives rather than merely seeking compromise. Simultaneously, I aspire to become a professional who can effectively bridge theory and practice, maintaining awareness of complex field realities while developing both solid academic foundations and practical knowledge. This program has provided a valuable starting point for my continued pursuit of becoming a professional who can make meaningful contributions to international peace and stability.
In closing, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Professor Owada, Rector Bijl, and all faculty and staff members from both Japanese and Leiden universities, fellow student participants, and all those involved in the Fourth Owada Chair for providing this invaluable learning opportunity.
