作成者別アーカイブ: wp7e

2018 129E Wishing for the success of the US-DPRK Summit Talk and hoping a contribution from Japan.

WP7 No.128E

April 16, 2018
The Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace
Kinhide Mushakoji, Yoshino Oishi, Michiji Konuma, Satoru Ikeuchi,
Shin-ichiro Ikebe, Kaoru Takamura and Susumu Shimazono

We, the Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace, express our hope for a successful Meeting between Donald Trump, President of the United States of America and Kim Jong-un, Chairman of the Workers’ Party of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). We express, on this occasion, our appreciation towards the efforts to stabilize the Korean Peninsula of Moon Jae-in, President of the Republic of Korea, who paved a way to this Meeting.
The Committee of Seven has wished the building of a peaceful and stable Korea in spite of the escalation of mutual pressures between the two Parties, USA and DPRK. The US pressure on the DPRK was told to be a means to bring the DPRK to the negotiation table, and when such signs became visible, the Trump Administration decided to follow prior hidden negotiations and engage in an official bi-lateral talk with the DPRK.
In spite of this positive development, Premier Shinzo Abe continues to insist on the necessity of strengthening international pressure on the DPRK, and Taro Kono, Foreign Minister, declared in his public speech delivered in 31 March that the DPRK “was preparing another nuclear test”, and could not answer the US remark he received, that the nuclear site activities of the DPRK had decreased, and was halted on the 5th of March. We ask the Government of Japan to join the international public opinion to support peace and stability in the DPRK and US relations.
The Committee of Seven supports the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. We believe that to become a reality, this will have to be a part of the continued and irreversible efforts of the nuclear States, including the United States of America, to decrease their nuclear capacities following the Article 6 in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, accompanied by the renunciation of Japan’s reliance on the extended nuclear deterrence of the United States of America. Unless these conditions are fulfilled, it is difficult to hope that the situation in the Korean Peninsula can improve within the global situation of peace and stability. This is why, we already made public our objection about the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review of the United States. There are hawks, in the USA, in the DPRK and in Japan, and the obstacles they will pose against any attempt to build peace and stability will have to be overcome. To develop, in spite of all the obstacles, in the Korean Peninsula and in the whole world, processes to abolition of nuclear weapons, will reduce the mutual mistrust among conflicting States and increase the conditions for mutual trust among them. This will, thus, reduce and dissolve the present perilous tensions among nuclear States, locally and globally.
Bearing in mind the above points, the Committee of Seven expresses its heartfelt wishes that Premier Abe, not objecting to the positive direction of the negotiation of President Trump with the DPRK, will encourage him to seek a stable peace, on the occasion of the forthcoming Japan-US Talks. Japan itself should contribute actively to the promotion of peace and stability in East Asia as well as in the whole world. This will undoubtedly build the diplomatic power of Japan and enable it to solve other national issues, thanks to the positive climates it initiates.

(This is the English version of the Appeal, WP7 129J, which was issued in Japanese on April 15, 2018 and distributed widely.)

PDF Appeal→129e.pdf

2018 128E We demand the withdrawal of the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review 2018,and of the supportive statement of Taro Kono, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan.

WP7 No.128E

February 10, 2018
The Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace
Kinhide Mushakoji, Yoshino Oishi, Michiji Konuma, Satoru Ikeuchi,
Shin-ichiro Ikebe, Kaoru Takamura and Susumu Shimazono

The Trump Administration of the United States has made public on 2nd February its Nuclear Posture Review. Its contents reject the Nuclear Posture Review 2010 by the Obama Administration. It simply takes us back in history to the Cold War period, with its posture inacceptable today.
Among other problems, it declares that the United States will develop low-yield nuclear warhead and will posture nuclear capability including to hedge against conventional attack. This will only accelerate the world-wide nuclear arms-race and will induce possible nuclear attacks by adversaries. Such position is inconsistent with the US position which demands other nations to renounce to develop nuclear armament.
This new policy is a direct negation of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons adopted at the United Nations Headquarters last year. It also violates, as a member, the commitment to pursue negotiation in good faith to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early stage and to nuclear disarmament provided in the Treaty of the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
The effect of radioactivity by the use of nuclear weapons will spread all-over the world even if they are low-yield and any nuclear conflict will make it impossible to build a stable peace. What we need today is just to prohibit the use and threat of use of nuclear weapons of any kind, under any possible circumstances.
The statement by the Minister of Foreign Affairs Taro Kono of Japan, who expressed his “high appreciation” towards the United States Nuclear Posture Review 2018 is contrary to the will of the Japanese people who have been united around the nuclear victims of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, demanding the total abolition of nuclear weapons since the nuclear tragedies of the two cities. It is a denial to the annual messages of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe himself to the Peace Memorial Ceremonies in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August, and to his own speech in front of the Cenotaph at the occasion of the Hiroshima visit of President Barack Obama.
We, the Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace, declare our dissent to the Trump and Abe Administrations, and demand the withdrawal of the U.S. Nuclear Posture Review 2018, and of the supportive statement of Kono, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Japan.

