Chapter 1. Nuclear Issues in East Asia: Implications for Peace and Stability
Introduction
Nuclear technology is inherently political due to its military utility and energy production capabilities. This report aims to examine nuclear issues and the implications of nuclear-induced accidents on regional stability and security in East Asia. Nuclear technology can give rise to political issues related to domestic governance and international stability.
Economically, it has provided a reliable energy supply. As a controversial technology, nuclear power has led to diverse challenges. However, nuclear technology can bring about detrimental and severe disasters that contaminate the environment over a long period of time. The Chernobyl Accident is the most well-known nuclear-related disaster in the world. This accident has not only polluted the environment but also influenced nuclear energy policies in Europe. In East Asia, there was a similar nuclear disaster, the Fukushima nuclear accident, which happened in Japan in 2011 because of the Tohoku earthquake and ensuing tsunami. The nuclear power plants collapsed due to the earthquake and subsequent tsunami. While nuclear technology has shaped the political, economic, and security landscape of East Asia, its potential dangers tend to be overlooked. East Asia is a region renowned for dealing with numerous nuclear threats. However, most East Asian countries have developed nuclear technology both for political and economic purposes. South Korea and Japan, being resource-scarce, depend on nuclear energy for their energy supply. More importantly, nuclear issues in East Asia are closely aligned with peace and stability at the international level.
1. Historical Events and Their Implications on Nuclear Issues in East Asia
In East Asia, several historical events have shaped understandings of nuclear energy and power, which eventually led to the construction of a large number of nuclear power plants. Firstly, the two atomic bombings in Japan in 1945 demonstrated the mighty power of nuclear technology in this region. For Koreans, nuclear power was considered a powerful tool that brought about their independence (Jasanoff and Kim, 2009). Secondly, Great Power rivalries during the Cold War divided the region and triggered the Korean War. The outbreak of the Korean War was one of the most remarkable events in East Asian history and continues to inflame military tensions among East Asian nations. The existence of North Korea is a product of complex historical legacies in Northeast Asia, and its nuclear threats are the most salient element in Northeast Asian security. North Korea has been developing its own nuclear weapons and missiles. The nuclear threat from North Korea gave birth to narratives and rhetoric that stressed the necessity of nuclear power and energy in East Asia.
1.1. Perceptions of Nuclear Technology in East Asia
In East Asia, various nations see science and technology as a means to gain respect in international society and to boost the economy. Among different types of technologies, nuclear technology has been controversial due to its potential dangers, including radioactive exposures and leaks. However, perceptions of nuclear technology in East Asia are different from those in the Western world. In the 1980s, nuclear proliferation and safety concerns were widespread in the West, encouraging Western countries to abandon nuclear power (Kim, S.C. and Chung(Chung et al., 2021), 2018). In contrast, East Asia views nuclear technology as an asset. This perspective is closely associated with historical events that changed international relations in East Asia. For example, a positive understanding of nuclear power persists in South Korea as Koreans believe that nuclear power brought independence to the Korean peninsula (Jasanoff and Kim, 2009). The two atomic bombings in Japan in 1945 brought about immediate political impacts in East Asia. The dropping of atomic bombs forced Japan to surrender while simultaneously liberating Korea from Japanese colonial rule that lasted for thirty-six years (Hong, 2011). Ironically, this event allowed South Korean politicians to perceive nuclear power as a mighty tool that guarantees sovereignty and national security (Jasanoff and Kim, 2009). Moreover, the two oil shocks in the 1970s allowed East Asian countries to view nuclear energy as an important source of electricity (Kim, S.C. and Chung, 2018). These events shaped a positive outlook towards nuclear technology in East Asia. Though criticism of nuclear power and the fear of nuclear waste exists, the need to develop and maintain nuclear technology remains deeply entrenched in this region.
