Toxic move radiates outrage

Japan’s plan to dump radioactive wastewater has fuelled anger among its neighbours, environmental groups and people in the Pacific Islands.

MONDAY marked the 35th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster, regarded as the worst nuclear accident in history. But some scientists contend that the damage caused by an earthquake and tsunami to Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant 10 years ago was equally severe.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) classified both as “Level 7” nuclear disasters, as they caused massive health and environmental destruction.

The Chernobyl calamity, which killed 30,000 people within two weeks, was caused by the flawed reactor design and operation by poorly trained personnel. The explosion at the plant, 110km from Kiev in Ukraine, shattered the building and spewed 5% of the radioactive reactor core, dispersing the toxicity to many parts of Europe.

The Soviet authorities, in control back then, evacuated the nearby town of Pripyat but did not notify the two million residents of Kiev about the danger. It was only after high levels of radiation were detected in Sweden that the world found out about the disaster.

The 9.1 magnitude Tohoku earthquake and 14m high tsunami killed almost 20,000 people and forced 160,000 to be evacuated. However, the immediate environmental impact of the nuclear accident at Fukushima, which caused three nuclear meltdowns and several hydrogen explosions on March 11,2011, was less obvious.

Much of Fukushima’s radiation was released into the Pacific Ocean, but the contaminated site continues to generate tonnes of radioactive water.

To prevent remaining reactor cores from melting, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco) has been pumping 180 metric tonnes of cooling water through the site daily. The wastewater is stored in more than 1,000 tanks and filtered to remove most of the irradiated material, except for tritium – a radioactive isotope of hydrogen that is considered hazardous to human health in large amounts.

Two weeks ago, Japan announced that it would release 1.13 million metric tonnes of contaminated wastewater into the ocean from 2023, sparking opposition from the Japanese public and outrage from global environmental groups.

It has also raised protests from neighbouring countries – China, South Korea, Taiwan and Russia – and member nations of the Pacific Island Forum over the risks to human health and marine life.

Kazue Suzuki of Greenpeace Japan said the Japanese government had taken the wholly unjustified decision to deliberately contaminate the Pacific Ocean with radioactive wastes.

“It has discounted the radiation risks and turned its back on the clear evidence that sufficient storage capacity is available on the nuclear site as well as in surrounding districts. Rather than using the best available technology to minimise radiation hazards by storing and processing the water over the long term, it opted for the cheapest option of dumping the water into the ocean, ” he said.

According to Suzuki, the majority of people in Fukushima and also Japan were opposed to discharging this radioactive wastewater into the Pacific while the federation of Japan Fisheries Cooperatives has also continued its total objection.

However, Japan received swift support from the United States, indicating that its geopolitical interests and closer strategic adherence outweigh environmental safety.

Imagine if China or Russia had announced plans to dump such a volume of radioactive wastewater into the ocean. All hell would have broken loose, and one can bet that the United States would have led the chorus of condemnation.

China has highlighted the United States’ collusion with Japan as yet another reflection of the double standards and hypocrisy of the so-called rules-based international order often touted by the superpower. No other major Western nation has come out in support of Japan so far.

The United States, which continues its ban on imports of farm and seafood products from the Fukushima region, claimed that Japan had been “transparent about its decision and appeared to have adopted an approach in accordance with globally accepted nuclear safety standards.”

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken tweeted: “We thank Japan for its transparent efforts in its decision to dispose of the treated water from the Fukushima Daiichi site.”

US climate envoy John Kerry said in South Korea last Sunday that America had confidence in the coordination efforts between Japan and the IAEA on releasing treated radioactive water.

South Korea had earlier criticised Japan’s move as a unilateral decision without offering a full explanation to the country geographically closest to Japan.

South Korea has also threatened legal action under international treaties. Controlling or banning the dumping of wastes into the sea comes under two accords – The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea adopted in 1982, and the Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter 1972 (also known as the London Convention and Protocol), signed in 1996.

Japan’s move has also set alarm bells ringing among island nations in the Pacific Ocean.

Pacific Islands Forum secretary-general Meg Taylor urged Japan to take all the appropriate measures within its territory, jurisdiction or control to prevent significant transboundary harm to the territories of the Pacific as required under the international law, and as highlighted by the Treaty of Rarotonga, also known as the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty.

Globally, netizens have expressed their anger and outrage against Japan for its decision, based on an exclusive survey posted by Xinhua news agency on its Twitter account last week. A total of 1,121 Twitter users took part in the single-choice survey which lasted for 24 hours.

Of the respondents, 65.7% voted “strongly against” and 13.2% voted “against.” Only 11.2% voted “support” while 9.8% had no comments.

Their concerns mainly focused on the wastewater’s lasting harm to human and marine life, Japan’s “irresponsible” conduct and the collective silence of Western countries on the matter.

Media consultant M. Veera Pandiyan likes this observation by Noam Chomsky: “There are two problems for our species’ survival – nuclear war and environmental catastrophe – and we’re hurtling towards them. Knowingly.” The views expressed here are the writer’s own.