PDF Appeal→128e.pdf

2017 127E At a critical crossroads to the future of Japan – We refuse to play a Game aiming to seize Government Power where the Citizens are ignored –

WP7 No.127E

October 9, 2017
The Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace
Kinhide Mushakoji, Yoshino Oishi, Michiji Konuma, Satoru Ikeuchi,
Shin-ichiro Ikebe, Kaoru Takamura and Susumu Shimazono

Since Premier Abe declared the dissolution of the House of Representative at the Opening of the Extraordinary Session of the Diet, Japan experiences unprecedented turbulent days toward the election on the coming October 22.
Premier Abe has recently misinformed the public by covering up the daily reports of the Self Defense Forces participating in the United Nations Peacekeeping Operations (PKO) in South Sudan which contained information embarrassing for the Government assuring the armed conflicts which would have required the recalling of the Japanese Troops. He, also refused to provide information to the Diet, representing the citizens, who demanded explanation on his personal involvement in the Government choice to support the establishment of two educational institutions, Moritomo Gakuen and Kake Gakuen, which were suspected to be an unfair exercise of his power to benefit his personal friends. These cases have exposed him as a politician who lacks sincerity.
We, the Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace, cannot keep silent in face of the repeated imposition on the public opinion of de facto state of affairs, contrary to the present Constitution. which were unduly reducing the human rights shared by the citizen of Japan through the heavy-handed adoption in the Diet of the Act on the Protection of Specially Designated Secrets, the Laws regarding National Security, and the Law against Premeditation.
Premier Abe’s decision to abrogate the Constitution Preamble and Article 9, Paragraphs 1 and 2, which does not allow to develop present joint activities of the Self Defense Forces with the Armed Forces of the United States as a part of the Collective Security, is un-Constitutional. His wish to propose a Referendum on a revision of the Constitution legalizing the present role of the Self Defense Forces goes against the seventy years accumulation of Democratic Will of the Japanese people. This ardent wish is unacceptable given the fact that the present Constitution has entirely no reason to be abrogated. We will oppose this plan mobilizing the whole nation of Japan to stop this useless abuse of power by the Abe Administration.
In the forthcoming election, the real division of the pro-Government and opposition lies between those who support or oppose the use of Collective Security, the acceptability of present laws regarding National Security, the revision of the Constitution. The emergence of a third political force, the Kibo Party, does not create a triangular opposition among three parties, since this new party shares the position of the Government about the above three issues. The difference, thus, exists between a political bloc, which supports democracy and want to promote its historical development, and a group having opposite tendency shared by the LDP and the Kibo Party.
We will aim building a Japan where human rights of all individuals are respected, a Japan which does not rely on military forces, and a Japan where the balance among the legislative, the judicial, and the executive power is re-established. We will continue all efforts to progress, step by step, in a World where all peoples recognize each-others’ life-style and historical background.

PDF Appeal→127e.pdf

2017 125E The Parliamentary System of Japan is about to Die

WP7 No.125E

October 9, 2017
The Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace
Kinhide Mushakoji, Yoshino Oishi, Michiji Konuma, Satoru Ikeuchi,
Shin-ichiro Ikebe, Kaoru Takamura and Susumu Shimazono

Since Premier Abe declared the dissolution of the House of Representative at the Opening of the Extraordinary Session of the Diet, Japan experiences unprecedented turbulent days toward the election on the coming October 22.

Premier Abe has recently misinformed the public by covering up the daily reports of the Self Defense Forces participating in the United Nations Peacekeeping Operations (PKO) in South Sudan which contained information embarrassing for the Government assuring the armed conflicts which would have required the recalling of the Japanese Troops. He, also refused to provide information to the Diet, representing the citizens, who demanded explanation on his personal involvement in the Government choice to support the establishment of two educational institutions, Moritomo Gakuen and Kake Gakuen, which were suspected to be an unfair exercise of his power to benefit his personal friends. These cases have exposed him as a politician who lacks sincerity.

We, the Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace, cannot keep silent in face of the repeated imposition on the public opinion of de facto state of affairs, contrary to the present Constitution. which were unduly reducing the human rights shared by the citizen of Japan through the heavy-handed adoption in the Diet of the Act on the Protection of Specially Designated Secrets, the Laws regarding National Security, and the Law against Premeditation.

Premier Abe’s decision to abrogate the Constitution Preamble and Article 9, Paragraphs 1 and 2, which does not allow to develop present joint activities of the Self Defense Forces with the Armed Forces of the United States as a part of the Collective Security, is un-Constitutional. His wish to propose a Referendum on a revision of the Constitution legalizing the present role of the Self Defense Forces goes against the seventy years accumulation of Democratic Will of the Japanese people. This ardent wish is unacceptable given the fact that the present Constitution has entirely no reason to be abrogated. We will oppose this plan mobilizing the whole nation of Japan to stop this useless abuse of power by the Abe Administration.

In the forthcoming election, the real division of the pro-Government and opposition lies between those who support or oppose the use of Collective Security, the acceptability of present laws regarding National Security, the revision of the Constitution. The emergence of a third political force, the Kibo Party, does not create a triangular opposition among three parties, since this new party shares the position of the Government about the above three issues. The difference, thus, exists between a political bloc, which supports democracy and want to promote its historical development, and a group having opposite tendency shared by the LDP and the Kibo Party.

We will aim building a Japan where human rights of all individuals are respected, a Japan which does not rely on military forces, and a Japan where the balance among the legislative, the judicial, and the executive power is re-established. We will continue all efforts to progress, step by step, in a World where all peoples recognize each-others’ life-style and historical background.

