Photo/Illutration Rows of storage tanks holding treated water cover the grounds of the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant. (Takeshi Iwashita)

Japanese government officials expected a reaction from China but were caught off-guard by the severity of Beijing’s response to the Aug. 24 discharge of treated radioactive water into the ocean.

China, describing the released water as “polluted,” imposed a full-blown import ban on all products from Japan that may have once lived in the sea.

The measure covers fish, shellfish and seaweed in whatever form they have been processed, be it fresh, refrigerated or frozen.

The move will affect fishermen around Japan, not just in Fukushima Prefecture, where the water was discharged from the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.

“This is an abnormal response,” said an official in the prime minister’s office handling foreign affairs.

A high-ranking fisheries ministry official said, “While we expected them to do something, we never imagined it would be this extensive.”

China accounts for the largest share of Japanese seafood exports, at about 20 percent, followed closely by Hong Kong, which has also announced a ban on seafood imports from 10 prefectures in Japan.

In contrast, Japan is not even a top 10 nation in terms of seafood export value to China, so Beijing’s ban will have a negligible effect on the Chinese market.

Prime Minister Fumio Kishida said on Aug. 24 that he would urge China to immediately end the import ban and to join serious discussions about the water-release plan among experts of both nations based on scientific rationale.

The Foreign Ministry lodged a protest with Beijing, but sources in China said the long period of stagnant bilateral ties was behind the latest move, and it would likely take decisions at the highest political levels to resolve the issue.

Although the Chinese Foreign Ministry said Japan has failed to conduct sufficient discussions with stakeholders over the water-discharge plan, a Japanese official involved in such negotiations said, “We have called on the Chinese Foreign Ministry a number of times for discussions based on science but have received no response.”

One source said the wide discrepancy is due to a lack of informal channels that could have allowed for franker discussions between the two sides.

“The only possible way to resolve this issue now is through the highest leadership level,” a senior official of a Chinese think tank involved in foreign policy matters said.

Chinese state media has fueled concerns about the water discharge with reports describing the Japanese plan as “dangerous” and “irresponsible.”

That may have led to a shortage of table salt on the shelves of supermarkets in China and online sites even though the volume of such salt made from seawater is not very large.

The only other governments taking similar stances against Japan are Hong Kong and North Korea, highlighting the political nature of China’s move.

Almost all of Japan’s allies have expressed support for the assessment given by the International Atomic Energy Agency that the water-discharge plan would not have a serious effect on people or the environment.

Still, Tokyo Electric Power Co., the nuclear plant operator handling the water discharge, and a number of government agencies are strengthening efforts to monitor tritium levels in the ocean and seafood off Fukushima Prefecture.

Tritium is the only radioactive element that cannot be removed from contaminated water using the Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS).

TEPCO has established a portal site that provides data from the various agencies. It can be accessed at: https://www.monitororbs.jp.

(This article was compiled from reports by Ryo Inoue in Shanghai, Tokuhiko Saito and Nozomu Hayashi in Beijing, Takuro Chiba, Hironori Kato and Ryo Sasaki in Tokyo.)

Related News