Nuclear policy causes small ripple in Japan

Press, 7 August 1985, Page 22

Nuclear policy causes small ripple in Japan

By

BRUCE ROSCOE

in Tokyo This month, as Japan and the world reflect on the birth of the nuclear age 40 years ago when the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were incinerated by nuclear explosion, New Zealand might also reflect on the impact its non-nuclear policy has had on Japan. If New Zealand’s nonnuclear policy was to impress any country, that country should have been Japan which, as the world's only victim of nuclear bombing, is uniquely qualified to assess the sense of non-nuclear policies. New Zealand's nonnuclear policy should have more than impressed Japan: there is every reason why it should have ignited a national debate, especially on the question of port call's by United States warships. Mysteriously, it has not; it has caused barely a ripple of public attention. Japan has not declared its support for New Zealand's policy. Nor has New Zealand sought Japan's support. But there is evidence that both countries have co-oper-ated to prevent the NewZealand policy from influencing Japanese public opinion. In a highly sensitive diplomatic move verbally requested by the Japanese Foreign Ministry, the New Zealand Government has deliberately discouraged debate in Japan on the nuclear question. Since the Labour Government came to power last

year, but more so since January when the United States put New Zealand's resolve to the test with a request for a port call by the U.S.S. Buchanan, NewZealand officials have maintained a cautious silence in Tokyo. They have declined each Japanese newspaper, television. and radio request for interviews or even information and they have also declined to address several Japanese peace activist organisations which sought information on the policy. This silence has extended to foreign news organisations in Japan, such is the strictness of the collaboration between the New Zealand and Japanese Governments. The inconsistency of the New Zealand Minister of Foreign Affairs permitting himself to argue for New Zealand's non-nuclear policy at venues such as an Oxford Union debate, while ordering his representative officials abroad to stay mute, is little more than irony. But the inconsistency has sent a message to Japan's powerful press that New Zealand's non-nuclear policy is above all a domestic policy designed exclusively for internal political consumption. Only the "Sankei" newspaper. a pro-Government daily with leanings to the Right, has taken a stand on New Zealand’s policy in terms of its bearing on Japan. “Sankei” described New Zealand as a “paradise located in the beautiful South Pacific.” After detailing the rift

between the United States and New Zealand over A.N.Z.U.S.. "Sankei” concluded: “The geopolitical situation of Japan is totally different from that of New Zealand. There is a mass of powerful (Soviet) nuclear forces right before our eyes, aiming at the centre of our country. Idealistic antinuclear movements ignoring this reality will only allow the other side to take advantage of us. Japan is not a paradise.” Only the "Asahi Shimbun”, a daily aligned with the Right but possessing Leftist pretentions, dared say: "It can be said that the actual state of (Japan’s) three non-nuclear principles which are being maintained as a national policy by the Japanese Government, is being questioned in connection with the strict nonnuclear policy of the Lange Administration.” Japan's non-nuclear principles (which forbid the manufacture, possession or introduction into Japan of nuclear weapons) were set out in a Parliamentary resolution in 1971. Their aim was to assure the public that the United States would remove its nuclear arsenal from Okinawa when the United States returned the island, which it had taken during World War 11, to Japan. Among other American authorities, a former American Ambassador to Japan and Japanese historian, Edwin Reischauer, has since said publicly that nucleararmed United States warships have called many times at Japanese ports. In any case, the biggest United States naval base in Japan, Yokosuka, serves as the home port of the United States aircraft carrier Midway. Japan has steadfastly avoided using the word “policy” to denote its nonnuclear “principles.” The principles themselves are

often equated with Article Nine of the Japanese Constitution. which says that Japan shall never maintain land, sea or air forces, or other war potential. Japan is highly conversant with nuclear technology. running a string of nuclear power stations throughout the country. It plans to build more. So’ if it has an aversion to nuclear capabilities, it is a commemorative aversion that has surfaced about this time each year for the last 40 years. The mayors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki hold their ceremonies. Japan's new lay Buddhist religions such as Soka Gakkai pour huge sums into highly publicised anti-nuclear movements that swell their membership. and the overriding theme of the commemorations is still that Japan was. above all. a victim of the last world war. Leaders within Japan's governing Liberal Democratic Party who are close to the Prime Minister. Mr Nakasone. do not support even the three non-nuclear principles. For example. Mr Masaaki Nakayama, who heads the party’s national campaign headquarters, says the principles are “dangerous." He personally favours scrapping them, and contends that privately so do many other Liberal Democrats. The party bases its foreign policy on a security treaty with the United States, and since the early 19705, at the request of the United States, has instructed the Government to embark on a series of military build-ups. These have been quite easy to sell to the public, which is often reminded that the Soviet Union still has not returned the four northern islands it took, and has since militarised, from Japan after World War IT.

At the grassroots level, a non-nuclear movement is spreading throughout Japan, and the Japanese Government wants to hold it in check. It has conveyed this point to the New Zealand Government, whose nonnuclear policy could not have been implemented at a more inconvenient time for Japan. In the last year, about 300 Japanese local bodies have declared their regions of administration to be "nuclear free." This growing movement was sparked partly by the action of Manchester, Britain, declaring itself a nuclear-free zone in 1982. but more fervently by a Japanese professor’s bestselling book, published in June, 1983. on anti-nuclear

campaigning. New Zealand’s nonnuclear policies must also be having a stimulative effect on the localised Japanese movement. New Zealand must show that such effect is by accident and coincidence, or face the charge of interference in Japan's internal affairs. Ironies, if not blatant contradictions. remain throughout the entire nuclear and defence question embroiling the United States, New Zealand, and Japan. Looming largest among these is the original design of A.N.Z.U.S. as a treaty to guard against the resurgence of Japanese militarism - a militarism which at this moment the United States is actively fuelling as a policy objective. If any nation has abrogated the spirit of A.N.Z.U.S., it is the United States. The reality, of course, is that military alliances adjust themselves to shifting balances of power. Perhaps that reality also can explain why it is that today a Japanese destroyer can freely sail through New Zealand waters and call at ports, while United States warships cannot.