After Prime Minister Takaichi Sanae (高市早苗) of Japan called for the removal of the enemy state clauses at the UN General Assembly, China's Foreign Ministry pushed back, saying the clauses still have practical significance today.
In an address to the UN General Assembly in New York on the 23rd, Prime Minister Takaichi Sanae (高市早苗) argued that the removal of the enemy state clauses should be expedited. China responded by taking a position rejecting Japan's argument over the historical understanding underlying its postwar identity as a peace-loving nation and its moves to strengthen its military capabilities. At a regular press conference, spokesperson Guo Jiakun (郭嘉昆) stressed that the enemy state clauses still have practical significance for protecting the international order, while referring to calls for Japan to reflect on history as a mirror. Japan and China remain at odds on the enemy state clauses on the international stage, and tensions are mounting against the backdrop of regional developments and moves to strengthen defense capabilities.
China views Japan's buildup of defense capabilities and the possibility of intervention in a Taiwan contingency as issues of concern, and has reiterated the significance of the enemy state clauses. Prime Minister Takaichi Sanae (高市早苗) spoke in New York on the 22nd, calling for the removal of the enemy state clauses and reform of the UN Security Council. Japan maintains that, more than 80 years after the war, the clauses no longer fit the current international situation, while China continues to attach importance to their role. The divide between the two countries' positions has once again been brought into focus.
Enemy state clauses
China pushed back against Prime Minister Takaichi Sanae (高市早苗)'s call for their removal in her address to the UN, saying that they still have practical significance today.
Comments made by spokesperson Guo Jiakun (郭嘉昆) at a regular press conference once again confirmed the current divide between Japan's and China's positions.