PDF Appeal→127e.pdf

2017 124E We oppose the legislation under the pretext of preventing the preparation for terrorism

WP7 No.124E

April 24, 2017
The Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace
Kinhide Mushakoji, Hideo Tsuchiyama, Yoshino Oishi,
Michiji Konuma, Satoru Ikeuchi, Shin-ichiro Ikebe and Kaoru Takamura

In 2017, we, the citizens of Japan, celebrate the 70th Anniversary of the Constitution of Japan. This Constitution, in its Clause 19, guarantees the Rights to the freedom of thought and conscience of all citizens. We express our serious concern about the fact that a bill on the criminalization of conspiracy preparing crimes, a legislation violating this freedom, is presently under discussion in the Diet. This legislation endangers the basic principle of the legal system of Japan which limits criminalization to only already committed criminal acts. This attempt to change decisively the very base of the legal system of Japan has been repeatedly attempted by the Government since 2003, and has been rejected already three times by the Diet, after many revisions of the proposed text and continued deliberation crossing Diet sessions. The same legislation criminalizing conspiracy preparing criminal acts is again submitted to the Diet for the fourth time as a law criminalizing the preparation of terrorism and other criminal acts.

The Government explained the reason for this new legislation to criminalize “Conspiracy Preparing Criminal acts” as that it is a precondition to the ratification of the “United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime” and this new legislation is indispensable in order to implement the legal measures to criminalize any activities implying the participation to a criminal act by two or more persons belonging to organized criminal organizations set out in the Clause 5 of this Convention.

The Abe Administration claims that unless the criminalization of conspiracy preparing Terrorism and other criminal acts is adopted by the Diet, Japan cannot ratify the above-mentioned United Nations Convention and hence cannot hold in 2020 the international Olympic and Paralympic Games. This statement is either based on misinterpretation of the international realities, or is a intentional distortion of the realities.

First, the “United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime” states in its Clause 34 that Each State Party shall take the necessary measures, including legislative and administrative measures, in accordance with fundamental principles of its domestic law, to ensure the implementation of its obligations under this Convention.
The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination was ratified in Japan without any new legislations to implement. This is an example which contradicts the explanation of the Abe Administration.

Secondly, if the ratification of the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime does not require any new legislation by the signatory parties, it is wrong to maintain the statement that the legislation criminalizing “the Preparation of Terrorism and other criminal Acts” must be adopted in order to ratify this United Nations Convention.

Thirdly, the objective of this Transnational Convention is not terrorism, and the proposed legislation also does neither have terrorism as its original objective. The Government has not presented to the Diet any justification to maintain that there exists an urgent need to create a law criminalizing the “Preparation of Terrorism and other criminal acts” in view of terrorist activities uncontrollable by the existing legal system.

Fourthly, the legal text which caused a public opposition does refer to 277 criminalized objects out of which 60% have entirely no relations to terrorism. The term “terrorism” was hastily added to the title and the explanation about why this law is submitted to the Diet legislation lacks any reference to terrorism.

From the above remarks, it follows logically, that the statement of the Government that without the legislation of “Crime of Preparation of Terrorism and other Criminal the Olympic Games cannot be held in Japan is entirely false. This way to try to accelerate the adoption of this law by deceiving the citizens cannot but alert us about the true intents behind this law.

First, to use the term “Counter Terrorism” to cover a variety of referents which cannot be limited to terrorism and make them the objects of an “important crime subject to more than four years’ penal servitude or incarceration” is logically manifesting an intent to use this crime to cover a variety of activities as undefined objects of this law.

Secondly, as it is assumed that even citizens living peacefully may become the object of investigation when they suddenly become members of criminal organizations, ordinary organizations of citizens may become the object of constant surveillance to determine whether sudden transformation does or does not take place.

Thirdly, any conspiracy is accompanied by preparatory acts. However, there is no concrete definition of what constitutes a preparatory act. Government replies to questions in the Diet declare that such acts do not have to be directly connected with the existence of a danger of criminal act. This cannot but mean that the definition of preparatory activities depends entirely on the judgement of the investigating authority. This, logically, makes the concept of “preparatory act” an entirely groundless legal argument.

Fourthly, the Government answers to questions in the Diet indicate that the investigating authorities are free to conduct their discretional investigations even before any activities preparing a crime has occurred, if the authorities judge that there exists a likelihood that a crime will be committed.

The logical consequences of the above trends are that all citizens will become the targets of a constant ever-broadening legal surveillance of their everyday life, and the object of legalized surveillance lacking any objective justification. So far as punishable criminality covers not only actual acts but also conspiracy and joint planning, we will be forced to accept any demand by the authorities to be submitted to questioning, in their discretionary investigating authorities so decide.

Since terrorists and criminal organizations cannot be distinguished by their appearance from peaceful citizens like all of us, all citizens become objects of surveillance to find conspiring criminals. Consequently, it is impossible to stop the expanding range of investigations using wiretapping and GPS.

The true reason the Government wants to have the Diet accept this legislation is clearly not to cope with terrorism but rather to develop a broad network of surveillance enabling the Government authorities to cover all aspects of the citizens’ livelihood. We strongly oppose this legislation which violates all the rights of the citizens of Japan about the freedom of thought and conscience, guaranteed by the Constitution, under the pretext of preventing the preparation for terrorism and other criminal acts.

