The Fukushima water release and South Korea: it's complicated
The Fukushima water release and South Korea: It’s complicated
WRITTEN BY YEONSU LEE
15 December 2023
On 13 April 2021, the Japanese government announced its plan to release the treated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plants (FDNPPs), which had been contaminated during the 2011 disaster. Over the past decade, the radioactively contaminated water has been treated and refined through the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) — a pumping and filtration system that eradicates radioactive materials but cannot remove tritium from nuclear-contaminated water. Since the capacities of the tanks storing the water have approached their maximum level, the Japanese government decided to release it into the ocean in 2021.
Japan’s neighbouring countries, China and South Korea, immediately criticised Japan’s plan to release the Fukushima water. Remarkably, the plan to release the water has sparked a complex and heated debate in South Korea, touching on various levels of society. Beyond its environmental and scientific implications, this issue has become a focal point in South Korean domestic politics, highlighting the sharp divide between the governing party and the opposition.
South Korea’s polarised reactions
There is no consensus in South Korea on whether the water is safe enough to be released, with two conflicting opinions on the matter. Although the Korean government has accepted Japan’s plan to release the Fukushima water, politicians, scientists, and citizens continue to raise concerns and criticisms. The opposition, the Democratic Party of Korea, actively expressed their disagreement, citing deep concerns about potential health risks and formed a committee to prevent the release of the water into the ocean. The leader of the opposition party, Lee Jae-Myung, began a hunger strike over the government’s policies. One of the reasons for his indefinite hunger strike was to oppose the release of the Fukushima water from Japan.
Many South Koreans are also concerned about the negative effects of releasing the water, especially the long-term health effects of the radioactive material left in Fukushima. Some scientists highlight the potential hazards from the remaining materials in the Fukushima treated water. They argue that seafood security will be threatened by releasing the Fukushima water into the sea. Particularly, controversy surrounding the dangers of tritium continues because tritium cannot be removed by the treatment process. In this situation, the Korean public fears the negative consequences of releasing the Fukushima water. Indeed, many South Koreans have stockpiled salt due to their fears about the potential negative effects of releasing the Fukushima water. Moreover, a majority of Koreans are hesitant to consume seafood after the release of the water.
Although the South Korean government has accepted Japan’s plan to release the Fukushima water, politicians, scientists, and citizens continue to raise concerns and criticisms.
These reactions do not appear to have a significant and direct impact on South Korea's nuclear energy policy. However, the government announced enhanced radiation tests to allay public fears. This highlights how scientific challenges, public opinion, and policy choices all interact. Even though the immediate impact on policy might not be huge, the fact that the government is taking proactive steps shows they understand how public feeling can influence the decisions they make. It shows how public concerns can play a role in shaping the direction of government policies.
The South Korean government, for its part, has underscored the importance of adhering to 'international' standards and cooperating with Japan on nuclear waste management. This stance has marked a significant departure from the previous South Korean government's position, signalling a notable shift in South Korea-Japan relations. Under President Moon, the South Korea-Japan relationship became stagnant after Japan removed South Korea from its trade whitelist. However, President Yoon began efforts to establish a better relationship with Japan before the controversy over releasing the Fukushima water intensified. Yoon has attempted to improve ties with Japan due to security threats from North Korea and disrupted global supply chains. He resumed summits between South Korea and Japan, tightening cooperation and vowing to develop a better relationship. The issue of releasing the Fukushima water has transcended its scientific and environmental dimensions and has become a matter of political debate in South Korea.
These reactions are notable as, historically, in South Korea, nuclear technology has been understood as a certain and mighty method to develop the country’s economy and its status in international society. This positive attitude towards nuclear technology has tended to neglect nuclear safety issues and the potential dangers of radioactive materials. Even though anti-nuclear movements gained public attention after South Korea became a democracy, anti-nuclear activists have not been able to provide an alternative tool for replacing nuclear technology for national development. Also, although the Fukushima water release is primarily a scientific challenge, it has raised different understandings of security concerns in South Korea.
The governing party and opposition party have incompatible opinions about releasing the Fukushima water, which seems to reflect different understandings of the potential risk from the release. The current government views the risk as significantly low, while the opposition party focuses on international laws, environmental impacts, and human rights. According to the South Korean government, the Fukushima water has met the international standards to be released into the ocean. In contrast, the opposition party worries about the potential hazards of radioactive materials. Despite the same scientific reports from Japan and the IAEA, the two parties show different perceptions of insecurity related to the Fukushima water release.
Framing nuclear technology in South Korea: a hope or risk?
South Koreans show conflicting opinions about nuclear technology because it has played a significant role in the country’s politics and economy. After the liberation from Japan, there was a consensus in Korean society that science and technology were necessary to secure its survival and to become a wealthy country. In this situation, then-President Rhee expressed interest in developing nuclear weapons for technological progress and national defence in the Cold War era. After the Korean War, the South Korean government sought to develop nuclear technology for national reconstruction while competing with North Korea. More recently, President Moon implemented a nuclear power phase-out policy that aims to halt the use of nuclear power plants. However, he has also shown an interest in acquiring nuclear-powered submarines. Economically, Yoon’s administration is eager to export South Korea’s nuclear power plants.
Before the Fukushima disaster, South Korea’s nuclear reactors provided approximately 40 per cent of the national electricity capacity. Moreover, the government planned to increase Korea’s nuclear capacity up to 56 per cent by the year 2020. The Fukushima disaster has not affected the Korean nuclear programme, although the government has emphasised safety factors. However, the Korean public’s attitudes towards nuclear technology are not uniformly favourable and tend to vary based on positive or negative events. As a result, although the South Korean government’s position on nuclear technology has been consistent, public opinion tends to emphasise its disadvantages when a negative nuclear event, such as the Fukushima accident, occurs.
Given the widespread concerns regarding the Fukushima water among South Koreans, the issue will likely remain important in domestic politics. The key scientific issue in the Fukushima water release is the potential harmfulness of tritium, which cannot be fully eliminated by the ALPS treatment. While the South Korean government has officially announced the water’s minimal impacts, the opposition party and civic groups are still severely concerned about its long-term effects on humans and seafood. With these two conflicting views, Koreans are explicitly expressing their frustration with the current administration’s response, and the opposition party will likely raise more doubts about the Yoon administration’s political capacity. However, the Fukushima water release is unlikely to affect popular preference for nuclear technology more broadly. Indeed, recent polls indicate significant support among South Koreans for pursuing nuclear armament.
The future of nuclear technology in South Korea
Due to unknown and uncertain risks, the Fukushima water release has raised diverse nuclear-related concerns in South Korea. Nuclear technology, in particular, has been considered a pivotal method in South Korean politics and economic development. Therefore, most nuclear-related challenges are not only purely scientific but also political in the South Korean context. Beyond its scientific dimensions, the controversy surrounding the water release underscores the deeply rooted political nature of nuclear-related challenges in South Korea. As the government's decision to agree to the discharge faces opposition and public protests, it is clear that the nuclear issue cannot be a purely technical matter but a socio-political issue that stirs emotions, ideological divisions, and differing visions for the nation's future. The continuous debate about the Fukushima water release emphasises the necessity for thoughtful approaches that go beyond the scientific aspects of nuclear challenges, recognising the intricate socio-political context within which these issues unfold.
DISCLAIMER: All views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent that of the 9DASHLINE.com platform.
Author biography
Yeonsu Lee is a PhD candidate researching nuclear-related issues and security in Northeast Asia at the University of Leeds. Image credit: Flickr/IAEA Imagebank.