Before reading this article, please click the red "Follow" button, which is convenient for you to discuss and share, and brings you a different sense of participation, thank you for your support!
text| Jiu Yan
Edit| Xiaojiang
Recently, despite the strong opposition of neighboring countries, the Japanese government insisted on discharging nuclear sewage into the sea, which attracted the attention of people all over the world.
Soon after the discharge of the contaminated water, dozens of dolphins ran aground and a large number of fish died.
The spread of nuclear effluent to waters near South Korea has also caused a large number of grouper deaths in South Korean farms, with more than 1 million fish dying in Yeosu, Jeollanam-do alone.
The United States, which had previously supported Japan's discharge of nuclear-contaminated water, has also begun to publicly accuse Japan of not being the same.
So why is the attitude of the United States so repetitive? Are they also starting to be afraid of nuclear sewage? What measures should the Japanese government take to remedy the situation in order to prevent the situation from deteriorating further?
Figure 1
The Japanese government is expected to give another 20 billion
Despite international rebukes and warnings, Japan's insistence on going its own way has severely affected its domestic fisheries, especially after losing the Chinese market.
Now the Japanese government is considering an additional emergency allocation of about 20 billion yen to boost the damaged aquaculture industry. The plan is expected to be officially unveiled next week.
According to industry analysts, Toyosu Market, Japan's largest wholesale seafood market, has shown obvious signs of instability.
Some fisheries have revealed that sales of frozen scallops, for example, have fallen by nearly 80% year-on-year, and may have to reduce prices to promote domestic sales in the future.
The grant program will cover a wide range of areas, including buying and stockpiling seafood such as scallops most affected by emissions problems, and supporting fishermen and aquaculture companies in finding new sales channels.
Figure 2
The Japanese government has earmarked about 80 billion yen for Fukushima-related fisheries, including 30 billion yen to improve the image of the aquaculture industry damaged by the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water.
But will 20 billion yen be enough to save the impact of losing the huge Chinese market?
It is reported that in 2022, the total value of China's imports of aquatic products from Japan will reach hundreds of billions of yen. Therefore, a subsidy of 20 billion yen will hardly have a significant economic effect under such circumstances.
South Korea was the first to suffer from the disaster caused by radioactive substances
The discharge of Japan's nuclear-contaminated water quickly triggered a transnational ecological and economic crisis, with South Korea becoming one of the most affected neighbors.
The city of Yeosu, Jeollanam-do, famous for its grouper production, has suffered an unprecedented disaster due to the Fukushima nuclear accident.
In a short period of time, more than a million groupers tragically died.
Figure 3
The ecological disaster was further transformed into an economic disaster, resulting in a loss of about 840 million yuan for local fishermen.
But that's just the tip of the iceberg. South Korea's entire seafood market is in a double crisis: falling demand and price collapse.
Even more shocking is that the market price of Jeju Island's oriental bass, an indispensable ingredient for high-end sashimi, has plummeted by nearly 60%.
Faced with such a grim situation, the South Korean government has had to make major adjustments in its 2024 budget.
The budget earmarked nuclear contamination with a whopping 738 billion won, an increase of nearly 40 percent over the previous year.
More notably, nearly 57.6 billion won of this funding will be used to strengthen the detection of radioactive materials in marine and aquatic products.
This is not only a resolute guarantee of food safety for the Korean people, but also a strong safeguard for the livelihood of the affected fishermen.
Figure 4
President Han's previous performance became a big joke
As early as when the Japanese government was preparing to discharge the contaminated water, the South Korean president came out to defend the contaminated water discharged from Fukushima, Japan, calling it safe.
In front of the media, I also taste fish caught from Fukushima.
This act has provoked large-scale repercussions and controversy in Korean society, and on this topic, Korean society has shown obvious polarization.
One side said the president's actions sent a strong signal that the administration takes food safety and public health seriously, and believes that heavily vetted Fukushima seafood is safe.
On the other hand, however, there is strong opposition to this action, arguing that it is not only a rash attitude towards a serious issue, but may further exacerbate public doubts about the safety of seafood quality inspection.
In this complex and nuanced context, the South Korean government is beginning to demonstrate more transparency and accountability.
They first strengthened the testing and monitoring of all seafood imported from Fukushima to ensure that they fully comply with food safety standards.
