Japan’s Nuclear-Contaminated Water Discharge Sparks Disinformation Debate
The recent discharge of nuclear-contaminated water from Japan into the ocean has sparked a heated disinformation debate, with China at the center of the controversy. Social media platforms like X (formerly Twitter) have been quick to label certain posts as disinformation in an attempt to combat what they perceive as false narratives. However, this has also revealed a larger-scale disinformation campaign from Japan, and the role of Western media in it.
Japan has taken significant steps to address the issue of misinformation surrounding its contaminated water release. The nation has allocated a substantial budget, reportedly 70 billion yen, to tackle this challenge. One strategy involves using artificial intelligence (AI) to monitor reports related to the release of nuclear-contaminated water. However, concerns have been raised about potential bias and manipulation of information due to the use of AI.
A point of contention surrounding the water discharge is the labeling of the water itself. Japan refers to it as ALPS treated water, highlighting that all radionuclides have been removed except tritium and C-14. On the other hand, China, South Korea, and other Pacific nations refer to it simply as contaminated water, underlining the presence of a broader range of radioactive materials due to direct contact with melted reactor cores. This ongoing debate underscores the highly politicized nature of the issue.
Critics argue that Western media outlets have downplayed Japan’s contaminated water release while focusing on China’s response. The Japanese Embassy in China claims that China has taken an aggressive stance by banning Japanese aquatic products and harassing Japanese restaurants. However, what has been largely unreported in Western media is the wave of harassment directed at the Chinese embassy and its citizens from Japan.
According to a statement from the Chinese Embassy obtained exclusively by China Daily, their staff have been subjected to hostile calls and personal threats from Japan following the decision to release treated radioactive water. Even the embassy’s fax machines have been inundated with letters containing radical content, exacerbating the situation. Right-wing groups are also reported to have disrupted the embassy’s operations by causing disturbances at its entrance.
While Japan is not the first nation to resort to ocean disposal of radioactive waste, its actions have drawn attention to historical behavior by Western nations. From 1946 to 1993, countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and France disposed of over 200,000 tons of solid nuclear waste into the oceans. The US alone released 190,000 cubic meters of radioactive materials into the North Atlantic and Pacific Oceans during this period. It is worth noting that this figure doesn’t account for the environmental impact resulting from the US conducting 67 nuclear tests in the Pacific from 1946 to 1958.
In contrast, Japan sees itself as a victim of nuclear devastation. As the only nation to have suffered nuclear bombings, Japan has experienced its fair share of environmental catastrophes. In 1953, a chemical plant’s wastewater discharge in Shuiyu town contaminated fish, leading to over 900 deaths and 2 million cases of health problems among those consuming mercury-contaminated fish. Furthermore, in 1993, Japan, with the assistance of the United States, compelled Russia to cease the discharge of radioactive waste from decommissioned nuclear submarines. Ironically, Japan’s current plan to discharge over 15 times the amount of waste that Russia did signifies a shift in perspective.
The debate surrounding Japan’s nuclear-contaminated water discharge is complex and highly politicized, with different perspectives highlighting the need for balanced reporting. While Japan faces criticism, it is crucial to consider the historical actions of other nations as well. Ultimately, the focus should be on finding sustainable solutions to address the environmental concerns related to nuclear waste disposal.
