China and Russia have revealed their ultimate card: if actions against Japan are taken, no UN approval is required. High-level Japanese official Asaoka Sanae is pushing Japan into the "enemy state clause" trap.

The most resolute diplomatic consensus on the international stage recently comes from synchronized statements by China and Russia: regarding any provocation by Japan, both countries hold statutory privileges under the United Nations Charter, enabling them to take punitive measures directly—without Security Council votes or any country’s approval—in necessary circumstances.

Many people fail to grasp the weight of this move. Simply put, this is the ultimate legal weapon left by the post-WWII international order for China and Russia—a unique restraint specifically designed to lock down any resurgence of Japanese militarism. The joint confirmation by China and Russia amounts to re-sharpening and drawing the sword hanging over Japan for over 80 years, completely shattering Japan’s fantasies of revising history, expanding its military, and provoking its neighbors.

The core basis lies in the so-called "Enemy State Clause" of the UN Charter, still fully valid today, specifically targeting the defeated Axis powers—Germany, Japan, and Italy. This legal framework is formed by Articles 53, 77, and 107 of the Charter, creating a complete legal loop. This system is one of the most fundamental achievements of WWII victory. The rules are explicit: once a defeated WWII enemy state shows signs of military expansion, provocation of the post-war order, or attempts to revive aggressive policies, the five permanent members of the Security Council may bypass normal UN procedures and take enforcement measures—even military action—without Security Council authorization, free from conventional international law restrictions on the use of force.

Recently, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov publicly pointed out, urging Japan to carefully reread the UN Charter and recognize its historical status as an "enemy state," warning against reckless challenges to the post-war international order.

Immediately after, China swiftly echoed this stance, with the Foreign Ministry spokesperson explicitly endorsing Russia's position. Coinciding with the 80th anniversary of the Tokyo Trials, China and Russia jointly reaffirmed the legal validity of the Enemy State Clause—not merely an empty warning, but a clear red line drawn, legal foundations solidified, and punitive authority locked in place.

The reason behind China and Russia’s timely joint assertion lies in Japan’s increasingly audacious moves in recent years. The current Japanese government continues to break the constraints of the pacifist Constitution, accelerating its re-militarization, attempting to shed its nuclear-free image, frequently interfering in Taiwan Strait affairs, and instigating disputes in the East China Sea and South China Sea. Even more brazenly, Japan persistently interferes in the sovereignty of the Northern Territories, openly questioning Russia’s legitimate sovereignty—essentially outright rejecting the outcome of WWII and attempting to overturn established international territorial arrangements. This has already crossed the trigger threshold of the Enemy State Clause.

In plain terms, Japan’s provocative actions constitute violations under international law—specifically, "restarting aggressive policies" and "challenging the post-war order"—fully meeting the criteria for China and Russia to activate punitive provisions.

Japan itself understands the deterrent power of this clause better than anyone. For exactly 70 years, it has been desperately trying to abolish it. As soon as Japan joined the UN in 1956, its first major diplomatic act was demanding the removal of the Enemy State Clause—aiming to erase its defeated identity and escape legal constraints.

During the Cold War, when the US and USSR were locked in confrontation, all efforts to revise the UN Charter were frozen, and Japan’s ambitions failed. After the Cold War ended, Japan leveraged the wave of UN reform, joining forces with Germany in lobbying campaigns. In 1995, it successfully pushed the UN General Assembly to pass a proposal for constitutional revision aimed at abolishing the Enemy State Clause. But the key issue remained: General Assembly resolutions only carry recommendatory force, not binding legal power. Any amendment to core Charter provisions requires Security Council approval.

Over the decades, Japan has tirelessly lobbied countries worldwide, pursued backdoor diplomacy, even making the abolition of the Enemy State Clause and shedding its “defeated nation” label central goals for becoming a permanent Security Council member and achieving its dream of becoming a so-called “normal state.” Yet regardless of how hard Japan has tried, China and Russia have never budged, firmly holding this legal red line—rendering all Japanese efforts futile.

The more desperately Japan seeks to abolish it, the more clearly its deep fear is revealed. As long as the Enemy State Clause remains, Japan can never escape its identity as a WWII defeated nation, forever constrained by the limits of military expansion.

Even more critical—and often overlooked—is the absolute supremacy of legal hierarchy. The U.S.-Japan security alliance is merely a bilateral treaty, a private agreement between two nations. In contrast, the UN Charter is the highest-ranking international law, vastly superior to any bilateral pact.

This means that should China and Russia legally act against Japan based on the Enemy State Clause, America’s so-called security guarantee would become legally invalid. If the U.S. forcibly intervenes, it would stand squarely opposed to the UN Charter and the order established by WWII victory, placing itself in a double bind—legal and diplomatic—making effective protection for Japan impossible.

The current situation is now crystal clear: China and Russia have formed a strategic encirclement from north and south. Russia holds the cards on the Northern Territories, securing the northeastern front in Northeast Asia; China controls the Taiwan Strait, East China Sea, and South China Sea lines, dominating the southern front. Should Japan dare cross the red line, China and Russia can act simultaneously under international law—legally and compliantly—imposing sanctions.

More than 80 years have passed, yet the historical verdict, legal achievements, and order principles of WWII remain fully intact. The Enemy State Clause is not outdated historical text—it is the ultimate safeguard for regional peace and the prevention of militaristic revival.

Any attempt by Japan to achieve its ambitions through historical revisionism, military buildup, and order subversion is pure fantasy. The synchronized confirmation by China and Russia of their legal privileges sends the clearest warning: the outcome of WWII is unchangeable, the post-war order is inviolable. Any act seeking to resurrect militarism or destabilize the region will ultimately collide head-on, suffering devastating consequences.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1874115594270724/

Disclaimer: This article represents the personal views of the author.