PDF Appeal→124e.pdf

2015 116E Let us strengthen solidarity with the overwhelming majority of the people of Okinawa opposing the Plan to construct a new US Military Base in the Henoko Bay.

WP7 No.116E
April 22, 2015
The Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace
Shin-ichiro IKEBE, Satoru IKEUCHI, Michiji KONUMA, Kinhide MUSHAKOJI,
Yoshino OISHI, Kaoru TAKAMURA, Hideo TSUCHIYAMA,

The overwhelming majority of the people of Okinawa have manifested, time and again, its opposition to the Plan of the Governments of the United States and of Japan to build a new Military Base of the U.S. Marine Corps by reclaiming the Bay of Henoko of Nago-City in Okinawa. Now the situation faces a serious confrontation.

This building of Henoko Military Base was the major issue of the Election of the Mayor of Nago City of January 2014, of the Election of the Governor of the Okinawa Prefecture of November 2014, and of the Election of the House of Representatives of the National Diet of December 2014. In all these elections, disputes fought around the Henoko issue was won by the candidates of “All Okinawa” alliance opposing the building of the Henoko Base by an overwhelming majority.

On the April 17, 2015, the Prime Minister Shinzo Abe met with the Governor of Okinawa, Takeshi Onaga. This meeting took place after a long stubborn refusal of Premier Abe to meet with the newly elected Governor Onaga over four months. At the start of the meeting Premier Abe said that the meeting was an occasion for a frank dialogue with the Governor. Yet he did not give any explanation about the concrete reason for maintaining that the Henoko Military Base was the only alternative in moving the Futenma Military Base which had been agreed to close down between the Japanese and the US Governments due to potential danger of serious accident in the midst of high population . He just stated repeatedly that “Henoko was the only solution” in response to Governor Onaga, who made a detailed exposition about the reason why he and the majority in the prefecture citizens could not accept this Plan.

The Government of Japan merely wants to apply the Plan to move the Futenma Military Base to Henoko proposed by bureaucrats of Japan and the United States in 1997, totally ignoring the present situation in which the people of Okinawa are experiencing a severe state of insecurity, without listening to the voices of the people of Okinawa opposed to this Plan.

The Abe Government legalized the unconstitutional concept of Collective Security, by a compromise lacking precision between the Liberal Democratic Party and the Komeito composing the Coalition Government, totally ignoring critical opinions of the opposition Parties in the Diet. The Government repeated undemocratic actions in order to create an international fait accompli in support of the so-called Proactive Peace Policy of Premier Abe. These actions of the Government regarding the U.S. Military Bases in Okinawa will make it impossible friendly relations between Japan and its neighbors including the United States itself.

The present situation in Henoko is not only a concern of the citizens of the Okinawa Prefecture. Petitions to the Central Government from Local Assemblies other than Okinawa such as the Village Assembly of the Hakuba Mura of Nagano Prefecture and the City Assembly of the Iwakura City of Aichi Prefecture criticized the Central Government ignoring the opposition to its plan on Henoko, demanding its respect to local autonomy, adopted in unanimity in the first case and by majorities in the second. The Local Government is not a branch office of the Central Government and the local autonomy should be respected by the Central Government according to the Law of Local Autonomy of Japan. It is the basic negation of democracy, we believe, that the Government neglects totally the determination of the Governor based on the will of the people.

The Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace made public two Appeals, in October 25, 2011, and in January 7, 2014, expressing its opposition to the creation of a U.S. Military Base in Henoko, and demanding respect of the historical past and future prospect of Okinawa by the Central Government.

The Local Defense Bureau in Okinawa has dropped 20 to 45 tons of concrete blocks into the Henoko Bay in connection with the construction of the runway on the sea authorized in August 2014 by the Okinawa Prefecture Government. On March 25, 2015 Governor Onaga ordered the stop of this construction work within 7 days for investigation of suspected violation of the condition of the approval, because of the dropping of concrete blocks outside of the permitted area and of demolishing the coral. On March 30, 2015, Yoshimasa Hayashi, Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, sent to the Okinawa Prefecture and the Local Defense Bureau an order of suspension of the instruction of Governor Onaga. This order was heavy-handed and indifferent that the dropping area was over the borderline of the previous permission and that the natural environment was demolished.

At present, the citizens of Okinawa Prefecture develop a non-violent campaign against the uncompromising maritime construction of the new Military Base in Henoko. They maintain a sit-in in front of the Camp Schwab, and organize a fleet of kayaks in opposition to the boring activities in the Henoko Bay.

We, the Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace, express its deep admiration for the non-violence of these activities. On the other side, the U.S. Military Forces, The Committee protests to the US Military Force, Japanese Police and Coast Guard who use violent measures against the resistant citizens, which cause casualties and arrests among them, since this is a clear violation of freedom of assembly and expression provided in the Article 21 of the Constitution of Japan.

