Home Contact Us  
   

Nuclear - Articles

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
#2948, 17 August 2009
 
Japanís Non-nuclear Principles: Change in the Offing?
Tomoko Kiyota
Visiting Fellow, IDSA
e-mail: tomokokiyota@gmail.com
 

Japan has been bound by three cardinal non-nuclear principles since the 1960s – not to manufacture or possess nuclear weapons nor permit their introduction into Japanese territory. Right before the upcoming election to the Japanese House of Representatives however, suspicions which could pose a grave challenge to these principles, surfaced. Ryohei Murata, retired administrative vice-minister of foreign affairs, alleged that there is a secret paper which is an agreement between the United States and Japan allowing the former to introduce its nuclear weapons into the latter’s territory without advance permission. While the US has already admitted to the existence of such an agreement, successive Japanese governments, led by the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), have consistently denied the fact. However, now, with the possibility that the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), the biggest opposition party, might win the election, there is a good chance that the truth of the matter might come to light, especially with the DPJ committing itself to investigating the secret agreement.
 
Since the Second World War, the Japanese government has been confronted with a dilemma. While it has been on a mission to promote global nuclear disarmament, it also faces the threat from the nuclear weapons of its neighbors. Additionally, the three principles also present an important paradox. The principles have formed gradually, over time, starting from the 1950s and became ‘Kokuze’ (national promise) during the Sato administration in 1967. However, since the Cold War era, Japan has served as among the most important bases for the US. Moreover, the Japanese government realized the importance of the US nuclear umbrella after the Chinese nuclear test. On the important question of whether or not American naval ships carry nuclear weapons, the US answered in the affirmative in the 1970s itself, especially since the meaning of ‘introduction’ according to the US was different from the understanding shared by the Japanese. To the former, it meant deploying nuclear weapons ‘on land’ and thus, carrying these weapons on American naval ships did not seem problematic.
 
On the contrary, for a long time, successive Japanese governments have answered in the negative because its citizens have been opposed to the introduction of nuclear weapons not only on land, but also in Japanese ports and territorial waters. Successive Japanese governments have maintained the pretext that ’Washington and Tokyo have an agreement that requires the US to consult Japan in case it wishes to introduce a nuclear weapon into Japan’s territory. And since Washington has never consulted Tokyo, it means that the US navy never introduced such weapons’. If Japan were to admit to the fact, Tokyo would need to either change the three principles or reject US attempts to introduce nuclear weapons. Thus, the policy of successive governments has been to ‘neither confirm nor deny’.
 
This question has surfaced yet again before Japan’s general election scheduled for August-end. While Ryohei Murata’s allegation has been dismissed by the LDP, the DPJ’s leader, Yukio Hatoyama, is reported to have said that ’if [the DPJ] wins the election, [it] will disclose the [secret] paper’. He added that there was a ‘need to conclude this problem with an open debate’.
 
However, Hatoyama’s commitment to the three non-nuclear principles appears to be wavering. On 14 July he emphasized the importance of the US nuclear umbrella for Japan to protect itself against North Korea. However, as soon as he realized that his remark had been taken to mean that he intended to change the non-nuclear principles, he was quick to deny the previous remark and said, “the principles are/will be maintained in the near future”. He further stated, “there is no need for the US to introduce its nuclear weapons to Japan”. On 4 August he told reporters, “the non-nuclear principles were like Kokuze. If it was a law, it could be amended easily”. Again, on 9 August, in front of a gathering of the victims of US’ nuclear bombing, he said, “there is a way to change the principles to law”. Such an unclear policy has, of course, been criticized by the LDP and media.
 
Although there is widespread speculation that the DPJ is likely to win this election, there seems little possibility of a change in Japan’s nuclear stance since the DPJ’s nuclear policy is almost the same as LDP’s. The DPJ remains unequivocally opposed to the possession of nuclear weapons. Further, its 2009 manifesto states that its nuclear policy will be geared to “take the lead to eradicate nuclear weapons” and establish a nuclear-free zone in Northeast Asia. Even if the DPJ were to investigate whether the US has introduced the weapons, and change the three non-nuclear principles to two non-nuclear principles, nothing will change. That will only be a linguistic change, not factual. Irrespective of who wins the election, the new Japanese government will not refuse the US nuclear umbrella. Moreover, it is possible that the new government would be dissolved before it can fully implement its manifesto, since short-lived governments have become a feature of Japanese politics.

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
IPCS Columnists
Af-Pak Diary
D Suba Chandran
Resetting Kabul-Islamabad Relations: Three Key Issues
Can Pakistan Reset its Relations with Afghanistan?
The New Afghanistan: Four Major Challenges for President Ghani
Big Picture
Prof Varun Sahni
Understanding Democracy and Diversity in J&K
When Xi Met Modi: Juxtaposing China and India
Pakistan?s Tactical Nuclear Weapons: The Inevitability of Instability

Dateline Colombo

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera.
Sri Lanka: Moving Towards a Higher Collective Outcome
The Importance of Electing the Best to our Nation's Parliament
Sri Lanka: Toward a Diaspora Re-Engagement Plan
Dateline Islamabad
Salma Malik
Pakistan's Hurt Locker: What Next?
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
India-Pakistan Relations in 2015: Through a Looking Glass
 
Dhaka Discourse
Prof Delwar Hossain
IPCS Forecast: Bangladesh in 2015
18th SAARC Summit: A Perspective from Bangladesh
Bangladesh in Global Forums: Diplomacy vs. Domestic Politics
Eagle Eye
Prof Chintamani Mahapatra
India-US: Significance of the Second Modi-Obama Meet
Has President Obama Turned Lame Duck?
Modi-Obama Summit: Criticism for Criticism?s Sake?