1.2. Cold War Dynamics in East Asia
International politics have influenced the perception of nuclear power in East Asia as well. The case of the Korean peninsula demonstrates how nuclear technology has been championed due to the international security order in East Asia. The US has influenced the East Asian security landscape in the Cold War and in the post-Cold War era. The US signed atomic energy cooperation agreements with its allies such as Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, following President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s speech on atoms for peace in December 1953 at the United Nations General Assembly (Kim, S.C. and Chung, 2018). US allies relied on nuclear power after promoting nuclear power as their major state-sponsored industry for their industrialisation and economic development (ibid.). However, the unipolar system has been weakened as the US has been losing its superpower status since the end of the Cold War, while great powers at the regional level have increased their political and economic clout in the region (Buzan, 2011). The nuclear programme in North Korea and US influence in Northeast Asia are products of regional history, which reproduces military tensions and becomes the main obstacle to promoting security cooperation. These security issues lead to a low level of security cooperation in East Asia (Wang and Stevens, 2021). However, the US has economically and militarily challenged East Asian regional cooperation (Hartley and Newman, 2019). Moreover, the US has not found an effective solution to resolve nuclear threats in East Asia (ibid.). In the 1970s, Washington reduced the number of American troops in South Korea following the Nixon Doctrine (Lim, 2019). This situation encouraged South Korea to begin a nuclear programme for national security without informing the United States (ibid.). Nuclear technology has been portrayed as an important tool for national security in South Korea ever since the Cold War era, while also becoming a means to secure political power in North Korea.
1.3. Nuclear Power and Security Order in East Asia
International relations in East Asia are a product of the Cold War era. The present security order in East Asia is closely related to the past security order. As discussed in the preceding section, nuclear technology has also greatly impacted the development of East Asia’s security order. Firstly, the two atomic bombings made Japan surrender while bringing about independence in the Korean peninsula. Secondly, the Cold War caused a hot war which divided the Korean peninsula in two due to the fierce rivalry between the US and Soviet Union. The existence of North Korea is proof that historical legacies still shape regional security dynamics in Northeast Asia. Moreover, China has increasingly maintained economic and political relations with North Korea since 2010 despite US sanctions on North Korea (Ross, 2013). This situation is not completely different from the security order in East Asia during the Cold War era.
The constant nuclear threat from North Korea has raised diverse issues in East Asia. North Korea has continuously developed nuclear power and weapons while disrupting Northeast Asian security since the first nuclear crisis of 1994 (Bechtol, 2017). North Korea’s nuclear threat affects South Korea’s attitudes to nuclear armament and nuclear technology. Whenever nuclear weapon tests by North Korea occur, the Korean public clamours for nuclear re-armament or is in favour of bringing nuclear weapons in from the United States (Lim, 2019). Despite the end of the Cold War, its legacy still resonates in East Asia. The existence of two Koreas clearly demonstrates the impact of the Cold War in this region. Frequent nuclear weapon tests suggest that South Korea’s positive outlook on nuclear technology will not go away anytime soon.
2. Economic Impacts of Nuclear Technology in East Asia
Nuclear technology has generally been described as a critical technology for economic development in East Asia. In South Korea, nuclear power has long been viewed as a crucial technology to fulfil ambitions for self-sufficiency in energy production and rapid industrialisation (Bak, 2014). This perspective was created and reinforced by government policies and remains deeply ingrained in South Korean society. To achieve rapid economic growth and industrialisation, scientific and technological risks have been overlooked in South Korea. In terms of nuclear power, the South Korean government tends to only highlight the benefits of developing nuclear technology. To focus on its economic development, the South Korean government framed failure to achieve rapid economic development as the most important risk facing the country (Kim, S.-H., 2015). In other words, nuclear technology gained significant public support for economic development in South Korea, which demonstrates that technology can be used as political leverage.
2.1. Nuclear Technology and Economic Considerations
Resource shortages are a major concern for states determined to build their industries and to boost their economies. For example, East Asian countries have focused on nuclear energy to overcome this problem, viewing it as an alternative and reliable source of energy. Energy scarcity has been used as a justification for developing and maintaining nuclear technology in East Asia. China, South Korea, and Japan have been keen to use nuclear energy. In many countries, nuclear energy was a key element in their energy policies (Fraser and Aldrich, 2019). In terms of economic benefits, nuclear energy allows energy-importing countries to save money. In East Asia, for instance, South Korea and Japan lack sufficient resources to produce energy. These countries are heavily reliant on nuclear energy which can cut down the cost of importing energy resources. South Korea has viewed nuclear technology as a reliable source of electricity. Nuclear energy is considered a sovereign energy with the capacity to produce energy for the population and contribute to the economy in Japan (Rieu, 2013). Moreover, Japan has promoted a nuclear energy policy since the mid-1960s, which largely remains unchanged although different events had happened in relation to Japan’s national policy for nuclear energy (Hasegawa, 2014). Moreover, these countries are exporters of nuclear reactors (Kim, S.C. and Chung, 2018). Nuclear energy is insulated from external and international events, such as the oil shock in the 1970s. The oil shock of the 1970s significantly affected energy security in East Asia, and nuclear energy became popular as a result, as it was considered a sustainable and reliable source of electricity (Kim, S.C. and Chung, 2018). For countries with limited resources, nuclear energy can reduce their expenses on importing oil or fossil fuels from overseas.