The closing of Futenma Military Base is also urgent measure already discussed about 19 years ago in 1995 between Japan and the United States. The agreement between the then Premier Ryutaro Hashimoto and U.S. Ambassador Walter F. Mondale declared the return of the whole Futenma Base within 5 to 7 years. The present Government of Japan recognizes the insecurity caused by this base located in heavily populated area which was the cause of the agreement. The possibility of accidents should be seriously considered, without depending on the unfounded optimism assuming that such incidents would not occur. This is why the Futenma Base must be immediately closed. The reduction and closing of Military Bases is in itself useful for the reduction of international conflicts as history tells us.

In history Ryukyu (present Okinawa) was an independent Kingdom between the 15th and 19th centuries. It signed Treaty of Amity with the United States (July 11, 1854), with France (November 24, 1855), with the Netherland (July 6, 1859). It was invaded by the Satsuma Clan of south Kyushu in 1609, and was annexed to Japan by the so-called “Ryukyu Disposition” of the Meiji Government using military pressure.

We should not ignore the abnormal discrimination of the concentration of 74% of the U.S. Military Bases in Okinawa which covers only 0.6% of the Land of Japan. We must stop the destruction of the ecology of the beautiful Bay of Henoko which is the habitat of dugongs, sea turtles and coral.

We, the Committee of Seven to Appeal for World Peace, strongly protest the heavy-handed measures of the Central Government of Japan ignoring the right to live in peace of the citizens of Okinawa and call all the citizens of the Mainland of Japan to strengthen their solidarity with the citizens of Okinawa Prefecture in their opposition to the creation of U.S. Military Base in Henoko.

PDF Appeal→116e.pdf

2012 106E We call upon citizens and governments of Israel and Iran

WP7 No.106E
April 10, 2012
The Committee of Seven for World Peace Appeal
Kinhide Mushakoji, Hideo Tsuchiyama, Yoshino Oishi,
Kayoko Ikeda, Michiji Konuma, Satoru Ikeuchi, Takashi Tsujii

 

Since 1955, the Committee of Seven for World Peace Appeal has issued appeals from Japan repeatedly to promote peace on the international and domestic levels.

A military attack by Israel against the nuclear facilities of Iran is discussed openly as a possibility. In addition, a confrontation between the US and the Iranian navies and air forces in the Strait of Hormuz is an additional reason for concern, as it may cause unforeseeable consequences.

When we recall Israeli air raids, conducted disregarding international law, against an Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981 and against a Syrian one in 2007, we cannot but be worried by the possibility of an attack by the Israeli air force over Iranian nuclear facilities. Such attempt, we believe, may well escalate into a large scale war

We share with the international community a serious concern about the insufficient transparency on nuclear research, development and utilization both in Israel and in Iran. We urge the two countries to renounce immediately any activity of military R & D of nuclear power and production and stockpiling of nuclear weapons they already have or plan to do so in the future, and to release without restriction to the international community all information on their nuclear facilities and operations. It will be a great step toward the realization of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East which has been proposed eagerly by our Committee among others.

The present imposition of economic sanction by the international community not against Israel but only against Iran violates the principle of fair and equitable treatment of all states and leads no stable settlement. We cannot admit it for this very reason.

Further, the lack of diplomatic relations between Israel and many neighboring states is a serious obstacle to the stability of the Middle East. This abnormal situation should be dissolved immediately by sincere efforts of both sides. We urge the concerned parties not to continue their confrontation of the past but to proceed, step by step, towards a desirable future in the Middle East through a peaceful cooperation of all parties involved. The improvement of relations between Israel and Palestine should be included among such efforts. We can affirm that this proposition is not a utopia but a realistic move in line with the historical progress of humankind. We find examples of such processes of reconciliation in the cases of the end of the cold war between the East and the West, the birth of the European Union and many other similar examples.

This appeal is based on the spirit of the Constitution of Japan, i. e., “all peoples of the world have the right to live in peace, free from fear and want” and “no nation is responsible to itself alone and the laws of political morality is universal”. We believe that the Charter of the United Nations also bases itself on the above principles.
PDF Appeal→106e.pdf

2011 104E A Farewell to Nuclear Power Plants: An appeal of seven Japanese scientists and intellectuals

WP7 No.104E
July 11, 2011
The Committee of Seven for World Peace Appeal
Kinhide Mushakoji, Hideo Tsuchiyama, Yoshino Oishi,
Kayoko Ikeda, Michiji Konuma, Satoru Ikeuchi, Takashi Tsujii
The Committee of Seven expresses its gratitude to the great contribution provided by the citizens and the governments of the world after the Great Earthquake of East Japan accompanied by the Tsunami and the Accident of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, Tokyo Electric Power Company. This includes the technical support invaluable in coping with the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident. Many dedicated individuals continue to work, day and night, under extremely dangerous condition on the site of the Nuclear Reactors., and deserve special recognition.

The Committee of Seven for World Peace Appeal believes that the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (Henceforth abbreviated as the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant) Explosion is an act of men triggered-off by the act of God of the Tsunami, and deserves to be carefully assessed. We appeal to all citizens, researchers, as well as media, business and government leaders to develop an intense dialogue to find ways to cope with the problems which surfaced from this tragedy.

