MINISTER OF EMBASSY OF JAPAN AT SYMPOSIUM ON TOWARDS A NUCLEAR WEAPON FREE & NON-VIOLENT WORLD, NEW DELHI ON 24 AUGUST 2002

< Introduction >

 It is a great privilege and pleasure for me to be here in this prominent think tank organization.

 The Japanese Ambassador, H.E. Mr. Hirabayashi was invited as the Chief Guest of today’s symposium but as he had another engagement, I have the honour to participate in his stead.

 Today’s topic “Towards a Nuclear Weapon Free and Non-Violent World” is very opportune for two reasons, first because August is the month when we Japanese suffered the holocaust of the atomic bomb twice, in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 57 years ago.

 On 6^th August, about three weeks back, in Hiroshima a memorial ceremony for the victims was held in the presence of Prime Minister Koizumi. He reiterated the resolves of Japanese Government not to repeat this holocaust, to abide by the Peaceful Constitution and to follow non-nuclear three principles; of not producing, not possessing and not allowing the introduction of nuclear weapons into the country.

 The second reason why I think this symposium is timely is that now the tensions between India and Pakistan seem a little bit cooled down, but a month ago many people talked about the possibility of a nuclear war between these two countries.

 I’d like to touch upon this later.

< Nuclear Test by India >

 In May 1998, when India conducted a nuclear test in Pokhran, I was director of South Asia Division of Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Tokyo.

 The reaction of Japanese people to this Indian test was hard and unanimous. On many issues, our Japanese public opinion has different opinions but at least on nuclear tests Japanese opinion is monolitique, regardless of their political thought, gender, age and so on.

 In the wake of the nuclear tests, Japan had to place economic measures against India. Japan suspended its official development aid to India. These measures are based on concerns of the proliferation of nuclear weapons. As director in charge of South Asia including India, I was not in favour of introducing draconian measures against India. Nevertheless there were still pressures to take more severe measures such as suspension of mutual visits of VIPs or postponement of government parleys. I resisted, for in my opinion India is an important country and that we should not define our bilateral relations only from the nuclear point view.

 These measures lasted more than 3 years. During this period, our bilateral nexus surely stagnated. Last October, the Japanese Government discontinued these measures, because we welcomed India’s commitment to continue nuclear test moratorium and follow severe export control on nuclear materials and technologies. We considered also the role, which ought to be played by India in the struggle against terrorism.

 < Japans security environment and its efforts towards a nuclear weapon free world >

 Now I’d like to touch upon Japan’s security environment and its effort towards a nuclear weapon free world. Japan is surrounded by China, Russia, both of which are two military giants having huge territories and enormous nuclear arsenals. Furthermore in the neighbor hood we have unstable elements such as the Korean Peninsula and the Taiwan Straits.

 The end of the Cold War seemed to have changed international security environment, but as far as North East Asia including Japan is concerned, there still exists tension, opaqueness and uncertainty. In order to assure peace and security, Japan is trying to stabilize our surrounding security situation. Our security policy has 3 pillars. One is strengthening our self- defense capacities; two is maintaining the security treaty with the United States. Three is the reinforcement of the international framework of disarmament.

In this context, we pursue nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. As the only country to have suffered the calamity of atomic bomb, we feel responsible and fully entitled to promote endeavors towards a nuclear-weapon free world.

 Among you, participants to this symposium, I’m sure there are some who might think Japan’s stand is inconsistent, that Japan condemned India for conducting nuclear tests, while Japan is under the US nuclear umbrella. In our efforts towards nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, Japan also requires the United States to reduce their nuclear arsenals and promote the non-proliferation regime. I don’t believe that Japan’s position is inconsistent.

 For Japan, which abandoned the option to possess nuclear weapons, the ultimate elimination of those weapons is the absolute element of its security. During the period where nuclear weapons remain, we depend on the US nuclear deterrence against nuclear threat, but at the same time we continue to make efforts steadily in nuclear disarmament, aiming towards the earliest realization of a nuclear-weapon free world.

 < What Japanese want of Indian people >

 Now please let me speak about what we Japanese want of India people. India conducted its nuclear tests in May 1998 because of threat from China and Pakistan. We understand to some extent India’s concerns about its security environment. I don’t say that India’s concerns are groundless, however they are not enough to justify this great nation to go nuclear.

 Without going nuclear, I believe India should be able to preserve its national security. Possession of nuclear weapons is not an element to be considered internationally as a big nation.

 As you know, up till now so many countries capable of manufacturing nuclear weaponry have abandoned this option, like several European countries, such as Germany and South Africa, Brazil, Argentina, Ukraine and Japan.

 I think it would be difficult for Indian people to realize the actual horrors of a nuclear bomb. The ones that fell on Japan instantly killed 200 thousand people in Hiroshima and 100 thousand people in Nagasaki and the effects of radiation persisted for many years later. Even now, 57 years after the holocaust, people still continue to die of the after effects.

 We Japanese learn the history of Hiroshima in the middle school. Many people visit the memorial museum at Hiroshima and lose voice in front of this tremendous human tragedy and loss.

 In my view, Indians tend to treat the issue of nuclear weapons, lightly. During the India-Pakistan tensions, leaders and high-officials of both countries touched upon the eventuality to resort to nuclear weapons.

 In my personal opinion, people should not pronounce the possibility of use of nuclear weapons so carelessly.

 I would like to urge India to seriously consider signing the CTBT and adhere to the NPT. I’m told the Indian Government has no objections in signing and ratifying the CTBT and awaits approval from the Indian Parliament. We are happy to hear this.

 < Tensions between India and Pakistan >

 Before ending my intervention, I would like to touch upon the present tensions between India and Pakistan. When tensions mounted in the beginning of June, the United States and Britain put up travel warnings and urged their nationals to leave this country. Japan did the same and other countries also followed.

 Why? It was done because of the perceived threat of a nuclear war. Unlike the last three wars fought between India and Pakistan, today both nations possess nuclear weapons. This fact totally changed the scene.

Many foreign businessmen left the country, tourists seldom came and the negative effect of the tension on the Indian economy was not negligible. The country risk for investment in India augmented.

 Furthermore I have my doubts as to whether nuclear weapons act as deterrent of war for both countries. Particularly, based on the experience of the Kargil war, Pakistan thinks that war can be a limited war thanks to nuclear weapons, while India deems possible a limited war inspite of nuclear weapons. In such a case nuclear weapons do not function as deterrent.

Under these circumstances, both countries think that a limited war is possible without the threat of it becoming a nuclear war. But is it true? Is there any assurance or guarantee that a limited war would remain so?

In case of Pakistan, the threshold to resort to the use of nuclear weapons is relatively low compared to that of India. Firstly, Pakistan so far is a military regime. The decision lies with President Musharraf and is not under any civilian authority or control. Secondly, Pakistan’s conventional weaponry is inferior to that of India. Thirdly is Pakistan’s non-acceptance in declaring a no-first use of nuclear weapons principle.

Even today, one million soldiers of both Pakistan and India stand eyeball to eyeball along the border and LoC. With continuing tensions, the pressures of an eventual nuclear conflict are stressful.

We sincerely hope that the issue of Kashmir is resolved as soon as possible. It would be difficult at this juncture to reach any sort of final solution, India might however find some formula of assurance along with Pakistan to stabilize the Kashmir situation or at least avert the mounting tensions.  

Finally, it is most important today for the people of the world to confront the true horror of the inhumane atomic bomb. I appeal again, that as the only country having suffered the nuclear holocaust, Japan really would like to see no other victims of the same atrocity, ever.

Thank you for your kind attention.