Japan should heed global concerns on its plan for wastewater

In July 2022, the Nuclear Regulation Authority of Japan officially endorsed the discharge of contaminated radioactive wastewater by Tokyo Electric Power Co from its wrecked Fukushima nuclear plant into the Pacific Ocean starting this year.

The date is approaching when the world will pay too high a price for Japan's irresponsible act. The decision by the government of Prime Minister Fumio Kishida to discharge the radioactive water from the nuclear plant into the ocean despite fierce opposition from home and abroad has undone decades of efforts in creating a global image of a leading environmental nation.

During the past several decades, Japan has made strenuous efforts to build itself into "a leading environmental nation" with a first-mover advantage, and has used the label in promoting its domestically produced agricultural, forestry and fishery products. Furthermore, with such measures as making fine products, deep processing and brand marketing, Japan has promoted its agricultural, forestry and fishery products to take the high-end approach, gradually becoming synonymous with high-end, expensive and premium farm produce.

However, in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, farm produce from the eight prefectures surrounding the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant — Aomori, Iwate, Miyagi, Fukushima, Ibaraki, Tochigi, Gunma and Chiba — has been rejected by domestic and overseas markets over food safety concerns. In particular, the fisheries and agriculture sectors in Fukushima Prefecture, which has long been famous for its agriculture, suffered drastically from the nuclear accident and were almost destroyed.

To this end, over the past more than 10 years, the Japanese government has carried out such activities as decontamination, land rehabilitation, test fishing and food safety tests. In addition, Japanese prime ministers have gone all out to promote food produced in Fukushima.

Currently, the price squeeze of Fukushima farm produce, because of reputational damage from radiation stigma, has been substantially improved. However, the Kishida government's decision to dump the radioactive water into the ocean regardless of strong opposition both at home and abroad could once again deal a heavy blow to Japan's agricultural, forestry and fishery products.

Japan's neighboring countries have expressed strong opposition to the discharge of toxic water into the Pacific Ocean, while some countries that always emphasize that environmental protection comes first have turned a deaf ear to Japan's irresponsible act.

The United States has lifted all of its restrictions on imports of food products from Japan established in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster, including rice and beef from Fukushima. In the meantime, the US Food and Drug Administration has strengthened supervision of food imports from Japan to protect domestic consumers from radioactive harm. The US-Japan alliance on global environmental issues has further torn off its "fig leaf" and showcased its hypocrisy on the environment.

If Japan eventually executes long-term dumping of large amounts of nuclear-contaminated water into the marine ecological system, it will inevitably exact an adverse impact on the ecological environment in the Pacific Ocean and on human health. All countries concerned must join hands to demand that Japan provide such information as the truth about the discharge and the real efficiency data of the purification equipment.

Furthermore, they should support Pacific countries and their peoples in filing lawsuits against the Japanese government and Tokyo Electric Power Co.

We hope that the Japanese government could truly act from the perspective of a community with a shared future for humanity, and reformulate a science-based, open, transparent, safe and responsible plan to properly respond to global concerns.

Wu Huaizhong is deputy director and a research fellow at the Institute of Japanese Studies of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Chen Xiang is an associate research fellow at the institute. The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.