As the ratification of the Kyoto
Protocol by the Japanese government approaches, a new “Outline for Promoting Countermeasures
Against Global Warming” was adopted by the government in late March. Among a variety of countermeasures being
proposed, nuclear energy is believed to be the most reliable and therefore the
most important for Japan in fulfilling her international obligation to reduce
the emission of carbon dioxide according to the Kyoto Protocol. In fact the new Outline states that “in
order to achieve the goal, it is necessary to increase nuclear power by 30 percent from the level
of 2000” and for this purpose, 9-12 more nuclear reactors require to be built
within the next ten years.
However, many experts are pessimistic about the
feasibility of such plan in the light of the declining public acceptance of
nuclear power as a result of recurring accidents in recent years. An increasing number of Japanese people seem
to be feeling weary about nuclear energy and turning against it. Something drastic must be done to improve
the safety of nuclear power plants and thereby restore public confidence. This is a real challenge facing Japanese
scientists and engineers.
In addition to those technological
problems, another series of technical issues related to the nuclear fuel cycle,
such as the operation of the Rokkasho-mura reprocessing plant scheduled to be
completed within a few years, the implementation of “Plu-thermal” program, the construction of a MOX fabrication
plant and the interim storage of nuclear spent fuels, must be addressed
urgently. Furthermore, an economic dimension has emerged recently, such as the
competitiveness of nuclear energy against the growing tide of deregulation in
electricity supply or the introduction of an “environment tax” or “fossil fuel
tax”.
Each of these issues certainly
raises important points requiring difficult decisions by the top management of
electric power companies. But when seen at the levels of the nation state, one
wonders whether arguments based on domestic perspectives alone does the subject
justice. Having spent many years studying nuclear power, energy and the environment
from the perspective of international politics and national security, I have
become increasingly concerned about the current tendency in this country.
As is well recognized by experts,
issues concerning energy resources such as oil, gas and nuclear power are
intrinsically related to international politics, and with nuclear power in
particular, international politics and national security are aspects that
should never be neglected. Based on such a strategic viewpoint, I shall present
several issues which, in my view, should be given greater attention by the
Japanese people and the government.
(1)
Nuclear energy as an “insurance” against international
crises
The September 11 terrorist attacks
on the United States last year raised concerns about a possible major energy
crisis in the immediate aftermath. While such concerns proved to be
unwarranted, that offers no cause for complacency, since Japan now depends on
the Middle East for 90% of its oil, reverting to levels before the first Oil
Shock in 1973 (it is to be noted that U.S. dependency on oil imported from the
region is only about 10%). There are even predictions that some oil producing
nations may see a collapse in their political system. One should not be
surprised if anything worse should happen at any time in that volatile region.
Furthermore, the seeds of crisis
extend beyond the Persian Gulf. The Indian Ocean where India and Pakistan
remain at loggerheads, the Malacca Straits where piracy proliferates, or the
East China Sea where territorial disputes intensify ? danger lies in numerous
locations along the route taken by tankers bound for Japan. The Japanese are
exceedingly off guard about such vulnerabilities that exist in maritime
transport, but we should be more aware of the fact that nuclear power also
plays the role of “insurance” in the event of crises.
(2)
Nuclear energy as a contributor to Asian energy security
There is growing concern in recent
years regarding mid- to long-term energy security in Asia. China, home to
billions and rushing to industrialize at a stupendous pace, is now promoting
its conversion from coal to oil, thus steadily increasing its oil imports,
while even Indonesia, a long-time oil producer, is becoming a net oil-importer.
This will inevitably aggravate the scramble for energy resources such as Middle
East oil or oil and gas reserves buried in the seabed of the South China Sea,
thereby endangering the energy security of Asia, to say nothing about military
security.
