An examination of Japan’s constitutional and international constraints, exposing the false claim that Japan became a “war-capable nation” after the passage of security legislation.

2016-03-01

The following is a continuation of the previous section.

The Yoke of the Enemy State Clause

What would happen if Japan and China were finally to come into direct conflict?
If one compares military strength alone, the Maritime Self-Defense Force would likely not be inferior to the Chinese navy, and the Air Self-Defense Force would probably not be inferior to the Chinese air force either.
However, Japan must not forget the fundamental premise that it is a country that “cannot wage war.”

Last year, when the security legislation was enacted, newspapers such as the Asahi Shimbun made a great fuss, claiming that Japan had become “a country that can wage war,” but this is utterly absurd.
In addition to the restrictions imposed by Article 9 of the Constitution, Japan still bears the burden of the “enemy state clause” in the United Nations Charter.

Put simply, the enemy state clause allows sanctions to be imposed on a country that had been an enemy (an Axis power) during World War II if it undertakes military action, without deliberation by the Security Council.
Specifically, this is stipulated in Articles 53, 77(1)(b), and 107 of the United Nations Charter.

If Japan—still treated as a “criminal” in the eyes of the United Nations, that is, the international community—were to take action in response to provocation by China, a permanent member of the Security Council, China’s military sanctions against Japan could be justified on the basis of this enemy state clause.

To be continued.