Invoking a domestic legal concept to justify potential military intervention in China's internal matter contravenes this core tenet of international law. International legal obligations — especially those derived from the UN Charter and from postwar settlements to which Japan explicitly subscribed — cannot be displaced or diluted by domestic legal reinterpretations. It has no grounding in international law and cannot be used to reshape or reinterpret obligations that arise under the UN Charter or customary international law. If states could adjust their international obligations simply by redefining their domestic legal terms, the global legal order would collapse. International law exists to restrain precisely such unilateral expansions of power.

Source: International New York Times December 23, 2025 11:39 UTC