New Hiroshima Report is released, scoring efforts by 36 nations for nuclear abolition
Apr. 8, 2017
by Junji Akechi, Staff Writer
On April 7, Hiroshima Prefecture issued the Hiroshima Report, an assessment of 36 nations based on the efforts they made in 2016 involving the three areas of nuclear disarmament, nuclear non-proliferation, and nuclear security. In the area of nuclear disarmament, the scores received by these nations, and in particular the non-nuclear nations, vary depending on the stance they have taken toward talks at the United Nations on a treaty that would outlaw nuclear arms, which opened at U.N. headquarters in New York in March. Compared to the previous report, Japan’s score has improved because it hosted the international conference on measures for verifying nuclear disarmament, despite the fact that Japan has expressed opposition to the U.N. treaty negotiations.
The Hiroshima Report has been released annually since 2013, with the scores of each nation based on their efforts over the previous year. This year’s report is the fifth to be issued. The nations assessed are the same as last year and include the five nuclear powers recognized by the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), the four other countries that now possess nuclear arms, and 27 non-nuclear nations. The Japan Institute of International Affairs, a Tokyo-based think tank, was tasked by the prefecture to compile the report, which consists of 64 ratings on each nation’s performance in 2016, such as possessing nuclear weapons, pursuing nuclear reduction, and voting at the U.N. General Assembly. In this article a nation’s full score is given, a percentage based on the combined ratings for each of the three main areas of assessment.
In the area of nuclear disarmament, Russia was rated the lowest among the five nuclear superpowers with a score of 9.0% (a decrease of 1.1 points since the last report). Of these five nations, Russia was the only country to be downgraded due to comments made by Russian President Vladimir Putin on strengthening its nuclear arsenal and other factors. The United States received a score of 21.8% (an increase of 1.1 points since the last report) because of the visit to Hiroshima by former President Barack Obama, the first sitting president to come to the A-bombed city.
Compared to the five nuclear superpowers, the scores of the four de facto nuclear weapon states are lower because they added to their nuclear arsenals and their transparency with regard to disclosing information was poor. North Korea, which repeatedly carried out nuclear tests last year, received a negative rating of -6.6% (a decrease of 1.1 points since the last report). North Korea has been assessed the lowest score in five consecutive years.
The scores of the non-nuclear nations differ depending on whether or not they showed support for the U.N. talks on a nuclear ban treaty. Austria, one of the nations that led the discussions for initiating the talks, was ranked highest at 77.1% (no change since the last report). The Philippines, which became the co-sponsor of the U.N. resolution calling for the start of these treaty negotiations, received a score of 65.7% (an increase of 5.7 points since the last report). Brazil, which also co-sponsored the resolution, raised its score to 68.6% (an increase of 2.9 points since the last report). On the other hand, South Korea was rated 37.1% and suffered the largest drop in score among all the nations assessed, as a result of its opposition to the U.N. resolution.
Japan’s score in the area of nuclear disarmament was 66.6% (an increase of 0.9 points since the last report). Though it voted against the U.N. resolution, Japan was scored favorably for the international conference that it held in Tokyo last June and for other factors. In the area of nuclear non-proliferation, Japan received a rating of 86.9% (a decrease of 1.6 points since the last report). Because Japan concluded a nuclear energy agreement in November with India, which has not joined the NPT, it is the only country among the 36 nations to have received a lower score in this area than last time. In the area of nuclear security, Japan’s score was 70.7% (no change since the last report).
The Hiroshima Report is issued as part of the “Hiroshima for Global Peace Plan” pursued by the prefecture. On this day, the prefecture released the report in both Japanese and English, and made available a booklet of the report on its website for the general public.
Report shows gap between nuclear and non-nuclear nations
The Hiroshima Report clearly conveys the gap between the nuclear nations, including allied nations like Japan that are under the U.S. nuclear umbrella, and the non-nuclear nations that want to outlaw nuclear arms.
