by Shao Xia
In September, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi called for deleting the “Enemy State Clauses” from the UN Charter at the UN General Assembly, drawing criticism from the international community. In fact, this is not Japan’s first such attempt. Since joining the United Nations in the 1950s, Japan, a defeated country in World War II, has been seeking to delete these clauses through dollar diplomacy and lobbying. So, why is Japan taking issue with these clauses?
The clauses refer to Articles 53, 77 and 107 of the UN Charter. An “Enemy State” is defined as “any state which during the Second World War has been an enemy of any signatory to the present Charter.” The clauses basically preserve the legal room for taking measures against any enemy state to prevent the “renewal of aggressive policy” without Security Council authorization and ensure that the Charter does not invalidate or preclude action taken or authorized as a result of World War II by the governments having responsibility for such action.
The UN Charter is not a peace treaty in the traditional sense, but the foundation of the post-war international order. Born from the ruins of war, it reflects the painful understanding that belligerence can not be easily eliminated, and that peace sometimes has to be protected with strength. The “Enemy State Clauses” enable prompt responses to former aggressors in WWII without Security Council authorization, should they revert to their old ways, keeping a sword hanging over the head of those who would dare disturb peace.
The Japanese government is anxious because it is remilitarizing the country, and the sword is now standing in its way.
Japanese politicians are seeking constitutional revision to abolish Article 9, which renounces war as its sovereign right and prohibits the maintenance of armed forces. The Japanese government adopted three national security documents in 2022, with the intention to develop what it called counterstrike capabilities. The Takaichi cabinet has also sought to lift the ban on lethal weapons exports by relaxing the Three Principles on Transfer of Defense Equipment and Technology.
The country’s military buildup is accelerating as well. Japan’s defense spending has risen for 14 consecutive years, reaching 2 percent of its GDP in fiscal 2025, two years ahead of schedule. For fiscal 2027, Japan’s Defense Ministry has sought a budget of roughly 8.9 trillion yen (about 55.5 billion U.S. dollars), another record high. Japan is abandoning its exclusively defense-oriented policy and expanding its offensive capabilities. Its defense minister has stated that discussions on nuclear weapons and the possession of nuclear submarines “should not be ruled out.”
Such moves are not confined to Japan’s own borders. Prime Minister Takaichi has claimed that a so-called “Taiwan contingency” could constitute a “survival-threatening situation” for Japan, potentially providing a pretext for Japanese military involvement in the Taiwan Strait. Posing as a “stakeholder” in the South China Sea, Japan has intervened in regional affairs by deepening military ties with the Philippines, joining this year’s U.S.-Philippine Balikatan exercise as a full member, and firing offensive missiles overseas for the first time since WWII.
Japanese right-wing forces are also actively hyping up false narratives about their wartime atrocities. They questioned the 1995 Murayama Statement, in which then Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama officially acknowledged Japan’s responsibility for aggression and expressed deep remorse. They also questioned the Kono Statement’s acknowledgment of the “comfort women” issue.
In 1956, Japan joined the United Nations on the premise of acknowledging its militarist crimes and accepting the entire UN Charter. As a member state, Japan is obligated to abide by all provisions of the Charter, including the “Enemy State Clauses.”
History does not simply repeat itself, but often follows a similar logic. In 1933, when the League of Nations condemned Japan’s invasion of Northeast China, Japanese representative Yosuke Matsuoka walked out in protest. Japan later announced that it would withdraw from the League, freeing itself from international constraints. Four years later, Japan launched its full-scale invasion of China. Today, Japan is similarly eager to break free from the “Enemy State Clauses” and bring back militarism.
The international community must see through Japan’s right-wing forces and leave no space for their “neo-militarism.”
Editor’s note: The author is a commentator on international affairs, writing regularly for Xinhua News Agency, Global Times, China Daily, CGTN etc. He can be reached at shaoxia2019@163.com.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Xinhua News Agency.
(Namibia Daily News/Xinhua)
