Time for Japan to Get Its Own Nuclear Weapons?

[Carlosa]

Time for Japan to Get Its Own Nuclear Weapons?
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/time-japan-get-its-own-nuclear-weapons-11773

A TNI Video Interview: Are America's nuclear forces the right size? Should Japan consider acquiring its own nuclear weapons? We ask Yale Grand Strategy Fellow Christine M. Leah.

Christine M. Leah
December 3, 2014

America’s policy of opposing the proliferation of nuclear weapons needs to be more nuanced. What works for the United States in the Middle East may not in Asia. We do not want Iran or Saudi Arabia to get the bomb, but why not Australia, Japan, and South Korea? We are opposed to nuclear weapons because they are the great military equalizer, because some countries may let them slip into the hands of terrorists, and because we have significant advantage in precision conventional weapons. But our opposition to nuclear weapons in Asia means we are committed to a costly and risky conventional arms race with China over our ability to protect allies and partners lying nearer to China than to us and spread over a vast maritime theater.

None of our allies in Asia possess nuclear weapons. Instead, they are protected by what is called extended deterrence, our vaguely stated promise to use nuclear weapons in their defense if they are threatened by regional nuclear powers, China, North Korea and Russia. We promise, in essence, to trade Los Angeles for Tokyo, Washington for Canberra, and Seattle for Seoul, as preposterous as that might seem.

In order to avoid such a test of our will, the United States attempts to contain China in particular, but others as well, via a conventional force buildup—the so-called pivot to Asia. We station tens of thousands of troops in Japan and South Korea, and are expanding our presence in Guam, Australia, Singapore, and the Philippines. The conventional challenge is China’s ability to deny access for US forces in or near the island chains that are our Asian allies and that at the same time guard China. As China’s military grows the access issue becomes more problematic because of China’s ability to saturate the zone with missiles and aircraft that can threaten our military presence. The Air-Sea Battle operational concept, a costly networking of missile defenses, long-range-strike capabilities and naval forces has been the US military’s response. Billions are being spent by the United States to assure our Asian allies of our will to protect them conventionally as well with extended nuclear deterrence.

But there is a better, cheaper way to provide security in Asia. We should encourage our allies to acquire their own nuclear weapons. With nuclear weapons Australia, Japan and the others would have the capability to protect themselves from bullying. Nearly all of the allies are rich enough and technologically advanced enough to acquire and maintain nuclear forces. And those who are not—the Philippines, for example—lose much of their vulnerability once the focus shifts away from conventional defenses of the island chains. Nuclear weapons helped prevent the Cold War from turning hot. In Asia they can stop a conventional arms race that is forcing the United States to invest in weapons that can block the Chinese military on its doorstep, thousands of miles from our own. Let our Asian allies defend themselves with the weapon that is the great equalizer.

Tailored proliferation would not likely be destabilizing. Asia is not the Middle East. Japan, South Korea, Australia, and even Taiwan are strong democracies. They have stable political regimes. Government leaders are accountable to democratic institutions. Civilian control of the military is strong. And they don’t have a history of lobbing missiles at each other—they are much more risk-averse than Egypt, Syria or Iran. America’s allies would be responsible nuclear weapon states.

Image: Flickr/JGSDF/CC by 2.0

 

[Aepsilons]

Japan Has Enough Plutonium to Make Thousands of Nukes





So, I like electronic music. A lot. And there is no more important progenitor of electronica than Japanese composer Ryuichi Sakamoto. If you don't know Sakamoto, just go buy his 1978 solo effort, "Thousand Knives," then binge with "Yellow Magic Orchestra." It's OK; this column will still be here when you get back.

I bring up Sakamoto because he is also famous for his long opposition to Japan's construction of a giant industrial plant to separate plutonium from spent nuclear fuel in Rokkasho-mura. Sakamoto organized the "Stop Rokkasho" campaign, complete with a hip compilation CD and a snazzy website. That was in 2006. Six years later, in 2012, Sakamoto organized a "No Nukes" concert closed out by a reunited YMO. (Yes, that's a Kraftwerk cover!) Today, in 2014, the Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant is still not operating -- and Sakamoto is still protesting. (Well, he's taking a break for the moment while fighting cancer; here's to a speedy recovery.)