1. The Accident of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, Tokyo Electric Power Company

At the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, human errors combined with natural calamity caused a cutoff of electric power complicated the already hopeless situation. And among the active six nuclear reactors, three melted down, and with the one of the three already interrupted for regular maintenance, hydrogen explosions occurred in four reactors, and their explosion was followed by a diffusion of radioactive material in the air, on the ground and in the sea. This unconceivable situation made the shutdown of the nuclear reactors unavoidable. All the 20 Nuclear Reactors on the Pacific coast as well as the Uranium Reprocessing Plant in Rokkasho-Mura are not functioning since the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident.

Even now, after four months have elapsed since the catastrophe, the nuclear fuel continues to be over-heated and cannot be controlled and stabilized. Although a possibility of rapid transformation of the present situation decreases, the danger of a new hydrogen explosion might occur. On the other hand, the highly polluted water used as coolant is still unmanageable. This included, the diffusion of radioactive material into the ground and beyond the borders of the Plant could not been put under control. This is why, even now, it is impossible to declare that the nuclear accident is over.

The Tokyo Electric Power Company (henceforth abbreviated as TEPCO) and the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, under the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (and formerly Ministry of International Trade and Industry) have proceeded to use Nuclear Power Stations in an easygoing way. As a result they could not deal with the accident properly and the damage expanded unnecessarily.

The local inhabitants of the regions affected by the East Japan Earthquake, who were forced to leave their houses, lands and belonging, experience intensive insecurity having been suddenly separated from their families, and having lost their links with the neighborhood community, many lost the pet animals and plants they loved, and have no more jobs guaranteeing their stable livelihood. The victims include those who experienced radioactive exposure and have this additional cause of insecurity especially intolerable. We must realize that all the victims of the Great Earthquake experience an incredible amount of stress and anxiety.

2. The right to live in peace free from fear and wants.

The citizens of Japan, reflecting the aggression to the peoples of neighboring countries until the World War II, declared in the Preamble of its Constitution that all peoples of the world have the Right to live in peace, free from fear and wants.

The Committee of Seven for World Peace Appeals established in 1955 continues since then to issue appeals for world peace and prosperity from a politically impartial position. It has opposed nuclear weapons and war unconditionally, and has proposed the building of a new world order through an international system of cooperation under a strengthened United Nations.

The Committee issued already in 2009 an Appeal entitled “Towards a World which Recognizes the Importance of Life” and emphasized on the “importance for humankind to realize fully its destructive capacity towards the geosphere and the biosphere” and “the importance that the development of knowledge, the use of power and the market activities be the object of regulation”.

However the crisis management policy adopted by the present government supporting the business community does not take into serious consideration the local inhabitants of the regions affected by the East Japan Earthquake, Tsunami and the Fukushima Nuclear Power accident and especially the right to live in peace of the vulnerable sectors of the civil society.

The people of Japan regret the fact that this right is now violated for the victims of the Great Earthquake of East Japan. Now, the forcefully displaced citizens as well as those who continue to live, under high insecurity, in the neighboring areas of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant are living all in situations far from a peaceful life. Not less unpeaceful is the life of citizens in more distant regions from the plant, who live under the fear of possible radioactive exposure. They including the children who are forbidden to play outdoors, the women pregnant or rearing babies, the peasants and fisher people whose product cannot be sold because of possible radioactive pollution, all these people are certainly deprived from the right to live in peace and from other basic human rights. We firmly believe that nobody should be allowed to use the term “as much as possible” used in such an easy-going manner by the government and business leaders. We must give absolute precedence over any other principles our duty to act in solidarity with the victims of the nuclear catastrophe of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, and respect their rights to live in peace in any decision taken by the government and by the corporate community.

The Committee of Seven calls upon the government and the corporate sector of Japan to take into serious consideration the high insecurity of the Geosphere of the Japanese Archipelago, and apply the “Precaution” principle in their decisions which may trigger-off serious consequences for the security of the neighboring regions of the nuclear plants in cases of natural calamities. They should take utmost precaution about possible emergence of situations of acute insecurity which would be too late to prevent once the natural calamity has occurred.

3. Concrete Recommendations for the Shutdown of Nuclear Power Plants which destroy peace of mind and security

The generation of electricity using nuclear energy consists in producing a very large amount of radioactive material from the nuclear fission in the nuclear reactor, and uses the created heat for the production of electricity. Even after closing a reactor, the heat requires several years to be cooled down, and the radioactive materials need to be left under human control for more than ten thousand years. When such control fails to work, for whatever reason, the pollution of the environment, including human bodies, cannot be avoided.

In reality, the fact that during the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Disaster of 1986 and the present Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident caused a massive diffusion of radioactive materials in the environment occurred and many peoples became victims. We have to realize that severe accidents will occur by acts of God and by acts of men. Considering further that

(1) no reliable and safe method of disposal and management has been developed on radioactive materials in the spent nuclear fuel,

(2) the nuclear fuel is not a sustainable resource on earth,

(3) the cost to settle accidents is gigantic,

we have to conclude that the nuclear power station is not a stable and safe energy source in future.

This is why many governments reach the decision to move away from the use of nuclear energy to generate electricity. This implies that the countries taking this decision will not be limited to Switzerland, Germany and Italy. Similar decision will have to be adopted by all nations of the world renouncing to use nuclear energy for electricity generation.

