×

Features

Japan refuses to sign joint statement against nuclear weapons at Preparatory Committee for NPT Review Conference

by Michiko Tanaka, Staff Writer

GENEVA--South Africa released a joint statement on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons on April 24 at the Second Preparatory Committee for the 2015 Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference, now in session in Geneva, Switzerland. The statement, endorsed by 74 nations, declares: “It is in the interest of the very survival of humanity that nuclear weapons are never used again, under any circumstances.” Japan, however, declined to sign the statement over concerns that this would have an adverse impact on the U.S. nuclear umbrella.

The joint statement stressed that tremendous damage has been produced by nuclear weapons testing and the use of nuclear weapons in the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. “The only way to guarantee that nuclear weapons will never be used again is through their total elimination,” it argues.

Last year, at the United Nations General Assembly, Japan was asked to support a joint statement calling for a stronger effort to make nuclear weapons illegal under international law. But Japan backed away from that statement, too, which it described as inconsistent with the nation’s security policy.

South Africa, in a bid to encourage Japan to endorse the statement, removed the word “outlaw” from the document. Prior to the preparatory committee, Switzerland had urged Japan to back the statement and, with Japan still undecided, negotiations had continued right up until the gathering opened. Japan’s decision will inevitably encounter criticism from home and abroad.

Within the Japanese government, some apparently argued that supporting the joint statement would negatively impact the nuclear umbrella and weaken nuclear deterrence against North Korea, which has been engaged in provocative military actions. Japan proposed that the phrase “under any circumstances” be removed, but as the number of countries supporting the statement grew, Switzerland and other nations rejected Japan’s request.

At the same time, Norway, Denmark, and other member nations of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) endorsed the statement, though these countries also rely on U.S. nuclear deterrence.

The joint statement had been scheduled to be released on April 23, but there was some delay in the proceedings, resulting in the later release.

Commentary: Essence of non-nuclear diplomacy must be questioned

by Michiko Tanaka, Staff Writer

GENEVA--Japan, the nation which suffered the atomic bombings, has rebuffed a joint statement against the use of nuclear weapons. South Africa, which authored the statement, as well as other supporters of the document, are surely very disappointed by Japan’s decision. The survivors of the A-bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki must be angry to hear this news. In the end, the Japanese government was determined not to ruffle the feathers of the United States, which protects Japan with its nuclear umbrella.

In the hope that Japan and other countries which rely on nuclear deterrence would sign the statement, phrasing which supported making nuclear weapons illegal was removed. According to an official from the Ministry of International Relations and Cooperation of South Africa, the South African delegation waited until the last moment because they believed it was important that the A-bombed nation endorse the statement, too. But Japan demanded a further change in the wording, and the two sides were unable to work out their differences.

Though the Japanese government upholds the abolition of nuclear weapons, it abides by a security policy based on nuclear deterrence. This contradictory posture, along with its excessive concern when it comes to the United States, have been bared at the meeting, resulting in frustration and criticism from inside and outside Japan. The joint statement is focused on the inhumanity of nuclear weapons, which is precisely the message that Hiroshima and Nagasaki have long been conveying. The essence of the non-nuclear diplomacy being pursued by Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida, who was elected from Hiroshima’s first constituency, must naturally be questioned.

(Originally published on April 25, 2013)

Archives