Spike News

Akamine Calls For Removal of Enemy State Clauses at UNGA

According to the Japanese 'Sankei Shimbun', on the evening of September 22nd, Eastern Time in the United States, Japanese Prime Minister Yukie Akamine, who was visiting the United States, delivered a speech at the 81st United Nations General Assembly. In her speech, Akamine said that 'reforming the Security Council is urgent', and called for the 'immediate removal' of the 'enemy state clauses' in the United Nations Charter that are targeted at Japan and other defeated nations.

Reports say that this year marks the 70th anniversary of Japan's membership in the United Nations. Kaiori Takahashi emphasized that the call to remove the "enemy state clause" is an act of "honor and dignity" on behalf of Japan, as Japan has made "significant contributions" to the cause of the United Nations over the past 70 years.

Komeko Takahashi also stated that the United Nations Security Council, composed of China, the US, the UK, France, and the USSR, represents the international situation of 1945. Therefore, she called for reforming the structure of the Security Council to "reflect the true reality of the modern international community."

"Enemy Clause" refers to parts of Articles 53, 77, and 107 of the United Nations Charter, covering specific provisions by member states of the Axis Power to prevent further aggression against other countries. These provisions allow for actions taken by those member states to take preventive measures that might be necessary for their own security without seeking UN Security Council authorization.

Since the 1960s, Japan has been actively working to promote the removal of the "enemy state clause". However, since changing the United Nations Charter requires a vote of two-thirds of the United Nations membership and unanimous consent from the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, although the General Assembly passed a resolution in 1995 calling for the removal of this clause as soon as possible, that resolution was merely advisory and had no legal effect.