In Japan, the use of nuclear energy to generate electricity began with the building of the first nuclear power station in Tokai-Mura in 1966. Since then this trend grew rapidly and in 1997, after 31 years, the number of nuclear reactors in Japan was 53. After the shutdown of the first nuclear reactor the following year, the total number of reactors varied because some new reactors were built while other older ones were closed. When the Fukushima Nuclear Plant explosion occurred, a total number of 54 reactors existed in Japan. The increase of nuclear reactors had already stopped in 1997. Japan presently occupies the third place after the United States and France in terms of the number of nuclear power stations. There exist in contemporary Japan 11 nuclear reactors under construction, but even if all of the plan will be realized, with the inevitable successive shutdown of existing ones the size of nuclear generation of electricity is bound to decrease. Until now, there was a general policy of the government to continue using the nuclear power station beyond their service life of approximately 30 to 40 years. This policy is based on a check of existing nuclear power stations using the present official guidelines about safety assessment. However, the government recognized the deficiencies of these guidelines after the Fukushima Nuclear Plant Accidents. The guidelines are presently under review, and this is another proof that the present system is highly insecure.

Taking into account the above state of affairs, we propose the five recommendations which follow:

(1) It is necessary to close all the old nuclear reactors which have reached their service life, as the probability of trouble increases.

(2) The construction of all the nuclear reactors for electricity generation presently under construction or in their planning stage must be stopped or abandoned immediately, as the guidelines used in the evaluation of the safety review and assessment conducted by the regulatory authority are admitted by the Government as inadequate..

(3) Under Japan four plates (Pacific Ocean, North America, Eurasia, Philippines) collide with each other and an innumerable number of active faults run across the archipelago. In this situation it is foreseeable that major earthquakes and tsunamis are bound to take place. Thus all the nuclear power plants built close to the active faults and on areas accessible by tsunamis must be immediately closed.

(4) One of the reasons why the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident cannot be brought to conclusion is that six large-scale nuclear reactors were built close to each-other in an over-crowded site. Most nuclear plants in Japan have plural nuclear reactors. The order of their closing must be decided so that the size of the nuclear plant is immediately reduced.

(5) If there remain some nuclear power plants not yet closed according to the above criteria and all of the following conditions will be cleared, certain reactors may be left active for a strictly delimited time. This will be acceptable only if the possible occurrence of major accidents are clearly formulated and the informed consent of all citizens and all concerned parties are obtained, the nuclear reactor may be left active if appropriate safety measures are adequately taken, and if the approval by domestic and international third parties based on their autonomous evaluation is given, and if the agreement is ascertained about all citizens in the possibly affected area
If the above conditions are met, Japan will become a nation without nuclear power reactors at the latest, when the service life of all functioning nuclear reactors is reached.

4. The Abolition of Nuclear Power Plants is Practicable:

There are people, since immediately after the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant Accident, who says that nuclear plants are indispensable for Japanese economy. They repeat the phrase “upon securing their safety”, a phrase which is a groundless and not-concrete affirmation used for the past 50 years. The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (and its predecessor, the Ministry of International Trade and Industry) and its external supportive agency, the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, promoted the use of nuclear generation of electricity since the 1950s. Following the Fukushima Accident, they merely declared that the necessary measures have been taken following the Fukushima tragedy, instead of ascertaining the public safety, already when the overall damages caused by the accident were not yet fully known and the area radioactively polluted was still expanding. They also put pressure on the local citizens, in different sites of nuclear plants, to support the reopening of the nuclear reactors stopped for their periodical tests, affirming that the safety of nuclear reactors was proved to be safe after the Fukushima Accident.

We recall the fact that already when the plan of introducing in Japan nuclear power station began to be discussed, the Science Council of Japan (JSC) pointed out, from a purely scientific point of view, the questions regarding public safety against earthquakes, as well as regarding the disposal of nuclear waste, and the soundness of cost. It is now too late to point out the fact that the present casualties caused by the nuclear accident could have been avoided if the government had not totally ignored the remarks made by the scientists in the JSC.

In a world-wide context, the research, development and utilization of renewable natural energy is progressing and expanding well. During the last two years, the investment of China in this field has been highest in the world, and the investment in the field of renewable energy of the United States and France, two top countries of nuclear power plants, is among the top ten. On the contrary Japan invests so far only a very small part of its R and D expenditure in this field, and the gap with other industrialized countries keeps widening.

The energy policy of Japan has been so far dominated by promoters of nuclear energy. The production of electricity and its distribution and consumption was in the hands of electric companies with regional monopoly. All costs of electricity production have been automatically added to the electricity fee paid by the consumers. It is this system which permits practically all R and D expenditures in the field of energy to be monopolized by nuclear energy production, and importation of renewable energy was hampered by a variety of obstacles. This is why the gaps in renewable energy development between Japan and the other industrialized countries is mainly the consequence of these institutional restrictions.

In order that the inhabitants of the Fukushima Prefecture, victims of the recent accident, can be saved from the danger of becoming the victims of another nuclear disaster, the Fukushima Prefecture has started to take initiative to become one forefront Prefecture in renewable energy development. The Committee of Seven welcomes and wishes to extend to this Prefecture all possible support.

This is, nevertheless, not a problem limited to the Fukushima Prefecture, it consists the whole world which is presently faced with the urgent need to decide between two options. Should humankind continue the 20th century approach to control nature and develop a material civilization based on mass production, mass consumption and mass disposal as it did until now, or should it rather decide to adopt a different approach towards nature, treating it with due reverence, combining an awe to its devastating power with a gratitude towards all its gifts, benefitting from them through an ecologically symbiotic civilization.

