preface
"The earth can lose its island nations,
But the ocean is our common dream. ”
On August 24, 2023, the world witnessed a pivotal moment in nuclear safety and environmental protection. The Japanese government's decision to discharge Fukushima's nuclear effluent into the sea was made amid widespread international opposition, including explicit dissuasion from many countries.
This action not only puts global ecological security at potential risk, but also raises international questions about Japan's responsibility and integrity. In the face of this momentous event, the major players on the international stage – China, the United States and Russia – acted quickly, demonstrating their concern and decision-making response to the event.
Is warning useful at all?
After the Fukushima nuclear sewage discharge incident, the international response was swift and resolute. As the first response, the two major economies of China and the United States immediately announced a moratorium on all imports of Japanese aquatic products, a move that clearly demonstrated their strong dissatisfaction with Japan's decision-making and concern about its long-term consequences.
Furthermore, Russia issued a more stern warning, making it clear that if Japan continues this dangerous behavior, it will not rule out taking military measures.
But that's just the tip of the iceberg. The positions of the three major countries, China, the United States and Russia, are unusually consistent on the Japanese nuclear issue. Their common credo can be succinctly summed up as: "We would rather Japan no longer exist on Earth than allow it to possess nuclear weapons." This statement once again underscores the seriousness of the international community towards nuclear safety and its strong antipathy towards Japan's actions.
Japan's international status changed radically after World War II. Because of its role in the war, the international community, especially the victorious Powers, imposed a series of restrictions, particularly with regard to armies and nuclear weapons.
In fact, although Japan has the technology and capability to develop nuclear weapons, it is still strictly bound to possess nuclear weapons. This has made Japan dependent on the United States in the military field for a long time, and is regarded as an important ally of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region, and some even describe it as a "vassal" of the United States.
The international landscape of the 21st century has brought new challenges and changes. Especially as the United States began to feel China's rise economically, politically, and militarily, its strategy adjusted accordingly.
Against this backdrop, Japan is seen as a strategic pawn or "pawn" of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region. In order to safeguard its interests and security in the region, Japan has repeatedly demonstrated its loyalty to the United States. And with the support and encouragement of the United States, its military strength has been strengthened and developed to a certain extent.
In the international strategic landscape, the increasing competition between the United States and China has led to an adjustment in the military policy of the United States towards Japan. This shift prompted Japan to repeatedly propose its own "nuclear weapons program" to the United States, but none of these proposals were agreed to by the United States. Japan's attempts also reveal its ambitions in the field of nuclear weapons.
It is noteworthy that the refusal of the Government of Japan on the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons has heightened the doubts of the international community about its nuclear policy.
In the name of "developing nuclear power," Japan has accumulated a large amount of materials that could be used in the manufacture of nuclear weapons, which has further aroused concerns. According to some foreign media reports, Japan has secretly stored more than 40 tons of plutonium-239, and has a large amount of natural uranium and uranium oxide transactions with South America, Africa and other countries.
If these reports are true, then the material at Japan's disposal is quite capable of creating nearly a thousand nuclear weapons. Its potential deterrent and destructive power is unprecedented, which will not only change the strategic balance of the Asia-Pacific region, but also pose a serious threat to the entire international security environment.
As a result of the incident concerning Japan's secret stockpiling of nuclear materials, the United States has reached new heights of vigilance. In order to ensure regional stability and security, the US military stationed in Japan has intensified its supervision of Japan's military activities. This change is not unilateral, in fact, China, the United States, and Russia quickly reached a consensus on this issue and jointly expressed a firm position against Japan's nuclear weapons development program.
Looking back at the history of mankind, nuclear weapons have been used passively only twice in conflicts, and Japan, with its unfortunate history, has become a victim of both.
This experience gave Japan a special interest and perception of nuclear technology after World War II. Although the defeat imposed many constraints on Japan, which led them to use this technology only in the civilian field initially, Japan never gave up exploring the potential use of nuclear technology in the military field.
As Japan's main ally and "guardian" after World War II, the United States has a deep understanding of the determination and behavior of the Japanese military government during World War II. This allowed the United States to impose strict military and political control over Japan after the war, ensuring peace and stability in the region. And in the new century, while the United States has somewhat tactically supported Japan to balance China's rise, it remains vigilant to ensure that all support is within a manageable and acceptable boundary.
Japan has indeed demonstrated its clear strategic positioning in its foreign and security policies in recent years. By observing their decisions and behaviors, we can read that Japan is trying to ensure its own security by protecting its national interests and, to some extent, to demonstrate its strength and determination externally.
Nuclear weapons have always been regarded as weapons of extreme destruction, and no country dares to take such a powerful force lightly. It is precisely because of the devastating consequences of nuclear weapons that States have always been exceptionally cautious in dealing with the issues associated with them. However, in the current international situation, turmoil and uncertainty have increased, which has undoubtedly increased the risk of the use of nuclear weapons. If Japan, as a country with a history of military aggression, does possess nuclear weapons, the potential risks posed are indeed deeply worrying.
As for the issue of nuclear sewage in Fukushima, Japan's decision-making seems to have exceeded the expectations of most countries. They seem to believe that they can act according to their own will with the tacit approval of the United States, and this pattern of behavior has attracted widespread attention and criticism in the international community.
Regarding the Fukushima issue, Russia's comments do express strong dissatisfaction and concern. The mention of "dropping hydrogen bombs on the region" underscores its serious views on the matter. The destructive nature of hydrogen bombs is well recognized, and their enormous explosive power does neutralize some radioactive materials, but it also has unpredictable environmental and ecological consequences.
Such remarks also underscore Russia's concerns about marine ecology and global security. The phrase "this earth can be without Japan, but not without the ocean" clarifies its position that it would rather sacrifice a country than see the ocean suffer long-term damage.
Japan's decision on Fukushima is seen by many as extremely selfish because of its potential consequences that could have long-term global repercussions. In order to maintain global peace and security, the international community needs to work together to ensure that such issues are properly addressed and that there is a clear response and sanctions against any possible threats.