Antinuclear

Japan under pressure from USA to keep nuclear power

On 22 September the Tokyo Shimbun newspaper reported that the US Government had demanded that no cabinet decision endorsing the strategy be made. Other newspapers reported that the US Government was pressuring Japan to abandon its nuclear phase out aspirations.

More recently a series of statements by former senior US officials and advisors suggests a concerted campaign could be underway to intimidate the Japanese Government

whatever the outcome [of Japan’s election], Japan is undergoing a historic shift in its energy policy. The Japanese people need international support in this process, but they don’t need to be bullied.

Why America Wants A Nuclear Japan, New Matilda, 7 Dec 12  In the wake of the Fukushima disaster, most Japanese voters want the country’s nuclear power plants to be permanently closed down – but the US has other ideas, writes Philip White

On 14 September this year, one and a half years after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident, the Japanese Government released an unprecedented document.

The “Innovative Energy and Environment Strategy”, the culmination of a year-long policy review process, set the previously unthinkable target of zero nuclear energy by the end of the 2030s. In resolving to phase out nuclear energy, the Japanese Government did what it had never done before in the energy policy field: it allowed itself to be influenced
by the will of the people.
The backlash was immediate. Business groups banded together to condemn the strategy, governors of prefectures hosting nuclear facilities expressed concern about the future of these facilities and, perhaps equally significant, the governments of France, the UK and the United States communicated their displeasure. In the face of this onslaught the government went weak at the knees and failed to give the strategy formal cabinet endorsement……

Presented with such a conclusive rejection of nuclear energy in a
public participation process on which it had staked its credibility,
the government was forced to bend. It had to include the “zero” word
somehow. But the strategy that it came up with was patently
contradictory, purporting to support the continuation of the existing
nuclear fuel cycle policy and stretching out the phase out deadline to
the end of the 2030s, while providing no credible pathway to zero.

France and the UK’s public reaction to the Innovative Energy and
Environment Strategy related to Japan’s responsibility to accept the
return of radioactive waste from spent nuclear fuel reprocessed in
their countries. However the response of the United States was more
complex.
The United States is concerned about the proliferation implications of
Japan’s massive plutonium stockpile, which currently stands at 44
tons, enough to make over 5000 Nagasaki-style bombs. If Japan goes
ahead with its nuclear fuel cycle program, in particular reprocessing
spent nuclear fuel, this plutonium stockpile will grow even larger.
But if Japan intends to phase out nuclear power, it will have no
reactors in which to use this plutonium.

The US Government could have responded in either of two ways: by
stating that it would retract permission to reprocess spent nuclear
fuel sourced in the United States, or by pushing Japan to retract its
nuclear phase out strategy. It has certainly expressed its concern
about the implications of the contradictory strategy for Japan’s
plutonium stockpile, but it seems to be emphasising the latter
approach, namely calling for Japan to remain committed to nuclear
power.
At least one of its motivations is not hard to fathom. In recent years
Japan has become more than just a customer for the US nuclear
industry. The current state of US nuclear industry is such that it
would be hard pressed to construct nuclear power plants without
Japanese cooperation. In fact, Toshiba now owns Westinghouse, while
GE’s nuclear operations are run through subsidiaries jointly owned
with Hitachi.
The Innovative Energy and Environment Strategy was considered by
Cabinet on 19 September, five days after it was released, but to
everyone’s surprise cabinet did not formally endorse the document. It
simply noted it, saying, “The Government of Japan will implement
future policies on energy and the environment, taking into account of
the Innovative Strategy on Energy and the Environment.”

On 22 September the Tokyo Shimbun newspaper reported that the US Government had demanded that no cabinet decision endorsing the strategy be made. Other newspapers reported that the US Government was pressuring Japan to abandon its nuclear phase out aspirations.

More recently a series of statements by former senior US officials and advisors suggests a concerted campaign could be underway to intimidate the Japanese Government. These people claim that Japan without nuclear
power would be bad for nuclear non-proliferation. The basis for this
claim is not fears about Japan’s plutonium stockpile. Rather it is
that allegedly Japan without an active nuclear power program would be
less able to support the United States’ non-proliferation efforts…..
The question arises, will the public will expressed in the national
debate be over-ridden by pressure from overseas? Will the first
tentative steps towards participatory democracy in Japan’s energy
policy be thus undermined?

The United States has no right to tell the Japanese whether or not
they should phase out nuclear power. On the other hand, countries like
Australia which have nuclear cooperation agreements with Japan have a
legitimate right to demand that Japan not add to its plutonium
stockpile. They have every right to demand that Japan not separate any
more plutonium at its reprocessing plant in Rokkasho.

A national election is scheduled for 16 December. Due to the general
confusion in Japanese politics the election may not deliver the type
of clear verdict on nuclear energy that one would otherwise expect.
But whatever the outcome, Japan is undergoing a historic shift in its energy policy. The Japanese people need international support in this process, but they don’t need to be bullied.
http://newmatilda.com/2012/12/07/why-america-wants-nuclear-japan

December 8, 2012 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | Uncategorized