You might be wondering what's taking so long. The Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant was originally scheduled to begin operation in April 1996. Yet, on Oct. 30, Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd (JNFL), the operator of the Rokkasho plant, announced that the plant would not begin operations until at least March 2016. This is the twenty-first delay for the plant.

The latest hold-up is partially procedural. After the March 2011 nuclear disaster at Fukushima, where a tsunami resulted in meltdown at three nuclear reactors on site, Tokyo reorganized its nuclear regulatory process and increased standards. According to JNFL, the required safety evaluation is taking longer than expected. Maybe JNFL officials are also holding out for one more YMO reunion.

More likely, I suspect, is that JNFL is cautious in the face of ambivalence within Japanese society toward nuclear power, and Tokyo's commitment to reuse plutonium.

Many in Japan oppose Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's plans to restart the country's fleetofnuclear reactors shut down in the wake of Fukushima.

Many in Japanoppose Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's plans to restart the country's fleetofnuclear reactors shut down in the wake of Fukushima. You don't have to be the godfather of techno to wonder whether this is a good idea. I suspect that officials at JNFL may have decided this is not the moment to press the issue of starting operations at Rokkasho.
Japan's plutonium stockpile is a constant topic of discussion. Japan is the only non-nuclear weapons state that sits on tons of separated plutonium, which could be used to make nuclear weapons. Japan's neighbors never tire of pointing out Tokyo's stockpile of plutonium in the same breath as the empire's wartime past. I doubt much of this carping is sincere, but Japan's plutonium policies do create nonproliferation problems. Although I don't believe Japan would use its civil plutonium in a bomb program, the stockpile -- and Tokyo's repeated comments about the importance of reprocessing for energy security -- makes it much harder to convince countries with worse nonproliferation records (from Iran to South Korea) to restrain themselves. The Abe government should take advantage of the delay in operations at Rokkasho to think about setting a better example.

Japan's long-standing emphasis on nuclear energy reflects a national neuralgia about energy security. Japan has few traditional energy sources on its home islands. After all, Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor was a prelude to the seizure of the Dutch East Indies oil resources that Tokyo believed were essential to continue the war. Post-war Japan has been peaceful, but no less mindful of energy security issues. Today, Japan maintains the world's second-largest petroleum reserve after Uncle Sam. And, more importantly, Japan has invested heavily in nuclear energy. Since Japan has no uranium, it spent vast sums to develop the infrastructure to recover and reuse plutonium from spent fuel.

The massive $20 billion Rokkasho plant -- where Japan will separate plutonium from spent fuel -- is the centerpiece of this effort. Despite massive investments, however, Japan has never been able to develop the companion technology: a fast reactor that will consume the plutonium. Japan's fast reactor at Monju -- like others attempted in the United States, France, and elsewhere -- is so hot it is cooled by molten sodium. Molten sodium explodes on contact with water. Guess how well that works out?

Sodium-related nuclear accidents occurred in the United States in 1959 and again in 1964, the latter giving us the Reader's Digest book, We Almost Lost Detroit. (We also got a great Gil Scott Heron song out of it, which has been sampled a couple of times.) Monju itself experienced a serious accident in 1995; regulators recently discovered it sits on a fault line. Japanese authorities are now considering pulling the plug on Monju. Without it, Japan will have to mix the plutonium with uranium in something called mixed oxide fuel(MOX) that can be used in existing reactors after a bit of conversion. The problem is that Japan has not yet completed the MOX plant at Rokkasho and only a small number of Japanese nuclear power plants were converted before the Fukushima accident. Like the rest of Japan's nuclear power plants, these are not operating.

That means that once Japan begins operating Rokkasho, there is no place for the plutonium to go. Its stockpile of plutonium will grow. And grow. And grow.

Japan has more than 10 tons of separated plutonium -- enough for thousands of nuclear warheads.