Hirohumi Tosaki, one of the authors of the report and a senior research fellow in the Center for the Promotion of Disarmament and Non-Proliferation at the Japan Institute of International Affairs, spoke at a press conference held at the Hiroshima Prefectural Office. Mr. Tosaki said, “In the report, you can identify the cracks that have been caused in the international community over the idea of outlawing nuclear weapons.” About the U.N. talks to establish a nuclear ban treaty, he shared his perspective, saying, “The talks may mark a turning point for the abolition of nuclear weapons, but it’s now difficult to judge how all this will unfold because U.S. nuclear policy under the Trump administration is still unclear.”
Nobuyasu Abe, the vice chair of the promotion committee for the prefecture’s “Hiroshima for Global Peace Plan,” stressed that greater waves of public opinion and political action are needed to bring about a change in the nuclear nations. Mr. Abe also stressed that “The A-bombed cities have a large role to play in conveying a message of peace based on their experiences of 70 years ago.” He mentioned the importance of making the most of new communication methods as well, like social media tools.
This May, the prefecture plans to hold an exhibition based on the Hiroshima Report at the venue of the first session of the preparatory committee for the NPT Review Conference, which will take place in Vienna, Austria. Hiroshima Governor Hidehiko Yuzaki said, “Because it’s being sent from Hiroshima, our message can reach people’s hearts. We’d like to make more efforts to broaden the areas of our research and bring together the results in order to continue conveying this message to the political leaders who make decisions on nuclear issues.”
Scoring rates, by nation, on efforts for nuclear abolition
1. Nation
2. Nuclear Disarmament (%)
3. Nuclear Non-proliferation (%)
4. Nuclear Security (%)
Five Nuclear Superpowers
1. The United Kingdom*215
2. 25.5 (25.5)
3. 87.2(87.2)
4. 61.0 (61.0)
1. France*300
2. 23.4(22.3)
3. 85.1(85.1)
4. 63.4(63.4)
1. The United States*7000
2. 21.8(20.7)
3. 87.2(87.2)
4. 65.9(63.4)
1. China*260
2. 13.3(13.3)
3. 68.1(68.1)
4. 53.7(61.0)
1. Russia*7290
2. 9.0(10.1)
3. 76.6(76.6)
4. 46.3(46.3)
Four De Facto Nuclear Nations
1. India*100-120
2. 6.4(6.6)
3. 34.9(34.9)
4. 53.7(48.8)
1. Pakistan *100-130
2. 2.7(2.7)
3. 20.9(20.9)
4. 41.5(39.0)
1. Israel*80
2. 0.0(-1.1)
3. 30.2(30.2)
4. 51.2(39.0)
1. North Korea*10
2. -6.6 (-5.5)
3. 0.0 (0.0)
4. -14.6 (-4.9)
27 Non-nuclear Nations
1. Austria
2. 77.1(77.1)
3. 85.2(85.2)
4. 65.9(68.3)
1. New Zealand
2. 74.3(74.3)
3. 90.2(90.2)
4. 65.9(63.4)
1. Sweden
2. 73.1(71.4)
3. 86.9(86.9)
4. 92.7(92.7)
1. Brazil
2. 68.6 (65.7)
3. 70.5(70.5)
4. 68.3(68.3)
1. Mexico
2. 68.6(68.6)
3. 82.0(82.0)
4. 73.2(73.2)
1. Japan
2. 66.6(65.7)
3. 86.9(88.5)
4. 70.7(70.7)
1. Switzerland
2. 66.0(65.7)
3. 82.0(78.7)
4. 75.6(75.6)
1. Chile
2. 65.7(62.9)
3. 85.2(85.2)
4. 73.2(70.7)
1. Kazakhstan
2. 65.7(62.9)
3. 77.0(77.0)
4. 63.4(63.4)
1. The Philippines
2. 65.7(60.0)
3. 82.0(78.7)
4. 68.3(56.1)
1. South Africa
2. 60.0(62.9)
3. 83.6(83.6)
4. 61.0(61.0)
1. Indonesia
2. 58.6(58.6)
3. 78.7(78.7)
4. 70.7(48.8)
1. Nigeria
2. 58.6(58.6)
3. 73.8(73.8)
4. 51.2(39.0)
1. The United Arab Emirates (UAE)