Anticipating such an outcome,
Asian countries are accelerating their development of alternative energy
sources including natural energy such as solar and wind power, but the effects
will always be slow in coming. Under such circumstances, technologically
advanced nations such as Japan, South Korea and Taiwan should consider it their
responsibility to maintain certain levels of nuclear power generation as a
means to further reduce their dependency on oil and thus contribute to Asian
energy security.
(3)
Nuclear energy as a “card” in the international energy market
Nuclear power is perhaps the only effective
“card” that a resource-poor country like Japan can play to avoid
disadvantageous price negotiations with oil producers and major oil companies
in the international market for oil and natural gas. It is this kind of
thinking that seems fatally lacking among ordinary Japanese citizens. And here
lies another reason why we should retain nuclear power for our own energy
security.
(4) The
importance of nuclear technology for future needs
It seems that most of developed countries,
except France and more recently the United States under Bush administration,
are phasing out their nuclear energy programs. But even those European
countries are actually maintaining certain levels of their nuclear research and
technology capabilities in anticipation for future needs. Besides, the United
States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France and China, all categorized as “nuclear-weapon
States” by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), can pursue necessary
nuclear research and development within their military programs, even if they
discontinue civil nuclear power programs, whereas Japan, a declared “non-nuclear-weapon
State,” has no such option.
Being the only victim of the
atomic bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, Japan, more than any other
country, is entitled to engage in the peaceful use of nuclear energy under
stringent international inspection and safeguards against military diversion.
It follows therefore that Japan has both the right and duty to continue its
civil nuclear power activities as much as it can in anticipation of the day
when fast breeder reactors become operational at some point in time during the
21st century.
(5) The
need for developing smaller reactors for developing countries
In recent years, the need for
innovative small, safe reactors is being advocated both inside Japan and
abroad. These reactors, the so-called “fourth generation reactors,” are likely
to be a benefit not only for developed countries like Japan as a solution to
the domestic problems of location (they could be built near big cities where
most electricity is used), but also for developing countries like Vietnam and
Indonesia which are planning to install nuclear power plants in future.
So far, reactor manufacturers in
advanced countries including Japan have been building bigger and bigger reactors
in pursuit of scale merit. Instead, we should make a further effort to promote
development of smaller reactors which are cheaper, easier to manage and, above
all, safer, to meet the special needs of developing countries. One can safely argue that it is another
responsibility for countries like Japan to contribute to Asian energy security
in this way.
To summarize, in debating energy and
nuclear power policies in Japan today, there is a tendency to consider only
issues at the domestic level, such as those related to safety, economy and the
environment, without paying much attention to international aspects of those
issues. But we must make total
decisions that sufficiently take into account the geopolitical situation
surrounding Japan, the international political climate and long-term energy
security in the world, especially in Asia. Because one thing has remained
basically unchanged over the past hundred years ? the harsh reality that energy
resources essential to the survival of any people are in fact Japan’s “Achilles’
heel”.
Sixty
years ago, shortly after the outbreak of the Pacific War, Japanese people, amid
the acute shortage of oil following the embargo by the United States, used to
say that “ a drop of oil is equal to a drop of blood”. Nearly thirty years ago, during the first
Oil Shock, they were plunged into a chaotic situation nationwide. Those bitter memories of pain and agony have
long since vanished. Today Japanese,
even officials and specialists at the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry,
seem to have forgotten the lessons hard learned in the past. Some boast that we have enough oil stockpile
up to about 160 days and the emergency mutual assistance schemes are well
established on international agreements.
But the next energy crisis, if it ever comes, will likely come in a way
quite different from the previous ones.
How then can Japan afford to be self-complacent?
*****************************************************
The writer is
Professor of International Relations at Tokai University and concurrently
President of the Japan Council on Energy, Environment and Security (CEES)/ the
Japan Forum on International Relations, Inc. He is a former career diplomat,
who served as the Director of the Asia-Pacific Regional Office of the United
Nations Environment Program and the founding Director of the Nuclear Energy
Division of Japan’s Foreign Ministry. He holds an LLM degree from Harvard Law
School.