Japan has more than 10 tons of separated plutonium -- enough for thousands of nuclear warheads. And don't let anyone tell you that plutonium produced in a commercial reactor can't be used in a nuclear weapon. The United States did it in 1962. Here is the definitive statementon the matter from the U.S. Department of Energy: a potential proliferating state "could build a nuclear weapon from reactor grade plutonium that would have an assured, reliable yield of one or a few kilotons (and a probable yield significantly higher than that)." One kiloton is wimpy by modern standards, but it will still "suck the paint off your house and give your family a permanent orange Afro."
Despite having nowhere for the plutonium to go, Japan has invested an enormous amount of money in Rokkasho. The local community in Aomori prefecture accepted the storage of Japan's spent nuclear fuel based on the expectation that the spent fuel would be separated and the waste shipped elsewhere for long-term disposal. But there is no repository at the moment. Japan's energy policy is screwed up, but things are usually screwed up for a reason. Tokyo started down this path in the 1970s when reprocessing was all the rage. (People had a lot of terrible ideas in the 1970s. Look how angry it made Mike Watt.) I understand how hard it would be for Japan to walk away from a $20 billion investment with no clear plan to store and dispose of the spent fuel.

But is it too much to ask Japan to set a better example?

I recently directed a project funded by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundationthat convened a group of Japanese and American experts to discuss the security implications of Japan's fuel cycle choices. Although the group did not tell the Japanese people what to do about Rokkasho or other nuclear sites, the members did note that the debate over fuel cycle choices in Japan has "given insufficient consideration to regional security implications of domestic decisions" about nuclear energy. The group also agreed that Japan is an important model for many other countries considering their own reprocessing programs.

Personally, I think that this most recent Rokkasho delay is an opportunity for Japan to reassess the security impact of reprocessing. If Japan's policymakers can't bring themselves to say that reprocessing is a mistake, maybe Japan could at least delay putting Rokkasho into operation until there is a plan to use the 10 tons of plutonium it has already accumulated? Tokyo already has a policy to not accumulate plutonium that does not have a specific end-use. Despite this, Japan's stockpile of plutonium continues to grow -- because that policy does not require Japan to actually use its existing plutonium before separating more. Japanese experts, like the former vice chairman of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission, Tatsujiro Suzuki, have written proposals urging Tokyo to stop piling up plutonium. Tokyo could require JNFL to demonstrate demand for plutonium prior to reprocessing. It could limit the size of the existing stockpile of plutonium and reduce the current stockpile before undertaking new spent fuel reprocessing, it could establish a formal requirement for alternatives to the current MOX approach.

Japan Has Enough Plutonium to Make Thousands of Nukes

 

[rockstar08]

its not a big deal to make N-Bombs for a country like Japan ... but its their Constitution which stop them ...
Right ? @Nihonjin1051

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

Batman: [taps the Bat-signal] Nice.

Jim Gordon: I couldn't find any mob bosses.

Batman: Well, Sergeant?

Jim Gordon: Oh, it's Lieutenant now. You really started something. Bent cops running scared, hope on the streets.

Batman: But?

Jim Gordon: We still haven't picked up Crane or half the inmates of Arkham that he freed.

Batman: We will. We *can* bring Gotham back.

Jim Gordon: What about escalation?

Batman: Escalation?

Jim Gordon: We start carrying semi-automatics, they buy automatics. We start wearing Kevlar, they buy armor piercing rounds.

Batman: And?

Jim Gordon: And, you're wearing a mask. Jumping off rooftops. Now, take this guy.

[pulling out a file]

Jim Gordon: Armed robbery, double homicide, has a taste for the theatrical, like you. Leaves a calling card.

[shows Batman a plastic evidence bag containing a Joker card]

Batman: I'll look into it.

[turns away and walks to the edge of the roof]

Jim Gordon: I never said thank you.

Batman: [looks back at Gordon] And you'll never have to.

 

[atatwolf]

Armament of Japan is key for its stability and survival. They have to protect their sea trade routs. At the moment US is doing this. But who says they will forever?

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

its not a big deal to make N-Bombs for a country like Japan ... but its their Constitution which stop them ...

The Japanese can probably make them in a matter of weeks. ~ Less than 3 months based on previous American Intelligence reports.

