

Power politics in Japan

A silent majority speaks

For the first time in half a century, Japan is without nuclear power

See article

Readers' comments




Ironic that the country where the Koyoto Protocals where signed and named after is now going 100 percent Fossil fuel. I wonder what there carbon foot print looks like now :)


Contrary to what this author claims, Japan has a long, rich, and violent history of mass public protest. In 2008 there were massive public protests in Okinawa against government mandated history textbook revisions. In the 1970s there was a long running and violent protest over construction of the Narita International Airport. In 1960 there were huge protests over the extension of the US-Japan Mutual Security. In the Meiji and Taisho periods, the military had to be mobilised several times to quell public protests.

Where does The Economist find such clueless writers?



Despite the seriousness of the Fukushima disaster, last year, it is quite possible that Japan will continue using nuclear power because there isn’t another energy source that can totally replace it. Japan also has a responsibility to further its global development by instigating the lessons learned from the crisis.

But it is critical that the government establishes a fully independent regulatory authority to help regain public trust in nuclear power: no more so than in accident management techniques and safety measures.

The wisdom gleaned from Fukushima will be important for the global nuclear industry. If Japan was to forego nuclear energy completely that would make it difficult to innovate and produce advanced technologies. Japan, thus, far, has been a key player on the world stage and it is imperative that it remains so.


indeed, for a country of some 377,000 sq kms, the size not much bigger than poland or italy, japan has a whopping 51 nuke reactors. yet they together provide surprisingly low percentage (less than 20%) of japan’s electricity.

this inevitably lands credence to the suspicions that japan was up to something for stockpiling non-peaceful use of nuke materials.

the huge sea water sucking whirlpool formation off coast near the nuke power station site right after 311 earthquake (suggesting some underground facilities were being flooded), and the japan’s refusal to let foreign personnel getting near there did not help to quell the fear of such enterprise being true in japan.

perhaps the boss men in Washington were not amused, so all that bomb making nonsense and indeed all nuke power plants in japan have to go, and off they go (but not gone?).

local politicians may be feuding on this, but don’t worry none, japanese civilians depend very little of their power need on nuke power generation, as most japanese electricity are gas, oil, geothermal and coal fired.

Curate's Egg

What is the economic impact of halting all nuclear power generation in Japan? This is a small-ish country that is probably one of the biggest net importers of energy in the world. There has to be severe economic consequences.

Gigle in reply to kommonsenses

I assume you're joking. Not only does Japan not have the capability to use nuclear weapons the very concept makes no sense. The only realistic use of nuclear weapons is as a deterrent against conventional or nuclear attack, anything else would lead to total destruction. There's a reason why Israel has let indirectly let the world know it has nuclear weapons while refusing to confirm details. If Israel's enemies didn't know that Israel had nuclear weapons they wouldn't be deterred. If Japan did have nuclear weapons, it wouldn't keep it secret. It would want North Korea, Russia and China to know that it did.

Also you greatly exaggerate America's power over Japan*

*A rather common mistake that completely ignores the economic problems the U.S. had because of Japanese businesses in the 1970s and 1980s. If we had that kind of control we would have used it.

kommonsenses in reply to Gigle

I am not joking. anyone who has heard about pearl habour attack of 1941 should know that I am not joking.

and I am not exaggerating america's power over japan. there's no denying that japan is still an occupied state with us troops and bases all over (now in the name of some fancy mutual packs perhaps) and a vassal state in its major policy making. tell me how else could japan have had accepted plaza acccord, or recently agreed to pay $3 billion dollars for the mere moving of a few thousand american troops?

believe it, under the facade of beautiful madame butterfly, japan is not to be trusted for america's own good.

At some point, Japan will find itself forced to make a decision. An explicit decision.

Do they want to continue to be a developed country? Or will they accept that they cannot maintain their lifestyle without nuclear power, because fossil fuels are just too expensive. It's one thing to make an emotional short-term decision on something like this. But even if summer blackouts (and air conditioner-less heat) do not force a re-think, the economic consequences will, as you say, be severe. And Japan's economic circumstances are not robust enough currently to allow them to be ignored.


Ja, Kraftwerk was in Japan!

"Radioactivity is in the air for you and me."
"Krypton 85 will cause death and cancer."
"Stop the radioactivity!"

Japan may follow German way!

Pachiguy in reply to ehk46

Dear Mr. Kinmonth,
"this is a country not given to mass demonstrations" only really needs the qualifier "in the last 30 years", or even "recently". Your Okinawa rallies barely raised an eyebrow in the rest of Japan. Aren't you nitpicking?


Fossil fuels are not a sustainable option in the long run. A hasty shutdown of all nuclear reactors will only increase Japan's energy burden. Although concerns of a another nuclear meltdown are not impossible, another large scale incident such as Fukushima's seems unlikely to occur in next few years. Japan should try to look for a viable alternative first before hurriedly turning their backs on those nuclear reactors.

red shoes

Japan needs to assert its sovereignty for once and not participate in the embargo against Iranian natural gas.

Why, in this world, is the Japanese government forcing Japanese people and industry into max. conservation because the US and Israel are "worried" about Iran.


My recommendation for japan;

- Nuclear bombs: Yes, because China has many. North Korea is about to have. Also yes for Taiwan and South Korea for the same reason.

- Nuclear kraftwerks: No, because they are dangerous.


Problem is not nuclear energy.
It is the nexus of politicians, bureaucrats and big business.
For some reason production of nuclear energy is cloaked in a veil in all countries. Latest example is the Kundakulam nuclear plant in south India.
The technology is well known. So what is being hidden is the safety measures or the lack of them.
Since a failure of a nuclear plant can create problems for people living 1000 miles away, an international body like IAEA should be created to inspect safety measures in all nuclear plants in all countries.


Latest blog posts - All times are GMT
Deportations: A kinder expulsion
Democracy in America March 14th, 21:38
Blasphemy laws: Wrong on so many levels
Erasmus March 14th, 17:20
Keynes and Hayek: Prophets for today
Free exchange March 14th, 16:43
Democracy in America March 14th, 15:55
Gay rights in Lebanon: Laws of nature
Pomegranate March 14th, 15:43
Airlines and hotels: Room at the top
Gulliver March 14th, 15:42


Products & events