2. 57.1(54.3)
3. 73.8(73.8)
4. 65.9(65.9)
1. Canada
2. 53.7(52.9)
3. 85.2(85.2)
4. 78.0(78.0)
1. Australia
2. 50.9(50.0)
3. 91.8(91.8)
4. 75.6(78.0)
1. Egypt
2. 45.7(48.6)
3. 60.7(59.0)
4. 31.7(26.8)
1. Holland
2. 45.1(42.9)
3. 90.2(90.2)
4. 78.0(75.6)
1. Norway
2. 45.1(48.6)
3. 88.5(88.5)
4. 68.3(68.3)
1. Germany
2. 43.7(40.0)
3. 91.8(91.8)
4. 68.3(68.3)
1. Iran
2. 42.9(42.9)
3. 59.0(47.5)
4. 22.0(14.6)
1. Belgium
2. 40.9(40.0)
3. 88.5(88.5)
4. 70.7(63.4)
1. South Korea
2. 37.1(44.3)
3. 83.6(83.6)
4. 90.2(87.8)
1. Poland
2. 37.1(35.7)
3. 85.2(85.2)
4. 73.2(56.1)
1. Saudi Arabia
2. 34.3(34.3)
3. 59.0(59.0)
4. 43.9(43.9)
1. Syria
2. 24.3 (30.0)
3. 34.4(34.4)
4. 4.9(4.9)
1. Turkey
2. 22.9 (24.3)
3. 82.0 (82.0)
4. 65.9 (63.4)
Nations are listed in the order of scoring rate, from highest to lowest, in the area of nuclear disarmament. Figures in parentheses show scores from the last report. The asterix (*) indicates the estimated number of nuclear warheads as of January 2016. (Source: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute)
(Originally published on April 8, 2017)
On April 7, Hiroshima Prefecture issued the Hiroshima Report, an assessment of 36 nations based on the efforts they made in 2016 involving the three areas of nuclear disarmament, nuclear non-proliferation, and nuclear security. In the area of nuclear disarmament, the scores received by these nations, and in particular the non-nuclear nations, vary depending on the stance they have taken toward talks at the United Nations on a treaty that would outlaw nuclear arms, which opened at U.N. headquarters in New York in March. Compared to the previous report, Japan’s score has improved because it hosted the international conference on measures for verifying nuclear disarmament, despite the fact that Japan has expressed opposition to the U.N. treaty negotiations.
The Hiroshima Report has been released annually since 2013, with the scores of each nation based on their efforts over the previous year. This year’s report is the fifth to be issued. The nations assessed are the same as last year and include the five nuclear powers recognized by the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), the four other countries that now possess nuclear arms, and 27 non-nuclear nations. The Japan Institute of International Affairs, a Tokyo-based think tank, was tasked by the prefecture to compile the report, which consists of 64 ratings on each nation’s performance in 2016, such as possessing nuclear weapons, pursuing nuclear reduction, and voting at the U.N. General Assembly. In this article a nation’s full score is given, a percentage based on the combined ratings for each of the three main areas of assessment.
In the area of nuclear disarmament, Russia was rated the lowest among the five nuclear superpowers with a score of 9.0% (a decrease of 1.1 points since the last report). Of these five nations, Russia was the only country to be downgraded due to comments made by Russian President Vladimir Putin on strengthening its nuclear arsenal and other factors. The United States received a score of 21.8% (an increase of 1.1 points since the last report) because of the visit to Hiroshima by former President Barack Obama, the first sitting president to come to the A-bombed city.