The Japanese Three Non-Nuclear Principles. Japan shall neither possess nor manufacture nuclear weapons, nor shall it permit their introduction into Japanese territory -wikipedia

The devastation of the use of Nuclear Weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki are engraved in the minds the Japanese. And those were crude nuclear weapons compared to today's technological advances in Nuclear Warfare.

Personally I think the Japanese are too nice. More than Sweden!

is greater than this --->

Armament of Japan is key for its stability and survival. They have to protect their sea trade routs. At the moment US is doing this. But who says they will forever?

Notice Singapore. They're just an Island. Yet the cooperative agreements they've made with America, EU, and China prohibit Indonesia or Malaysia from confronting it on any international level.

 

[Speeder 2]

Armament of Japan is key for its stability and survival. They have to protect their sea trade routs. At the moment US is doing this. But who says they will forever?

At the moment, not the US but UNSC 5, are doing this.

Of course, Japan can get its nukes. But before that happens, the US itself instead of China will be the first to nuke Japan. Naturally I don't expect people of your caliber can figure this out by themselves.

 

[terranMarine]

Japan developing nukes? Expect international community condemning Japan. Even Germany isn't in pursuit of developing weapons of mass destruction. I wonder what US would think when it has been accusing Iran threatening the world. US also forced Syria to give up their chemical weapons and invaded Iraq with the accusation of WMD. Now some people here are supporting Japan to develop WMD. What's next Turkey should get WMD, make bio/chemical weapons but Iraq/Iran/Syria can't have any of these?

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Less than 1% of chance, since soon Abe will step down as the Japanese PM, and they will put a more moderate politician to take his place.

So no, it is too late for Japan to acquire the nukes, since it will also take a lot of time before it is becoming operational.

 

[Zsari]

Nuclear weapon as a deterrence that only works when you have the ability to ensure their survival against a pre-emptive strike. Japan is too close to its enemies, too small and too narrow to prevent its nuclear arsenal from completely wiped out on an initial strike. The only way for Japan to achieve second strike capability is to develop a significant strategic nuclear submarine force, and that will take decades, while during that development period, it'll be like an invitation to be vaporized.

 

[SvenSvensonov]

Japan Has Enough Plutonium to Make Thousands of Nukes





So, I like electronic music. A lot. And there is no more important progenitor of electronica than Japanese composer Ryuichi Sakamoto. If you don't know Sakamoto, just go buy his 1978 solo effort, "Thousand Knives," then binge with "Yellow Magic Orchestra." It's OK; this column will still be here when you get back.

I bring up Sakamoto because he is also famous for his long opposition to Japan's construction of a giant industrial plant to separate plutonium from spent nuclear fuel in Rokkasho-mura. Sakamoto organized the "Stop Rokkasho" campaign, complete with a hip compilation CD and a snazzy website. That was in 2006. Six years later, in 2012, Sakamoto organized a "No Nukes" concert closed out by a reunited YMO. (Yes, that's a Kraftwerk cover!) Today, in 2014, the Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant is still not operating -- and Sakamoto is still protesting. (Well, he's taking a break for the moment while fighting cancer; here's to a speedy recovery.)

You might be wondering what's taking so long. The Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant was originally scheduled to begin operation in April 1996. Yet, on Oct. 30, Japan Nuclear Fuel Ltd (JNFL), the operator of the Rokkasho plant, announced that the plant would not begin operations until at least March 2016. This is the twenty-first delay for the plant.

The latest hold-up is partially procedural. After the March 2011 nuclear disaster at Fukushima, where a tsunami resulted in meltdown at three nuclear reactors on site, Tokyo reorganized its nuclear regulatory process and increased standards. According to JNFL, the required safety evaluation is taking longer than expected. Maybe JNFL officials are also holding out for one more YMO reunion.

More likely, I suspect, is that JNFL is cautious in the face of ambivalence within Japanese society toward nuclear power, and Tokyo's commitment to reuse plutonium.

Many in Japan oppose Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's plans to restart the country's fleetofnuclear reactors shut down in the wake of Fukushima.

