Field Report on the Great East Japan Earthquake: Current Status and Lessons Learned

On May 3rd, the East Asia Institute (EAI), in collaboration with the Association for Modern Japanese Studies, hosted the 15th Infrastructure Vision Forum under the theme "Field Report on the Great East Japan Earthquake: Current Status and Lessons Learned" to discuss the lessons and implications of the Great East Japan Earthquake and the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Following a report by a nuclear power plant inspection team, led by the Association for Modern Japanese Studies, on their site visit after the earthquake, the forum engaged in discussions with experts from relevant fields and government officials regarding the lessons South Korea can draw from the Fukushima nuclear disaster. The presentations and key discussion points are as follows.

Political Implications of the Great Disaster

The Great Disaster and Japanese Politics

While the scale of the earthquake and tsunami exceeded all expectations (想定外), and the subsequent nuclear accident compounded the situation, leading to unavoidable circumstances for the government, it was assessed that systemic issues arose in the Japanese government's initial response and its handling of the nuclear accident.

In response to this disaster, the Japanese people and society demonstrated an orderly and calm demeanor, earning international praise for the 'advancement of the human spirit'.

Despite the Kan Naoto administration's desperate efforts, distrust and dissatisfaction with the government continue to spread, further weakening the already precarious foundation of the administration and making political stability unlikely in the near future.

International Politics of the Great Disaster

Following the reversal of China's and Japan's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2010 and Japan's subdued response during the Senkaku Islands dispute between China and Japan, this great disaster has been imprinted as an event symbolizing the decline of Japan's national power and fortune in international politics. It starkly revealed the collapse of the Japanese system, the limitations of a society reliant on manuals, and the absence of leadership, thereby accelerating the advent of an East Asian era dominated by the two major powers, the US and China (G2).

Due to psychological factors, the international community perceives the level of risk in Japan to be excessively high, exceeding the actual problematic situation. Consequently, significant damage is being incurred due to rumors and reputational harm (風評).

The Great Disaster and the Trilateral Equation of South Korea-Japan Relations

The nationwide atmosphere of support for Japan following the great earthquake demonstrated the potential for South Korea and Japan to develop into true good neighbors (善隣). Aid to Japan will enhance South Korea's diplomatic standing and serve as an asset for future diplomatic relations with Japan, thus requiring sustained effort.

The Japanese government's announcement regarding the screening of textbooks has led to a sharp cooling of Korean sentiment towards Japan. In fact, this screening process, led by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), is understood as a 'decision of non-decision' made according to established procedures. However, it is imperative to clearly convey to Japan that the textbook and Dokdo disputes, as issues related to territorial sovereignty and historical perception, are non-negotiable matters.

The Fukushima nuclear disaster is an international challenge that necessitates fundamental consideration of nuclear safety and energy issues on an East Asian and global scale. Therefore, cooperation systems at regional and international levels must be strengthened regarding nuclear power issues.

Current Status and Implications of the Nuclear Disaster

Roadmap for Responding to the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident

On April 17th, TEPCO announced a roadmap outlining phased cooling, containment, and monitoring plans, designating 'Step 1' as the stage where radiation levels are steadily decreasing, and 'Step 2' as the stage where radioactive material leakage is managed and radiation levels are significantly reduced. The roadmap projected the achievement of 'Step 1' within three months and 'Step 2' within six months, setting a goal to complete the management of the nuclear accident within the year.

Implications and Aftermath of the Nuclear Disaster

This incident has heightened awareness regarding nuclear safety. The risks associated with nuclear energy, which had been somewhat overlooked amidst the atmosphere of a nuclear renaissance, have re-emerged as a significant issue and are expected to have considerable repercussions on the nuclear energy policies of various countries in the future.

Since the 2008 G8 Summit, nuclear issues have been defined as problems of safeguard, safety, and security (3S), with separate guidelines established for each. However, this incident demonstrated that the issue of nuclear safety (safety) can easily escalate into a security (security) issue, to the extent that half of the entire Self-Defense Forces personnel had to be mobilized for accident response. This necessitates a discussion on whether new concepts are required concerning the 3S framework moving forward. This is particularly important in relation to setting the agenda for the 2012 Nuclear Security Summit.

Due to the varying nature of nuclear accidents, the lessons learned through experience differ. Therefore, establishing an international cooperation network for sharing experiences is essential.

Informal networks are as important as formal ones. This nuclear incident confirmed that information obtained through official channels tends to be overly conservative and takes too long to acquire, highlighting the importance of developing informal networks. Strengthening informal networks is particularly crucial for promoting cooperation among South Korea, China, and Japan, which are in a competitive relationship regarding the nuclear industry.

Perceptions of Key Japanese Figures

An Unforeseeable Situation (想定外)

Among key figures in Japan, the prevailing assessment was that the tsunami's reach to the Sendai Plain was an 'unforeseeable situation' (想定外). However, some criticized the event as a man-made disaster (人災) rather than a natural disaster (天災), pointing out that neighboring prefectures to Fukushima had already prepared tsunami countermeasures. In particular, voices of self-reflection were high regarding nuclear issues, stating that the concept of 'unforeseeable' could not be applied.