Compared to the five nuclear superpowers, the scores of the four de facto nuclear weapon states are lower because they added to their nuclear arsenals and their transparency with regard to disclosing information was poor. North Korea, which repeatedly carried out nuclear tests last year, received a negative rating of -6.6% (a decrease of 1.1 points since the last report). North Korea has been assessed the lowest score in five consecutive years.
The scores of the non-nuclear nations differ depending on whether or not they showed support for the U.N. talks on a nuclear ban treaty. Austria, one of the nations that led the discussions for initiating the talks, was ranked highest at 77.1% (no change since the last report). The Philippines, which became the co-sponsor of the U.N. resolution calling for the start of these treaty negotiations, received a score of 65.7% (an increase of 5.7 points since the last report). Brazil, which also co-sponsored the resolution, raised its score to 68.6% (an increase of 2.9 points since the last report). On the other hand, South Korea was rated 37.1% and suffered the largest drop in score among all the nations assessed, as a result of its opposition to the U.N. resolution.
Japan’s score in the area of nuclear disarmament was 66.6% (an increase of 0.9 points since the last report). Though it voted against the U.N. resolution, Japan was scored favorably for the international conference that it held in Tokyo last June and for other factors. In the area of nuclear non-proliferation, Japan received a rating of 86.9% (a decrease of 1.6 points since the last report). Because Japan concluded a nuclear energy agreement in November with India, which has not joined the NPT, it is the only country among the 36 nations to have received a lower score in this area than last time. In the area of nuclear security, Japan’s score was 70.7% (no change since the last report).
The Hiroshima Report is issued as part of the “Hiroshima for Global Peace Plan” pursued by the prefecture. On this day, the prefecture released the report in both Japanese and English, and made available a booklet of the report on its website for the general public.
Report shows gap between nuclear and non-nuclear nations
The Hiroshima Report clearly conveys the gap between the nuclear nations, including allied nations like Japan that are under the U.S. nuclear umbrella, and the non-nuclear nations that want to outlaw nuclear arms.
Hirohumi Tosaki, one of the authors of the report and a senior research fellow in the Center for the Promotion of Disarmament and Non-Proliferation at the Japan Institute of International Affairs, spoke at a press conference held at the Hiroshima Prefectural Office. Mr. Tosaki said, “In the report, you can identify the cracks that have been caused in the international community over the idea of outlawing nuclear weapons.” About the U.N. talks to establish a nuclear ban treaty, he shared his perspective, saying, “The talks may mark a turning point for the abolition of nuclear weapons, but it’s now difficult to judge how all this will unfold because U.S. nuclear policy under the Trump administration is still unclear.”
Nobuyasu Abe, the vice chair of the promotion committee for the prefecture’s “Hiroshima for Global Peace Plan,” stressed that greater waves of public opinion and political action are needed to bring about a change in the nuclear nations. Mr. Abe also stressed that “The A-bombed cities have a large role to play in conveying a message of peace based on their experiences of 70 years ago.” He mentioned the importance of making the most of new communication methods as well, like social media tools.
This May, the prefecture plans to hold an exhibition based on the Hiroshima Report at the venue of the first session of the preparatory committee for the NPT Review Conference, which will take place in Vienna, Austria. Hiroshima Governor Hidehiko Yuzaki said, “Because it’s being sent from Hiroshima, our message can reach people’s hearts. We’d like to make more efforts to broaden the areas of our research and bring together the results in order to continue conveying this message to the political leaders who make decisions on nuclear issues.”