East Asia Compass
Dr Sandip Mishra
India-Japan-US Trilateral: India?s Policy for the Indo-Pacific
China-South Korea Ties: Implications for the US Pivot to Asia
Many ?Pivots to Asia?: What Does It Mean For Regional Stability?
Himalayan Frontier
Pramod Jaiswal
Nepal?s New Constitution: Instrument towards Peace or Catalyst to Conflict?
IPCS Forecast: Nepal in 2015
Constitution-making: Will Nepal Miss its Second Deadline?

Indo-Pacific
Prof Shankari Sundararaman
IPCS Forecast: Southeast Asia in 2015
Indonesia's Pacific Identity: What Jakarta Must Do in West Papua
Modi in Myanmar: From ?Look East? to ?Act East?
Indus-tan
Sushant Sareen
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
Islamic State: Prospects in Pakistan
Pakistan: The Futility of Internationalising Kashmir

Looking East
Wasbir Hussain
Myanmar in New Delhi's Naga Riddle
China: ?Peaceful? Display of Military Might
Naga Peace Accord: Need to Reserve Euphoria
Maritime Matters
Vijay Sakhuja
Indian Ocean: Modi on a Maritime Pilgrimage
Indian Ocean: Exploring Maritime Domain Awareness
IPCS Forecast: The Indian Ocean in 2015

Nuke Street
Amb Sheelkant Sharma
US-Russia and Global Nuclear Security: Under a Frosty Spell?
India's Nuclear Capable Cruise Missile: The Nirbhay Test
India-Australia Nuclear Agreement: Bespeaking of a New Age
Red Affairs
Bibhu Prasad
Countering Left Wing Extremism: Failures within Successes
Return of the Native: CPI-Maoist in Kerala
The Rising Civilian Costs of the State-Vs-Extremists Conflict

Regional Economy
Amita Batra
India and the APEC
IPCS Forecast: South Asian Regional Integration
South Asia: Rupee Regionalisation and Intra-regional Trade Enhancement
South Asian Dialectic
PR Chari
Resuming the Indo-Pak Dialogue: Evolving a New Focus
Defence Management in India: An Agenda for Parrikar
Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan: Implications for Asian Security

Spotlight West Asia
Amb Ranjit Gupta
Prime Minister Modi Finally Begins His Interaction with West Asia*
A Potential Indian Role in West Asia?
US-GCC Summit: More Hype than Substance
Strategic Space
Manpreet Sethi
India-Russia Nuclear Vision Statement: See that it Delivers
Global Nuclear Disarmament: The Humanitarian Consequences Route
Nasr: Dangers of Pakistan's Short Range Ballistic Missile

The Strategist
Vice Admiral Vijay Shankar
Jihadi Aggression and Nuclear Deterrence
The Blight of Ambiguity
Falun Gong: The Fear Within


OTHER REGULAR contributors
Gurmeet Kanwal
Harun ur Rashid
N Manoharan
Wasbir Hussain
Rana Banerji
N Manoharan

Ruhee Neog
Teshu Singh
Aparupa Bhattacherjee
Roomana Hukil
Aparupa Bhattacherjee


 

Browse by Publications

Commentaries 
Issue Briefs 
Special Reports 
Research Papers 
Seminar Reports 
Conference Reports 

Browse by Region/Countries

East Asia 
South Asia 
Southeast Asia 
US & South Asia 
China 
Myanmar 
Afghanistan 
Iran 
Pakistan 
India 
J&K  

Browse by Issues

India & the world  
Indo-Pak 
Military 
Terrorism 
Naxalite Violence 
Nuclear 
Suicide Terrorism 
Peace & Conflict Database 
Article by same Author
Assessing Japan-India Relations: A Japanese Perspective

India-Japan Relations: Strategic Alliance not Sideshow Required

Playing at Hide-and-Seek: Submarines in Asian Navies

Look South Policy? Japan's Approach to India in the 21st Century

ADD TO:
Blink
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Google
Simpy
Spurl
Y! MyWeb
Facebook
 
Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
Year 2017
 January  February  March  April  May  June  July  August  September  October  November  December
 2016  2015  2014  2013  2012  2011  2010  2009
 2008  2007  2006  2005  2004  2003  2002  2001
 2000  1999  1998  1997
 
 

The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) is the premier South Asian think tank which conducts independent research on and provides an in depth analysis of conventional and non-conventional issues related to national and South Asian security including nuclear issues, disarmament, non-proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, the war on terrorism, counter terrorism , strategies security sector reforms, and armed conflict and peace processes in the region.

For those in South Asia and elsewhere, the IPCS website provides a comprehensive analysis of the happenings within India with a special focus on Jammu and Kashmir and Naxalite Violence. Our research promotes greater understanding of India's foreign policy especially India-China relations, India's relations with SAARC countries and South East Asia.

Through close interaction with leading strategic thinkers, former members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Foreign Service and the three wings of the Armed Forces - the Indian Army, Indian Navy, and Indian Air Force, - the academic community as well as the media, the IPCS has contributed considerably to the strategic discourse in India.

 
Subscribe to Newswire | Site Map
18, Link Road, Jungpura Extension, New Delhi 110014, INDIA.

Tel: 91-11-4100-1902    Email: officemail@ipcs.org

© Copyright 2017, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.