3. Nuclear-Related Accidents and Regional Implications
Despite its political and economic utility, nuclear energy has the potential to cause immense harm due to nuclear waste facilities, radioactive contamination, and exposure. These dangers have been controversial across the world, and several nuclear-induced accidents happened in the past, bringing about detrimental impacts on the environment. One of the most infamous nuclear accidents took place in Chernobyl in 1986. This incident adversely affected European countries such as Ukraine, Belarus and Russia (Jensen, 2015). In addition, the debate on nuclear power resurfaced in Europe, and nuclear phase-out re-emerged as an important issue in Sweden (ibid.). Likewise, a similar nuclear accident occurred in Japan due to the earthquake and the ensuing tsunami. The 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami damaged nuclear power plants in Fukushima. This disaster led to environmental degradation due to nuclear contamination and caused severe socio-political issues in Japan over the following years as well. While concerns about nuclear power plants were raised among the public in Japan and South Korea, both countries were less likely to stop using nuclear energy. The Japanese government immediately halted the use of nuclear power plants after the disaster. In South Korea, President Lee Myung-Bak emphasised the safety of Korean nuclear technology (Hong, 2011). Japan’s temporary anti-nuclear stance faded relatively quickly after the Fukushima disaster. This demonstrates that nuclear technology is still very important to many East Asian nations.
3.1. Fukushima Disaster in 2011 and Its Impacts in East Asia
The Fukushima disaster marked a turning point in energy policy and nuclear energy perception both in Japan and other East Asian countries due to its massive impacts on the environment. A magnitude 9 earthquake triggered a tsunami that hit the northeastern coast of Japan in 2011 (Jorant, 2011). This natural disaster caused radioactive contamination in Japan. The earthquake and ensuing tsunami were recorded as the most significant disaster in Japan since the Second World War and the third largest disaster in modern Japanese history (Hasegawa, 2012). The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power reactors completely collapsed after being hit by the earthquake and tsunami. The reactor was not located high enough above sea level, while the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plants were not prepared for nuclear accidents (Falk, 2013). The meltdown of the nuclear power reactors in Fukushima was a major problem, releasing radioactive materials and became one of the most serious technical and natural disasters in the world (Felt, 2017). The Fukushima disaster became an important turning point in Japanese society and Japan’s overall energy policy.
The Fukushima disaster has changed Japanese society and raised awareness about the potential risks of nuclear accidents in East Asia. The Japanese government considers nuclear energy as a crucial power source, but dependence on nuclear energy has reduced significantly (Suzuki, 2019). The shutdown of nuclear power plants in Fukushima was inevitable after the earthquake and tsunami. This situation adversely affected Japan’s energy supply. Moreover, the Japanese government implemented stress tests for other nuclear reactors, and 54 nuclear reactors were shut down (Hayashi and Hughes, 2013). As a resource-poor country and an energy importer, Japan faced a major energy supply shortage due to its lack of nuclear power plants. As nuclear energy is a major source of electricity, Japan needed to import more fossil fuels such as liquefied natural gas to make up for the loss of energy from nuclear power plants (Vivoda and Graetz, 2015). Japan’s increased demand for fossil fuels led to global energy insecurity, particularly in Asia where the price of fossil fuels fluctuated frequently due to political unrest in the Middle East and North Africa and growing needs from emerging market economies (Hayashi and Hughes, 2013).