Many in Japanoppose Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's plans to restart the country's fleetofnuclear reactors shut down in the wake of Fukushima. You don't have to be the godfather of techno to wonder whether this is a good idea. I suspect that officials at JNFL may have decided this is not the moment to press the issue of starting operations at Rokkasho.
Japan's plutonium stockpile is a constant topic of discussion. Japan is the only non-nuclear weapons state that sits on tons of separated plutonium, which could be used to make nuclear weapons. Japan's neighbors never tire of pointing out Tokyo's stockpile of plutonium in the same breath as the empire's wartime past. I doubt much of this carping is sincere, but Japan's plutonium policies do create nonproliferation problems. Although I don't believe Japan would use its civil plutonium in a bomb program, the stockpile -- and Tokyo's repeated comments about the importance of reprocessing for energy security -- makes it much harder to convince countries with worse nonproliferation records (from Iran to South Korea) to restrain themselves. The Abe government should take advantage of the delay in operations at Rokkasho to think about setting a better example.

Japan's long-standing emphasis on nuclear energy reflects a national neuralgia about energy security. Japan has few traditional energy sources on its home islands. After all, Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor was a prelude to the seizure of the Dutch East Indies oil resources that Tokyo believed were essential to continue the war. Post-war Japan has been peaceful, but no less mindful of energy security issues. Today, Japan maintains the world's second-largest petroleum reserve after Uncle Sam. And, more importantly, Japan has invested heavily in nuclear energy. Since Japan has no uranium, it spent vast sums to develop the infrastructure to recover and reuse plutonium from spent fuel.

The massive $20 billion Rokkasho plant -- where Japan will separate plutonium from spent fuel -- is the centerpiece of this effort. Despite massive investments, however, Japan has never been able to develop the companion technology: a fast reactor that will consume the plutonium. Japan's fast reactor at Monju -- like others attempted in the United States, France, and elsewhere -- is so hot it is cooled by molten sodium. Molten sodium explodes on contact with water. Guess how well that works out?

Sodium-related nuclear accidents occurred in the United States in 1959 and again in 1964, the latter giving us the Reader's Digest book, We Almost Lost Detroit. (We also got a great Gil Scott Heron song out of it, which has been sampled a couple of times.) Monju itself experienced a serious accident in 1995; regulators recently discovered it sits on a fault line. Japanese authorities are now considering pulling the plug on Monju. Without it, Japan will have to mix the plutonium with uranium in something called mixed oxide fuel(MOX) that can be used in existing reactors after a bit of conversion. The problem is that Japan has not yet completed the MOX plant at Rokkasho and only a small number of Japanese nuclear power plants were converted before the Fukushima accident. Like the rest of Japan's nuclear power plants, these are not operating.

That means that once Japan begins operating Rokkasho, there is no place for the plutonium to go. Its stockpile of plutonium will grow. And grow. And grow.

Japan has more than 10 tons of separated plutonium -- enough for thousands of nuclear warheads.

Japan has more than 10 tons of separated plutonium -- enough for thousands of nuclear warheads. And don't let anyone tell you that plutonium produced in a commercial reactor can't be used in a nuclear weapon. The United States did it in 1962. Here is the definitive statementon the matter from the U.S. Department of Energy: a potential proliferating state "could build a nuclear weapon from reactor grade plutonium that would have an assured, reliable yield of one or a few kilotons (and a probable yield significantly higher than that)." One kiloton is wimpy by modern standards, but it will still "suck the paint off your house and give your family a permanent orange Afro."
Despite having nowhere for the plutonium to go, Japan has invested an enormous amount of money in Rokkasho. The local community in Aomori prefecture accepted the storage of Japan's spent nuclear fuel based on the expectation that the spent fuel would be separated and the waste shipped elsewhere for long-term disposal. But there is no repository at the moment. Japan's energy policy is screwed up, but things are usually screwed up for a reason. Tokyo started down this path in the 1970s when reprocessing was all the rage. (People had a lot of terrible ideas in the 1970s. Look how angry it made Mike Watt.) I understand how hard it would be for Japan to walk away from a $20 billion investment with no clear plan to store and dispose of the spent fuel.

But is it too much to ask Japan to set a better example?