Problems with the Japanese Government's Response System

Many pointed out issues with the command structure centered on the 'Headquarters' functioning as a control tower. It was suggested that measures must be developed to rapidly transition from the hierarchical administrative system of normal times to an accident response system in the event of an emergency. Criticism was also raised that the excessive number of related organizations, including the Reconstruction Council, the Nuclear Disaster Response Headquarters, the Emergency Disaster Response Headquarters, the Nuclear Safety Commission, and the Nuclear Safety Agency, and the lack of horizontal coordination among them led to a failure in unifying information channels and public disclosure.

It was pointed out that the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) simultaneously handling both nuclear promotion and regulation led to inappropriate personnel transfers and bureaucratic inertia. Therefore, a proposal was made to separate the Nuclear Safety Agency, which is currently under METI and responsible for nuclear regulation, integrate it into the Nuclear Safety Commission, and upgrade it from an advisory body to an independent administrative agency.

It was pointed out that risk diversification is necessary to prevent localized issues, such as the disruption of Monozukuri component supply, from severely impacting the entire Japanese economy.

Increased Support for the Self-Defense Forces

While public distrust in the government reached 58 percent, positive evaluations of the Self-Defense Forces' activities soared to 95 percent. Furthermore, positive evaluations of strengthened cooperation between the Self-Defense Forces and the US military reached 88 percent.

Limitations of Japan's Response

Limitations of Initial Response

Japan's initial response failed, exacerbating the situation. The core of the roadmap, announced on April 17th, was to cool the reactor by flooding it with water from outside the containment vessel. South Korea had already proposed this solution to the Japanese government in early March, but it was not accepted. As time passed, the containment vessel was eventually damaged, making flooding and cooling difficult. Excessive caution led to a failure in the initial response, resulting in the loss of an opportunity to resolve the problem.

Inadequate Preparedness

Given that tsunamis with wave heights exceeding 15 meters have occurred more than four times in prefectures neighboring Fukushima over the past 100-150 years, it is unreasonable to dismiss the current situation as simply unforeseeable. Generally, establishing disaster preparedness systems incurs significant costs, leading nuclear industry stakeholders to employ every possible rationale to minimize the likelihood of risk. Therefore, this incident is difficult to escape criticism for intentionally disregarding the possibility of problems for the sake of cost reduction, rather than being an unforeseeable issue.

Limitations of Japanese Society: Low Level of Globalization, Component Society

Japan's lack of globalization is also a problem. For Japan, globalization tends to be confined to its relationship with the United States, exhibiting a certain lack of balance. The poor cooperation and information sharing with countries other than the US are also judged to stem from this limitation.

Japan excels in component production but often adopts and uses US systems as they are, leading to limitations in effectively managing problems when they arise within these systems. Consequently, Japan is expected to struggle with resolving this incident for a considerable period. South Korea, with its well-established systems, should leverage this opportunity to strengthen cooperation with Japan. Enhanced South Korea-Japan cooperation would allow South Korea to learn from Japan's advanced technology in components.

Bureaucratization of Nuclear-Related Institutions

Although Japan plans to separate the Nuclear Safety Agency from METI to strengthen regulatory functions, a more serious issue is the excessive specialization of nuclear-related personnel and the bureaucratization of organizations, which hinders effective exchange among relevant institutions. To enhance the monitoring and oversight functions of nuclear safety, active information sharing among related institutions is as crucial as ensuring the independence of regulatory bodies.

Implications for South Korea

Training and Manual Development for Unforeseeable Situations

Based on creative imagination, we must consider improvements in the design of nuclear facilities to prepare for extreme natural disaster scenarios that could be considered unforeseeable from our perspective. In particular, training and manual development are needed to prepare for the scenario of total power loss, which has been identified as critical through this incident.

Review of Decision-Making Processes for Great Disaster Preparedness

Japan's failure in initial response was partly due to confusion within the accident response headquarters. The plant manager, who should have served as the overall responsible person, was unable to reconcile information from international society and political circles (top-down information) with information from plant designers and operational staff (bottom-up information). Learning from this, South Korea needs to review its nuclear power plant management decision-making processes and establish manuals in preparation for great disaster situations during normal times.

Enhancing the Competence of Nuclear Operating Technicians

Initial response to nuclear accidents is handled by the responsible operating technicians. Therefore, enhancing the competence of field technicians is essential for improving nuclear safety. It is crucial to cultivate personnel with high levels of expertise and pride through measures such as improving the treatment of nuclear technicians.

Strengthening Exchange of Basic Information on Nuclear Power Among South Korea, China, and Japan

Nuclear issues can cause catastrophic damage to neighboring countries. Therefore, South Korea, China, and Japan need to enhance mutual information exchange regarding each country's nuclear facilities. Currently, even basic information about the structure of nuclear facilities is not shared, making it difficult to assess the severity of a problem and devise countermeasures in the event of an accident. While sharing sensitive information may be difficult, a network for basic information exchange among South Korea, China, and Japan must be established. To this end, South Korea, in particular, needs to make diplomatic efforts to mediate between China and Japan.■

Moderator

Ha Young-sun, Professor, Seoul National University

Presenters

Kim Ki-seok, Professor, Kangwon National University

Kim Sook-hyun, Professor, Tohoku University

Kim Woong-hee, Professor, Inha University

Lee Won-deok, Professor, Kookmin University

Jeon Jin-ho, Professor, Kwangwoon University

Discussants

Kim Ki-hyun, Senior Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade

Baek Won-pil, Senior Executive Vice President, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute

Yoon Kyung-min, Reporter, YTN

Lee Sook-jong, President, East Asia Institute

Jang Soon-heung, Professor, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology