Contradiction Still Remains

The First Committee of United Nations General Assembly released a joint statement of appealing the inhumanity and disabling nuclear weapons with approvals of 155 nations, marking new record in terms of the number of participants. As expected, Japan joined it, knowing the contradiction that it relied its security heavily on nuclear umbrella laid by the greatest nuclear power, United States, while it was demanding elimination of nuclear weapons. Was Japan saying that it could be called equal but different responsibility?

The statement was bold enough to urge nuclear powers dismantle the facilities. “We deeply concern about devastative and inhumane consequence brought by nuclear weapons,” told the joint statement, and it said that “the only way to assure nuclear weapons not to be used is abolishing them.” The advocators of the statement swell from 125 countries, including Palestine, of last year. The Ambassador of New Zealand to U.N. indicated that there was a movement to look this issue from the viewpoint of inhumanity.

As usual, five major countries with nuclear weapons, U.S., Russia, China, United Kingdom and France, did not join in the statement. India and Pakistan also turned their back to it. Even the countries without nuclear weapons, like Australia or South Korea, took a distance from it, considering their situation under nuclear umbrella of U.S. For those nations, nuclear weapon is a tool for preventing war, regardless the devastating consequences it may bring. They are supposed to be unable to accept one description, which is “It is a benefit for human being itself that nuclear weapons will not be used again under any circumstances.”

As an alternative, Australia submitted another statement that welcomed the statement with overwhelming majority and proposed easing tension between nuclear-possessing countries as seen in Ukraine crisis. But, Australia added an opinion that the abolishment of nuclear weapons would be achievable only through substantive and constructive engagement of nuclear powers. In other words, it said the abolishment was impossible.

The actual attitude of Japan on this issue is escaping from this discussion, even though it is an only nation that experienced devastating consequence of nuclear war. The Japanese stop thinking when they are trapped by an answerless question. If they want to exercise its leadership on this issue, they need to find a concept that nuclear weapons do not necessarily guarantee existence of nation.