Figure 5
The South Korean government then stepped up communication with the Japanese to obtain comprehensive information on its plans for the discharge of contaminated water and its possible impacts.
While the president's intention may have been to calm concerns and prove that South Korea's seafood is still safe, the attempt apparently did not have the desired effect.
In fact, in most Korean seafood markets today, consumers are still wary of a variety of seafood.
The lack of optimism in sales not only reflects public distrust, but also exposes the government's inadequacy in dealing with this sensitive issue.
04Mass protests broke out in South Korea
Since Japan released contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant into the sea, the actions of the South Korean government have intensified strong discontent in China.
With the death of millions of groupers, public discontent has risen rapidly.
It is reported that after the maritime crisis, the South Korean government changed its previous attitude and submitted a protest to the International Atomic Energy Agency and threatened to launch an international lawsuit against Japan.
Figure 6
As a concrete measure to address safety concerns about Japanese seafood, South Korea has also stepped up testing for radioactive substances in its imported seafood.
Not only at the government level, but also the Korean people are actively taking action. Demonstrations and mass rallies broke out across the country, and people strongly demanded that the Japanese government rescind the decision.
They also called for a nationwide boycott of Japanese goods and tourism as a way to put pressure on Japan.
In downtown Seoul, South Korea's largest opposition party, the Democratic Party of Korea, united several other opposition parties and more than 90 social groups to organize a massive protest.
They held signs and rallied loudly, calling on the South Korean government to take stronger action, including taking the case to the International Tribunal for the Sea of the Sea.
05The chain reaction after the discharge of nuclear-contaminated water
The impact of the contaminated water discharge from Japan's Fukushima nuclear power plant may not be limited to fish.
In the long run, the impact of nuclear pollution is undoubtedly multifaceted and long-term, and it will also have a chain reaction to tourism.
Figure 7
Take South Korea as an example, the country is home to many popular seaside tourist destinations, including Jeju Island, Busan, and Ulsan.
These areas are not only a paradise for tourists, but also provide considerable support for the local economy and the livelihood of the residents.
If environmental concerns cause these destinations to fall out of favor, South Korea's economy and job market will be hit hard.
Tourism not only creates a large number of jobs, but also contributes a lot of revenue to the national finances.
Once there is an environmental crisis in these tourist resorts, it can trigger a series of economic and social problems, and even lead to massive unemployment and the collapse of the regional economy.
The U.S. position is controversial
Despite the Japanese government's decision to discharge contaminated water from the Fukushima nuclear power plant into the sea, the U.S. government expressed support for the decision, repeatedly stressing that the decision was in line with international standards and requirements.
However, this support has generated social and political divisions within the United States, raising questions about the government's motives and sense of responsibility.
Figure 8
In fact, many Americans and news organizations were critical of the decision.
These critics further point out that the U.S. government's position on this issue is quite complex and multifaceted.
While official U.S. support may be based on its close alliance and strategic cooperation with Japan, this does not mean that the decision was made after a comprehensive assessment of all possible impacts.
The U.S. government may also be weighing its strategic goals in the Asia-Pacific region, which could include maintaining an alliance with Japan against other powers in the region.
Surprisingly, when Japan discharged nuclear-contaminated water, the U.S. position began to remain so-called "neutral" again.
In the shortest possible time, the US government urgently ordered large-scale restrictions on the import of seafood from Japan, especially products produced in Fukushima Prefecture, which were subjected to strict scrutiny.
It is understood that up to 35 different categories of products from Fukushima Prefecture have been included in the restricted list, which is even more unusual.
Figure 9
Obviously, the United States has behaved quite ambivalently in this matter, and the meaning behind this double standard practice is self-evident.
brief summary
The issue of nuclear-contaminated water is a wake-up call that we cannot afford to take environmental protection lightly.
History has proven many times that man-made environmental damage has irreversible effects, harms ecological balance and threatens biodiversity.
It is therefore incumbent upon us to learn from the failures of the past, to be cautious about the only planet we inhabit, and to avoid going down the wrong path again.
At this stage, we need to come together to promote sustainable and environmentally friendly energy solutions.
Only through collective efforts can we truly protect the oceans and ensure that future generations can live on a better and healthier planet.