When Disaster Isn’t a Zero-Sum Game
Image Credit: US Navy

When Disaster Isn’t a Zero-Sum Game

0 Likes
3 comments

Since last month, Japan’s leadership has understandably been focusing on managing the aftermath of the three-fold disaster that struck the north-east of the country. But as it grapples with the enormous projected cost of years of reconstruction efforts, one question has received much less attention: How will the crisis affect Japan’s global engagement?

The answer is more encouraging than you might think.

This isn’t to say that there aren’t genuine reasons why Japan’s leadership might be tempted to disengage, at least temporarily. After all, the total cost of the earthquake and tsunami are enormous. Estimates vary, but the World Bank has suggested it could top $235 billion, while Japan’s Cabinet Office’s has suggested $309 billion. These figures don’t even include the long-term effects of the ongoing problems at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant.

With this in mind, it’s no surprise that the main impact on Japan’s international presence will have an economic dimension, most likely concerning Japan’s Official Development Assistance (ODA). Indeed, the effect on ODA is already being felt. The cabinet has adopted its first $49 billion supplementary budget to finance reconstruction, but instead of issuing deficit-covering bonds, the government is reallocating funds. As part of this, ODA for FY2011 will be reduced by 10 percent, meaning an about $611 million cut. Yet while this reduction is undoubtedly significant, it’s half the figure that was originally floated, a number that would have slashed Japan’s ODA to $5.37 billion—about what it was in 1982.

Another potential casualty of the disaster could be Japan’s international engagement on climate change. Japan has been promoting nuclear power as a way of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions, and the government had planned by 2020 to have constructed nine new nuclear reactors. This would have allowed Japan to increase the operation ratio of its nuclear plants from 65.7 percent in FY2009 to 85 percent, making the country’s pledge to cut its CO2 emissions by 25 percent from 1990 levels much more feasible.

Unsurprisingly, though, the Fukushima crisis has prompted Prime Minister Naoto Kan to state that the government will review last June’s Basic Energy Plan. Under such circumstances, it’s difficult to see how Japan can avoid downward revisions to its emissions goal, a move that could also compromise the country’s ability to play a leading international role on climate change.

Comments
3
John Chan
May 2, 2011 at 01:13

The only right course for Japan to take is to cut its military spending to half and using the saving the rebuilding the places destroyed by the natural disasters. Looking after the welfare for its people is Japanese government’s sole responsibility, doing anything else is the expression of heartless and mindless of the Japanese Imperialism.

Japan must spending the remaining half of the military funding to convert all its nuclear power plants to latest generation of nuclear power technology. Using 2nd generation of nuclear power technology as disguise in order to produce weapon grade nuclear material is a danger to existence of Japanese race and the island nation itself. Japan must forget its illusion to become master of Asia again, and take action to show its remorse for the war crimes and evil deeds it committed in WWII and all the way up to Meiji Restoration.

For the survival of Japan as a race and culture, Japan must realise it does not have the strategy depth to sustain the devastation imposed on it by the mother nature as well as inviting man made destruction. Its rearmament as encouraged and described in the article is the path of oblivion for Japan. For the survival of Japanese and its prosperity, Japan must listen to Ohmae Kenichi, his book Chugoku Shift is the blue print for Japan to follow.

guest
April 30, 2011 at 00:14

Withdrawing inwards would be a mistake. Instead of feeling sorry for herself, Japan should take advantage of the current goodwill to reach out to Korea and China, and attempt to resolve disputes.

It’s time for Japan to re-frame the strategic environment in East Asia. China, Japan and South Korea should take leading roles; US influence should be diminished.

Patrick Cronin
April 28, 2011 at 21:04

Jeffrey Hornung does a wonderful job at specifying the various ways in which Japan remains actively engaged in international security, even after 3/11, and, more importantly, some of the ways it should expand that role in the months and years ahead. Whether Japan can attempt both full recovery and expanded international engagement, however, will depend to a very large degree on POLITICAL LEADERSHIP.

Share your thoughts

Your Name
required
Your Email
required, but not published
Your Comment
required

Newsletter
Sign up for our weekly newsletter
The Diplomat Brief