 "Will Tokyo become the new home of the United Nations?")
The United Nations (UN) commemorates its 80th anniversary this year.
New York City has played host to UN headquarters since its inception.
But now with changing global tides, especially the active withdrawal of the United States from numerous global roles it took on in the last few decades, questions rise over where the UN should anchor its future operations.
Across the Pacific, is Tokyo a viable option?
Tokyo Governor Yuriko Koike has openly suggested that parts of the UN’s functions — and possibly even major offices — be relocated to the Japanese capital.
While still preliminary, the discussions do have a solid foundation as they complement Japan’s ambitions to expand its global role and the UN’s search for a more efficient, secure, and strategically located operational hub.
Koike’s campaign to attract the UN to Tokyo
During a visit this month to the United States, Koike placed Tokyo’s offer on the table in high-level discussions.
On July 24, 2025, she met UN Secretary-General António Guterres for a 15-minute session in New York.
Speaking afterward, she explained her pitch clearly: “Tokyo would like to provide various types of support [to the UN],” pointing to the city’s strengths, including “public safety, security and now, with the weak yen, there are other positive aspects to life.”
Koike’s trip had a broader agenda. She addressed an audience at Johns Hopkins School of International Studies in Washington, pointing out Tokyo’s emergence as a key global city, and met policy experts at the Hudson Institute, where discussions ranged from Tokyo’s sustainability plans to its aspirations for greater international engagement.
Although she refrained from presenting a detailed blueprint to Guterres, Koike has spoken before about possible relocations.
At a Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly session in June, she suggested that functions from influential UN bodies — including the UN Security Council, the World Health Organisation (WHO), and even the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) — could, in theory, be shifted to Tokyo.
Guterres offered no indication of whether such ideas might advance but confirmed that “the United Nations has received offers of cooperation from various countries and regions,” framing Japan’s proposal as one among many.
A UN in transition, a world in flux
The conversation about Tokyo comes at a time when the UN is already reconsidering its structure.
Mounting costs in New York City have led to some decentralisation; parts of the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) have been relocated to Nairobi, Kenya, where operational expenses are significantly lower.
This internal reshuffling is being driven, in part, by financial pressures stemming from the US itself.
Under President Donald Trump’s second term, Washington has distanced itself from several UN programmes, shrinking the funding base for the organisation and creating ripple effects across its agencies.
The withdrawals have been sweeping. Earlier this year, Trump announced that the US would again leave the World Health Organisation.
In February, he signed an executive order to pull out of the UN Human Rights Council and halted contributions to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) , citing concerns over institutional bias and inefficiency.
Most recently, he confirmed US' formal exit from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), effective at the close of 2026.
UNESCO’s Director-General Audrey Azoulay responded sharply, saying, “This decision contradicts the fundamental principles of multilateralism and may affect first and foremost our many partners in the United States of America.”
Japan’s long relationship with the UN
Japan is not a newcomer to the UN framework. Over the decades, it has been one of the organisation’s largest financial contributors and has hosted several important bodies, such as the UN University and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees office.
This history has fostered a policy tradition in Tokyo that places the UN at the heart of Japan’s foreign policy.
Speaking to South China Morning Post’s This Week in Asia, Ben Ascione, an assistant professor of international relations at Waseda University, explained the broader motivation behind Koike’s move: “It is obviously very early days and I see this as Koike sounding Guterres out at this stage.”
He elaborated, “Firstly, something like this brings prestige and recognition. Japan has long placed importance on the UN’s functions and has a history of a UN-centred foreign policy.”
Ascione also highlighted the alignment between Japan’s post-war constitution and the UN’s mission: “Article 9 of the Japanese constitution renounces war as a means of settling disputes and aligns closely with the UN’s mandate to resolve international issues through dialogue.”
This dovetails with the message Japanese policymakers have consistently projected — that Japan seeks to be viewed as a promoter of peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific.
The China question
Another reason of motivation behind Tokyo’s outreach is strategic competition. Japanese officials have watched with unease as China has expanded its presence within the UN.
By the early 2010s, Chinese nationals were leading four of the organisation’s 15 principal agencies, including the Food and Agriculture Organisation, the UN Industrial Development Organisation, the International Telecommunication Union, and the International Civil Aviation Organisation.
Beyond these top roles, nine of the 15 agencies also have Chinese deputy leaders.
Critics have argued that Beijing has used its influence to support preferred candidates for other roles, including the current World Health Organisation Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus.
This growing footprint has triggered anxiety in Tokyo about being sidelined in global governance. Hosting more UN functions could help Japan counterbalance China’s sway, projecting itself instead as a neutral, rules-based actor.
Ascione summarised the stakes plainly: “Japan also wants to be seen as a leading peacemaker and stabiliser in the East Asia region and while these plans are tentative at the moment, I think it would be good if it did happen.”
Tokyo’s case: safety, stability, and cost savings
Tokyo’s pitch rests on several tangible factors. Koike has consistently stressed the city’s reputation for safety and security — two issues that weigh heavily for any international institution housing thousands of staff.
The city’s infrastructure is another selling point. Japan’s transport, communications, and disaster response systems are among the world’s most advanced, offering the UN an operational advantage if more offices were based there.
The weak yen also plays a surprising role in the proposal. With the Japanese currency trading low against the dollar, the cost of living and doing business in Tokyo has dropped for international organisations.
Koike framed this as a practical benefit, saying Tokyo is well-placed to offer more affordable support to the UN at a time when cost reductions are high on the agenda.
The UN has not yet signalled any immediate plan to relocate key headquarters functions, and any such move would involve intense negotiations among member states.
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
