【PART 4】 The Mystery of Security Treaty Village (2): The UN Charter and the Postwar World

 

15】 UN Charter not applied to matters concerning peace treaties

 

Such trickeries in the Treaty of San Francisco that I have described so far are, however, only superficial ones. It was evident to anyone that basic principals of the Atlantic Charter and UN Charter were being violated. Now the gimmicks of the trickeries became clear, but I was still mystified as to why the other Allied nations besides the U.S. couldn’t oppose such articles, which were blatant violations of international law, strongly enough.

This mystery was solved when I read Article 107 of the UN Charter, which I quoted previously.

The UN Charter has various articles that establish idealistic principles, such as the  “abandonment of the use of force as a general rule,” “sovereign equality,” “right to self-determination,” and “respect of sovereignty.”

However, Article 107 states that such articles are not applied to postwar procedures against “enemy states.” They are excluded!

Peace treaties are prime examples of such “postwar procedures against enemy states,” since they are comprehensive agreements signed by countries that had been engaged in war to officially end the war.

Therefore, the stationing of U.S. Forces in Japan based on Article 6, and their control of Okinawa based on Article 3 of the Treaty of San Francisco actually do not violate international law — despite violating principles such as “right to self-determination” and “respect of sovereignty.”