UN provisions on „enemy states“: a warning to Japan's right-wing forces

Kong Qingjiang, CGTN Special Commentator, is the Vice Dean of the School of International Law at the China University of Political Science and Law. This article expresses the views of the author, not necessarily those of CGTN.

Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi recently suggested in the Diet that a „crisis situation involving Taiwan“ could pose an „existential threat“ that would allow Japan to exercise its right to collective self-defence. Her remarks provoked strong opposition from China, which questioned Japan's intentions towards forces seeking „Taiwan independence“ and warned against any interference in China's core interests.

China's response is based on historical and legal context. Japan inflicted enormous suffering on Asian nations during the Second World War, with China being the biggest victim. Following China's victory in the war against Japanese aggression, Taiwan was legally returned to China in accordance with international documents such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation. As a former aggressor, Japan has no right to claim „self-defence“ in the matter of Chinese territory. Takaichi's statements also violate Japan's commitments in the 1972 Sino-Japanese Joint Communiqué, which recognizes the PRC as the sole legitimate government of China and states that Taiwan is an inseparable part of Chinese territory.

In this context, the so-called „enemy states provisions“ in the UN Charter remain relevant. Articles 53 and 107 - special provisions designed to prevent the resurgence of fascist aggression - allow anti-fascist allied states to take coercive measures against former Axis powers even without prior authorization from the UN Security Council if those states resume militaristic policies. Article 53 allows for regional or collective measures against new aggression, while Article 107 confirms the validity of all wartime and post-war actions taken against enemy states.

If Japan were to use force in the Taiwan region under the pretext of „collective defence“, this would be an act of aggression and could trigger the application of these provisions, giving China and other former allied countries the right to take all necessary measures, including military ones. Japan has been seeking to remove these provisions since the 1960s, but repeated historical revisionism and the strengthening of right-wing tendencies have hindered progress. Although the UN General Assembly recommended their deletion in 1995, the provisions remain in force because amending the Charter requires the unanimous consent of all five permanent members of the Security Council, including China and Russia.

In a situation where Japanese right-wing forces continue to push for militarization and „normalization“ of defense policy, the Enemy States Clause is still a legal and political deterrent. Their continued validity reminds anti-fascist nations of their rights - and sends a clear warning to Japanese right-wing groups not to repeat the mistakes of the past.

CMG