More importantly, the loss of public trust in nuclear power emerged in the aftermath of Fukushima disaster in Japan. This loss of public trust and dramatic change in public perceptions about nuclear power are a result of the Fukushima disaster (Suzuki, 2019). Despite scepticism and concerns about nuclear power, Japanese authorities actively promoted the benefits of nuclear power and constantly overlooked safety issues in nuclear power plants (Hara, 2013). Before the Fukushima disaster, protests against nuclear power plants took place at the headquarters of electric power companies in several major cities like Sapporo, Sendai, and Fukuoka. Each of these protests were suppressed (Hasegawa, 2014). Japanese citizens were unable to voice their doubts about the safety of nuclear power. However, the Fukushima disaster allowed Japanese citizens to express their concerns on nuclear power more freely. Public debates on the future of nuclear power emerged in the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster (Vivoda and Graetz, 2015). Responses to the Fukushima disaster raised many questions and became the main reason why nuclear power lost public trust in Japan. Disappointment with the Tokyo Electric Power Company and the Japanese government fuelled public anxiety about nuclear power, fears of radioactive contamination, and suspicions about the nuclear industry (Hindmarsh, 2013). Therefore, the role of civil society has been significant in Japan, as activists actively engage with anti-nuclear movements and promote nuclear phase-out policies (Kim, S.C. and Chung, 2018).
The Fukushima disaster also had impact on neighbouring countries like China, South Korea, and Taiwan (Hindmarsh, 2013). In South Korea, anxieties about nuclear safety increased after the Fukushima disaster in Japan (Lim, 2019). The Fukushima disaster also changed China’s nuclear power policy. The Chinese had previously deepened their reliance on nuclear power to bolster their energy supplies, but Beijing suspended the construction of nuclear power plants for half a year after the disaster (Fraser and Aldrich, 2019; Aldrich, 2013). Additionally, East Asia is well-known for its high number of nuclear power plants. Bar North Korea, nuclear power plants in China, South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan rank among the largest in the world (Park, 2022). Therefore, East Asian countries cannot afford to ignore the risk of nuclear accidents, and the Fukushima disaster has raised awareness about these dangers like never before.
Conclusion: Nuclear Technology, Peace and Stability in East Asia
Unresolved historical and territorial disputes are roadblocks to peace and stability in East Asia, and nuclear power has been a trigger for regional conflicts. Politically, East Asian nations have been on edge since the Cold War era, despite globalisation and economic interdependence (Hahm and Heo, 2019). Rivalries have promoted an economic-security nexus that exacerbates interstate tensions in this region (Ravenhill, 2013). In East Asia, economic cooperation tends to be stained by security concerns.
This report analysed how nuclear technology is perceived in East Asia and how nuclear technology can affect regional stability and security. East Asian countries achieved their rapid economic development thanks to science and nuclear technology, particularly in South Korea and Japan. However, although these states use nuclear power for peaceful ends, nuclear power still has the potential to trigger conflicts among East Asian countries.
Despite the danger of nuclear accidents, East Asian countries tend to maintain their nuclear power plants (Park, 2022). This is an important point as East Asia’s international relations and history have shaped positive attitudes towards nuclear power. In short, the politicisation of science and technology has created a paradoxical situation in rhetoric rather than in practice (Cho, 2018). Political influences on science and technology may create contradictions in discussions, but these contradictions might not appear in their practical application. The case of South Korea clearly demonstrates how nuclear technology was positively perceived in light of Japanese colonialism and the Korean War. These events encouraged South Koreans to view nuclear power as a necessary tool for national survival. Nuclear power was seen as a new hope that would turn South Korea into a developed country (Jasanoff and Kim, 2009). Atomic bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki demonstrated the capabilities of advanced science and technology to South Korea. This led to high degrees of trust in science and technology within South Korean society. In Japan, nuclear energy has been portrayed as a sovereign energy that helps Japan’s economy (Rieu, 2013).
The Fukushima disaster is proof that East Asian nations need to cooperate with each other. Following this disaster, China, South Korea, and Japan organised the Korea-China-Japan nuclear safety Top Regulators’ Meeting (TRM), to share information on major nuclear safety issues (Park, 2022). However, this meeting has not addressed the transnational risks that nuclear power plants may pose in future (Cho, 2018). Moreover, the release of contaminated Fukushima water into the ocean has been a source of tension in East Asia. Japan’s release of Fukushima water raises very legitimate concerns about the radioactive contamination of the Pacific Ocean. If peace is to be maintained in East Asia, the use of nuclear power and its consequences should be carefully discussed among East Asian states.
References
Aldrich, D.P. 2013. Rethinking civil society–state relations in Japan after the Fukushima accident. Polity. 45(2), pp.249-264.
Bak, H.-J. 2014. The politics of technoscience in Korea: From state policy to social movement. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal. 8(2), pp.159-174.
Bechtol, B.E. 2017. North Korea’s Nuclear Weaponization Program: Background, context, and trends for the future. The Routledge Handbook of Asian Security Studies. Routledge, pp.38-49.