The Committee of Seven proposes to the concerned citizens of the world the following concrete steps to develop urgently an energy policy oriented towards the second option:

(1) To adopt a clear priority in research, development and utilization of energy resources on renewable natural energy, and to eliminate all institutional obstacles hampering the reorientation of technology and economics from its present emphasis on scale, concentration and standardization to a new orientation stressing scaling-down, de-concentration, and diversification.

(2) The awareness of the necessity to reduce energy consumption is rapidly spreading among the citizens and the corporate community in Japan. Further reduction of electricity consumption, the increased use of energy-saving devices increasing the efficiency of the use of energetic resources, an extensive effort to reduce the fluctuation of high and low times in energy consumption, the introduction of individual household electricity generation reducing the public consumption of electricity in peak hours, all these measures are now under intensive consideration in Japan, where the major problem is the lack of electricity focuses on short peak hours in the summer.

(3) The two above policies will make it possible the accelerated closure of the remaining nuclear plants, and should lead to shorten the time when all nuclear plants are closed down definitively.

In applying the above policies, it is essential to cease thinking that energy should be generated according to an unlimited demand of the national economy, and give absolute priority to the right of the citizens to live in peace free from fear and wants, and reduce the use of energetic resources in accordance with the citizen’s will to live simply within the range of energy resources usable without any danger on their security and prosperity.

Since the mid-1950s, the successive Liberal Democratic Government of Japan developed a national policy to develop the technological capacity of Japan to have access to nuclear armament while not becoming a nuclear weapon country during the time they keep power. In fact the nuclear power stations were developed, and a massive production of plutonium was realized with the acquisition of uranium enrichment. This policy combined with the nuclear umbrella strategy presupposing the usefulness of nuclear weaponry made Japan suspicious of intending an eventual access to the nuclear power club. If Japan decides unambiguously to cease using nuclear power generation of electricity this suspicion will be removed in the eyes of the world.

5. The Strengthening of IAEA Intervention in Nuclear Power Plant

IAEA which was founded in 1957 as a special organization of the United Nations contributed to develop the peaceful use of nuclear energy and to prevent the military utilization of its activities in the non-nuclear weapon countries. The Chernobyl Nuclear Plant Accident of 26 April 1986, the leakage of radioactive materials to environment was terminated after ten days of the accident, and IAEA organized an international expert meeting in Vienna, four months later in August 25 to 29.

At the break of the Accident of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, we hoped that an unconditional cooperation, beyond differences of viewpoints, could be developed, domestically and internationally, towards the earliest resolution of the Accident. This is why we have abstained from any critical remarks until today. However, it is to be regretted that even now four months after the Accident, it is not yet possible to make an accurate assessment of all the aspects of the Accident.

When we study the activities of the TEPCO and of the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency they lacked any long range perspective and kept taking short term measures which are simply disappointing. On top of this, their optimistic estimation of the situation caused them to take action only too late and led to the inacceptable aggravation of the disaster. The lack of their transparency made it difficult to assess the real situation and the citizens were thus excluded from the process of recovery. The Government of Japan and TEPCO should have trusted the citizens and tell them frankly about uncertainties and about potential dangers. They did not do so and they have lost the credibility from citizens and this led us to the present impossible situation.

The effect of accident of nuclear power plants expands over the national boarder and the limit of the territorial waters. We hope not to leave measures only to the concerned parties but to concentrate all wisdom together from all over the world. We expect in the future a more active role played by IAEA. This Organization should prepare in peaceful times in preparation of emergencies, international standards on public safety, taking into consideration both the scientific and technological and the social aspects of the safety of nuclear reactors.

IAEA should conduct inspections not only to prevent the military misuse of the nuclear issues, but also to guarantee their full knowledge of the large facilities developed for the peaceful use of nuclear energy.

This would permit their intervention in case of nuclear emergencies, which should not be limited to giving advice in case they are consulted, but a more active role in organizing expert teams and play a leading role in the process towards the complete resolution of the nuclear accidents.

We sincerely expect the IAEA and all member states to discuss this problem.

We wish also to draw the attention of the citizens and the experts concerned about the possible sources of insecurity which accompanies the present trend of export of nuclear plants from industrial countries including Japan to the developing countries. This export is inevitably accompanied by a potential great disaster. Some accidents of nuclear plants may occur following natural calamities, and this may cause unbearable situations of insecurity for the vulnerable citizens in the recipient countries. We firmly believe that such exportation should not be permitted.
We appeal to the international community to take positive actions to develop international cooperation in strengthening the research, development and utilization of renewable natural energy.

6.Concluding Remarks:

Japan experienced a man-made catastrophic situation, the explosion of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, following the acts of God, the Earthquake and Tsunami during the March 11 East Japan Earthquake. Japan, thus, became the victim of both the military use of nuclear power in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and of its peaceful utilization in Fukushima.

This is why, the Committee of Seven for World Peace Appeals, shares the sincere wish of many citizens of Japan, in calling upon all the peoples of good-will of the World at large to start a global movement towards the abolition of all military use of nuclear power as well as the closure of all nuclear power plants.
PDF Appeal→104e.pdf