You can help expand this article with text translated from the corresponding articles in Japanese and German . (April 2023)Click [show] for important translation instructions.
|
Enemy State clauses is a term used to refer to Article 107 and parts of Articles 53 and 77 of the United Nations (UN) Charter. They are both exceptions to the general prohibition on the use of force in relation to countries that were part of the Axis during World War II. [1]
The enemy state clauses in the UN Charter are a set of transitional provisions tied to World War II, which includes:
The provisions were meant for the postwar transition, which have fallen into desuetude in practice over time, [2] especially as all former "enemy states" have now become members of the UN. [3] However, the precise end point of “enemy state” status was unclear and was not automatically removed by UN membership, as shown by the Four Powers Agreement regarding the two German States, [2] where Article 7 explicitly terminates the enemy state status of Germany, yet no similar arrangement has been made to other enemy states, such as Japan. [3] A 1995 UN General Assembly resolution recognised that the enemy state clause had "become obsolete" and announced its intention to begin the process of amending the Charter as provided for in Article 108 of the UN Charter. [4] While Germany and Japan have advocated for the deletion of these clauses from the Charter, they have not yet been removed as of 2025 [update] . [5] [6] [7] The clauses still effectively prevented the two countries from obtaining permanent seats on the Security Council, since any change in membership requires the approval of two-thirds of the General Assembly members and no veto from the five permanent members of Security Council. [8]
In November 2025, amidst the China–Japan diplomatic crisis, the Chinese embassy in Japan invoked the enemy state clauses, implying possible military action against Japan after Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi told the National Diet, in response to a hypothetical question, that a Taiwan Strait crisis could pose a "survival-threatening situation" for Japan justifying military intervention. [9] [10] Fu Cong, China’s representative to the UN, told the General Assembly that Japan had previously invaded its neighbours under the pretext of a “survival-threatening situation”, citing the 1931 invasion of Manchuria, and warned that China would use its right of self-defence under the UN Charter if Japan intervened militarily in Taiwan. [11] Chinese state media, such as China Daily and People's Liberation Army Daily , also published commentaries echoing the view. [12] Japan rejected the claim that China can take military action against it under the enemy state clauses, stressing that these provisions were declared obsolete by a 1995 UN General Assembly resolution that China itself supported. [13]
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)