Time stands still in the Pacific – it’s what attracts tourists.
But in December 2022, the clock is ticking towards Japan’s planned release of more than 1.2 million tonnes of radioactive cooling water into the Pacific ocean, placing the region’s tuna stocks under immediate threat.
The fallout from this unprecedented action will affect thousands of jobs and millions of people who rely on the Western and Central Pacific’s annual $USD8 billion industry.
It is expected that Japan will begin to release its toxic discharge from the Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant at Fukushima in March 2023.
Only then will the Pacific know how its lucrative industry based on a highly migratory species will be affected.
Japan spends an estimated $US1 billion in bilateral aid, soft-loans and other diplomatic efforts every year, making it the sixth largest contributor to Pacific government coffers.
At a time when the region’s focus has been on the posturing of China and the United States, along with their efforts to gain increased influence and power, Japan has opted for the soft approach.
Japanese aid has been in technical areas – including fisheries and medicine – and the construction of airports.
Until recently, France and the U.S. have been the focus of nuclear non-proliferation advocacy groups concerned over waste leaching from facilities at Muroroa and Fangataufa in French Polynesia and Kwajelian in the Republic of the Marshall Islands.
Japan’s nuclear waste has been buried at home. But an explosion in Fukushima in March 2011 has forced the need to find alternative measures of disposal. The option Tokyo has chosen is the Pacific.
Ironically, the waste is expected to flow first into the Northern Pacific, the focus of Japan’s World War II expansionism. Mostly coral atolls, these nations have dealt for 70 years with the result of U.S. testing. Birth defects and illness in the islands can still be traced back to post-war testing.
Hundreds of islanders remain displaced – forced to make way for the tests – and waste is stored underground in large, concrete silos, thousands of kilometres from Washington where life-changing decisions were made for the islanders seven decades ago.
Rhea Moss-Christian is Executive Director of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission. From the Northern Pacific, she knows first hand the impact of nuclear testing and waste on vulnerable communities which live in a fragile ecosystem.
“There are a number of outstanding questions that have yet to be fully answered. They have focused a lot on one particular radionuclide. And not very much on others, that are also present in the wastewater.”
Moss-Christian worked for Marshall Islands Nuclear Commission. The organisation seeks justice for victims of and nuclear activity through a five-pillar programme based on compensation, health, the environment, national capacity and education,
“We have a lot of experience in the Marshall Islands with lingering radioactive waste,” she said.
“And we don’t want to find ourselves in another situation, not just in the Marshall Islands, but in general in the region, where we agree to something without knowing what could potentially happen in the future.
“But not only that, what are the contingency plans? What are the compensation mechanisms? How do these, how does the wastewater in the toxins behave across the ocean?,” Moss-Christian said.
“Yeah, Fukushima is a concern.
Pacific governments at the WCPFC have their concerns but they are being very quiet. Japan, after all, is a major player in the tuna fishing industry and in the area of international relations.
Moss-Christian echoed the Pacific position which was made clear when regional leaders met in Suva earlier this year and raised strong concerns about what they described as “the significance of the potential threat of nuclear contamination to the health and security of the Blue Pacific, its people and prospects’.
“I just wish they would take a bit more time to think more carefully about this,” Moss-Christian said.
“If there’s a way find a way to delay. I understand that there are some urgencies because of the logistics and the storage of this wastewater.
“But this is a massive release and a big, big potential disaster if it’s not handled properly. But Japan is a really important partner in this region.”
And therein lies the rub. Pacific nations want to protect their billion-dollar tuna industry while recognising Japan’s importance in the area of assistance, security and development.
For now, the WCPFC – known commonly as the Tuna Commission – hopes that consultation which is not new for Japan or the region can be used to buy some time and delay the release of waste water,
“I think that would really go a long way, not just for the partnership, but for also protecting our fisheries,” Moss-Christian said.
