From Nuclear Hedging to Korea-Japan Nuclear Weapons Free Zone: Japan's Nuclear Options

Q3 Social Sciences Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies Pub Date : 2016-10-27 DOI:10.22439/CJAS.V34I1.5189
Tianjiao Jiang
{"title":"From Nuclear Hedging to Korea-Japan Nuclear Weapons Free Zone: Japan's Nuclear Options","authors":"Tianjiao Jiang","doi":"10.22439/CJAS.V34I1.5189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses both the positive and negative effects of Japan's three nuclear strategies: nuclear hedging, nuclear breakout, and the Korea-Japan Nuclear Weapons Free Zone (KJNWFZ). Nuclear hedging has been the longest established strategy to protect Japan's national security but it will become increasingly unreliable in the coming decades. Nuclear breakout, an alternative strategy, is impractical due to its high costs. In comparison, this article argues that KJNWFZ is the ideal option for Japan's future nuclear strategy. However, in recent years, the Japanese government has maintained the status quo, despite the scale of anti-nuclear protest across the country following the Fukushima crisis. Civilian anti-nuclear does not effectively in-fluence nuclear strategy decision-making, due to a combination of national electoral politics, interests groups, the 'veto players' of the right-wing, and the broader regional security context. In conclusion, the nuclear hedging policy remains the accepted balance of interests supported by decision-makers.","PeriodicalId":35904,"journal":{"name":"Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies","volume":"34 1","pages":"81-111"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22439/CJAS.V34I1.5189","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article discusses both the positive and negative effects of Japan's three nuclear strategies: nuclear hedging, nuclear breakout, and the Korea-Japan Nuclear Weapons Free Zone (KJNWFZ). Nuclear hedging has been the longest established strategy to protect Japan's national security but it will become increasingly unreliable in the coming decades. Nuclear breakout, an alternative strategy, is impractical due to its high costs. In comparison, this article argues that KJNWFZ is the ideal option for Japan's future nuclear strategy. However, in recent years, the Japanese government has maintained the status quo, despite the scale of anti-nuclear protest across the country following the Fukushima crisis. Civilian anti-nuclear does not effectively in-fluence nuclear strategy decision-making, due to a combination of national electoral politics, interests groups, the 'veto players' of the right-wing, and the broader regional security context. In conclusion, the nuclear hedging policy remains the accepted balance of interests supported by decision-makers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从核对冲到韩日无核武器区:日本的核选择
本文论述了日本三大核战略:核对冲战略、核突破战略和韩日无核武器区战略的正负效应。核对冲一直是保护日本国家安全的历史最悠久的战略,但在未来几十年,它将变得越来越不可靠。另一种战略是核突破,但由于成本高昂,不切实际。通过比较,本文认为KJNWFZ是日本未来核战略的理想选择。然而,近年来,尽管福岛危机后全国各地爆发了大规模的反核抗议活动,但日本政府一直维持现状。由于国家选举政治、利益集团、右翼的“否决权玩家”以及更广泛的地区安全背景的综合作用,民间反核不能有效地影响核战略决策。综上所述,核对冲政策仍然是决策者支持的公认的利益平衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies
Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊最新文献
Foreword Beyond Methodological Nationalism Pasts of the Present Fūdo in Foreign Language Learning in Japan and Finland Alessandro Rippa, Borderland Infrastructures: Trade, Development and Control in Western China
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1