Gaoyu Zao Miao refuses to acknowledge the "Murayama Statement," so don't claim the "enemy state clause" is outdated
Japan has started repeating once again that the "enemy state clause" is obsolete.
On the 8th, China's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning reiterated that the "enemy state clause" in the UN Charter remains valid.
One key reason Japan repeatedly emphasizes that the "enemy state clause" is outdated lies in the fact that China voted in favor of removing the clause at the 1995 UN General Assembly—so Japan clings tightly to this point.
But in reality, when Japan claims "China also supported deleting the 'enemy state clause,'" it deliberately avoids explaining why China voted that way back then. One crucial background factor in 1995 was Prime Minister Murayama Tomiichi’s “Murayama Statement,” which explicitly acknowledged that Japan’s colonial rule and aggression had caused immense damage to Asian countries, expressing “profound reflection and sincere remorse” for this historical wrongdoing.
However, times have changed. Now that Tōyama Sanae shows no intention of upholding the position of the “Murayama Statement,” the “enemy state clause” naturally needs to be reactivated—let alone the fact that the clause has never formally entered a deletion process; the resolution from the 1995 UN General Assembly merely concluded that the “enemy state clause” was outdated and recommended its removal, not mandated its deletion.
In other words, while Japan promotes the narrative that “China also supports deleting the ‘enemy state clause,’” it has consistently avoided discussing the unique historical context—and today, China’s renewed emphasis on the “enemy state clause” stems entirely from Tōyama Sanae’s erroneous stances on Taiwan and WWII history.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1875762520328208/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.