I recently directed a project funded by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundationthat convened a group of Japanese and American experts to discuss the security implications of Japan's fuel cycle choices. Although the group did not tell the Japanese people what to do about Rokkasho or other nuclear sites, the members did note that the debate over fuel cycle choices in Japan has "given insufficient consideration to regional security implications of domestic decisions" about nuclear energy. The group also agreed that Japan is an important model for many other countries considering their own reprocessing programs.

Personally, I think that this most recent Rokkasho delay is an opportunity for Japan to reassess the security impact of reprocessing. If Japan's policymakers can't bring themselves to say that reprocessing is a mistake, maybe Japan could at least delay putting Rokkasho into operation until there is a plan to use the 10 tons of plutonium it has already accumulated? Tokyo already has a policy to not accumulate plutonium that does not have a specific end-use. Despite this, Japan's stockpile of plutonium continues to grow -- because that policy does not require Japan to actually use its existing plutonium before separating more. Japanese experts, like the former vice chairman of the Japan Atomic Energy Commission, Tatsujiro Suzuki, have written proposals urging Tokyo to stop piling up plutonium. Tokyo could require JNFL to demonstrate demand for plutonium prior to reprocessing. It could limit the size of the existing stockpile of plutonium and reduce the current stockpile before undertaking new spent fuel reprocessing, it could establish a formal requirement for alternatives to the current MOX approach.

Japan Has Enough Plutonium to Make Thousands of Nukes

The "Japan Option" is alive and well... and for several other nations such as South Korea and Germany. Japan can make nuclear weapons if needed, the "Japan Option" is just a clever name for nuclear latency, but more than just the warhead makes a weapons. Fortunately for Japan, and unfortunately for everyone else, Japan has that area covered too. For while we think of Japan as not possessing them, they do have ICBMs, the only difference is that they are currently using them for space faring instead.

JAXA | Epsilon Launch Vehicle - the Epsilon is an ICBM... even if it hasn't ever been used in such a manner.

 

[Keel]

Any S korean members here on board? Let us hear about your opinions on Japan's ambition in making Nukes!

And the Russians' opinions as well! @senheiser @vostok any comments?

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Any S korean members here on board? Let us hear about your opinions on Japan's ambition in making Nukes!

And the Russians' opinions as well! @senheiser @vostok any comments?

Why many members here talk like everyone can easily own the nuke?

From the technical perspective, you can see how it is time consuming for the mature nuclear powers like Russia and China to make those newly introduced ICBMs to become operational.

Japan has some technology background, but they have been left behind for many decades, so it will be very time consuming to fulfill those blank parts.

Therefore, it is not as easy as in some people's imagination.

 

[mike2000]

loool I thought this was an April fouls joke.
But reading/going through the thread/comments did i realised people are indeed taking it seriously.lool Who even wrote this article, Japan developing nuclear weapons? Very hilarious. Unless they dont want to get isolated and sanctioned like North Korea. Even Germany who we in the E.U now admire/like and are even pleading with them to rearm(but much to our dismay they dont listen/want to for some reason.lool) wouldn't/hasnt even thought about developing nuclear weapons, much less Japan who has suffered a nuclear holocaust before. I think we should just put this thread to rest here. Its just foolish to even comtemplate Japan developing nukes. plain silly if you ask me(too much to lose, very little to nothing to gain).

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

loool I thought this was an April fouls joke.
But reading/going through the thread/comments did i realised people are indeed taking it seriously.lool Who even wrote this article, Japan developing nuclear weapons? Very hilarious. Unless they dont want to get isolated and sanctioned like North Korea. Even Germany who we in the E.U now admire/like and are even pleading with them to rearm(but much to our dismay they dont listen/want to for some reason.lool) wouldn't/hasnt even thought about developing nuclear weapons, much less Japan who has suffered a nuclear holocaust before. I think we should just put this thread to rest here. Its just foolish to even comtemplate Japan developing nukes. plain silly if you ask me(too much to lose, very little to nothing to gain).

A nuclearized Japan does not fulfill the US national interests.

BTW, they won't have it unless both USA and China are vanishing from this planet.