Scoring rates, by nation, on efforts for nuclear abolition
1. Nation
2. Nuclear Disarmament (%)
3. Nuclear Non-proliferation (%)
4. Nuclear Security (%)
Five Nuclear Superpowers
1. The United Kingdom*215
2. 25.5 (25.5)
3. 87.2(87.2)
4. 61.0 (61.0)
1. France*300
2. 23.4(22.3)
3. 85.1(85.1)
4. 63.4(63.4)
1. The United States*7000
2. 21.8(20.7)
3. 87.2(87.2)
4. 65.9(63.4)
1. China*260
2. 13.3(13.3)
3. 68.1(68.1)
4. 53.7(61.0)
1. Russia*7290
2. 9.0(10.1)
3. 76.6(76.6)
4. 46.3(46.3)
Four De Facto Nuclear Nations
1. India*100-120
2. 6.4(6.6)
3. 34.9(34.9)
4. 53.7(48.8)
1. Pakistan *100-130
2. 2.7(2.7)
3. 20.9(20.9)
4. 41.5(39.0)
1. Israel*80
2. 0.0(-1.1)
3. 30.2(30.2)
4. 51.2(39.0)
1. North Korea*10
2. -6.6 (-5.5)
3. 0.0 (0.0)
4. -14.6 (-4.9)
27 Non-nuclear Nations
1. Austria
2. 77.1(77.1)
3. 85.2(85.2)
4. 65.9(68.3)
1. New Zealand
2. 74.3(74.3)
3. 90.2(90.2)
4. 65.9(63.4)
1. Sweden
2. 73.1(71.4)
3. 86.9(86.9)
4. 92.7(92.7)
1. Brazil
2. 68.6 (65.7)
3. 70.5(70.5)
4. 68.3(68.3)
1. Mexico
2. 68.6(68.6)
3. 82.0(82.0)
4. 73.2(73.2)
1. Japan
2. 66.6(65.7)
3. 86.9(88.5)
4. 70.7(70.7)
1. Switzerland
2. 66.0(65.7)
3. 82.0(78.7)
4. 75.6(75.6)
1. Chile
2. 65.7(62.9)
3. 85.2(85.2)
4. 73.2(70.7)
1. Kazakhstan
2. 65.7(62.9)
3. 77.0(77.0)
4. 63.4(63.4)
1. The Philippines
2. 65.7(60.0)
3. 82.0(78.7)
4. 68.3(56.1)
1. South Africa
2. 60.0(62.9)
3. 83.6(83.6)
4. 61.0(61.0)
1. Indonesia
2. 58.6(58.6)
3. 78.7(78.7)
4. 70.7(48.8)
1. Nigeria
2. 58.6(58.6)
3. 73.8(73.8)
4. 51.2(39.0)
1. The United Arab Emirates (UAE)
2. 57.1(54.3)
3. 73.8(73.8)
4. 65.9(65.9)
1. Canada
2. 53.7(52.9)
3. 85.2(85.2)
4. 78.0(78.0)
1. Australia
2. 50.9(50.0)
3. 91.8(91.8)
4. 75.6(78.0)
1. Egypt
2. 45.7(48.6)
3. 60.7(59.0)
4. 31.7(26.8)
1. Holland
2. 45.1(42.9)
3. 90.2(90.2)
4. 78.0(75.6)
1. Norway
2. 45.1(48.6)
3. 88.5(88.5)
4. 68.3(68.3)
1. Germany
2. 43.7(40.0)
3. 91.8(91.8)
4. 68.3(68.3)
1. Iran
2. 42.9(42.9)
3. 59.0(47.5)
4. 22.0(14.6)
1. Belgium
2. 40.9(40.0)
3. 88.5(88.5)
4. 70.7(63.4)
1. South Korea
2. 37.1(44.3)
3. 83.6(83.6)
4. 90.2(87.8)
1. Poland
2. 37.1(35.7)
3. 85.2(85.2)
4. 73.2(56.1)
1. Saudi Arabia
2. 34.3(34.3)
3. 59.0(59.0)
4. 43.9(43.9)
1. Syria
2. 24.3 (30.0)
3. 34.4(34.4)
4. 4.9(4.9)
1. Turkey
2. 22.9 (24.3)
3. 82.0 (82.0)
4. 65.9 (63.4)
Nations are listed in the order of scoring rate, from highest to lowest, in the area of nuclear disarmament. Figures in parentheses show scores from the last report. The asterix (*) indicates the estimated number of nuclear warheads as of January 2016. (Source: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute)
(Originally published on April 8, 2017)