Buzan, B. 2011. A World Order Without Superpowers: Decentred Globalism. International relations (London). 25(1), pp.3-25.
Cho, E. 2018. 동북아에서 지역 원자력 협력의 필요성과 한국의 역할. JPI Research Series. 43, pp.321-332.
Chung, S., Kim, K.H., Park, Y. and Kim, H. 2021. A Site of Bounded Imaginaries: Local Narratives of Buan after Protests against a Nuclear Waste Repository. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal. 15(3), pp.354-376.
Falk, J. 2013. The Search for Energy Security after Fukushima Daiichi. Nuclear Disaster at Fukushima Daiichi: Social, Political and Environmental Issues. p154.
Felt, U. 2017. Living a real-world experiment: Post-Fukushima imaginaries and spatial practices of “containing the nuclear”. New Perspectives on Technology in Society. Routledge, pp.149-178.
Fraser, T. and Aldrich, D.P. 2019. East Asia’s Nuclear Policies Fukushima Effect or a Nuclear Renaissance?
Hara, T. 2013. 2 Social Shaping of Nuclear Safety. Nuclear disaster at Fukushima Daiichi: Social, political and environmental issues. p22.
Hartley, R. and Newman, E. 2019. Global and Regional Organisations. The SAGE Handbook of Asian Foreign Policy. p272.
Hasegawa, K. 2012. Facing nuclear risks: Lessons from the Fukushima nuclear disaster. International Journal of Japanese Sociology. 21(1), pp.84-91.
Hasegawa, K. 2014. The Fukushima nuclear accident and Japan’s civil society: Context, reactions, and policy impacts. International Sociology. 29(4), pp.283-301.
Hayashi, M. and Hughes, L. 2013. The Fukushima nuclear accident and its effect on global energy security. Energy policy. 59, pp.102-111.
Hindmarsh, R. 2013. Nuclear disaster at Fukushima Daiichi: Introducing the terrain. Nuclear Disaster at Fukushima Daiichi. Routledge, pp.1-21.
Hong, S. 2011. Where is the nuclear nation going? Hopes and fears over nuclear energy in South Korea after the Fukushima disaster. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal. 5(3), pp.409-415.
Jasanoff, S. and Kim, S.-H. 2009. Containing the atom: Sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea. Minerva. 47, pp.119-146.
Jensen, M. 2015. Political impact of the Fukushima Daiichi accident in Europe. Reflections on the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident. Springer, Cham, pp.123-128.
Jorant, C. 2011. The implications of Fukushima: the European perspective. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 67(4), pp.14-17.
Kim, S.-H. 2015. Social movements and contested sociotechnical imaginaries in South Korea. Dreamscapes of modernity: Sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power. pp.152-173.
Kim, S.C. and Chung, Y. 2018. Dynamics of nuclear power policy in the post-Fukushima era: interest structure and politicisation in Japan, Taiwan and Korea. Asian Studies Review. 42(1), pp.107-124.
Lim, E. 2019. South Korea’s nuclear dilemmas. Journal for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament. 2(1), pp.297-318.
Park, S.-H. 2022. An Empirical Comparative Study on International Cooperation in Nuclear Safety between Korea and Japan: Focusing on East Asian Nuclear Safety Cooperation. 일본학보. (130), pp.229-250.
Ravenhill, J. 2013. Economics and security in the Asia-Pacific region. The Pacific Review. 26(1), pp.1-15.
Rieu, A.-M. 2013. Thinking after Fukushima. Epistemic shift in social sciences. Asia Europe Journal. 11(1), pp.65-78.
Ross, R.S. 2013. US grand strategy, the rise of China, and US national security strategy for East Asia. Strategic Studies Quarterly. 7(2), pp.20-40.
Suzuki, T. 2019. Nuclear energy policy after the Fukushima nuclear accident: an analysis of “polarized debate” in Japan. Energy policy. pp.1-16.
Vivoda, V. and Graetz, G. 2015. Nuclear policy and regulation in Japan after Fukushima: Navigating the crisis. Journal of Contemporary Asia. 45(3), pp.490-509.
Wang, D. and Stevens, F.M. 2021. Why is there no Northeast Asian security architecture?–Assessing the strategic impediments to a stable East Asia. The Pacific Review. 34(4), pp.577-604.
