黑料社

TOBA, Japan 鈥� There is the soaring rhetoric. And then there鈥檚 the messy reality.

When US President Barack Obama and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe make a historic visit to Hiroshima on Friday 鈥� the first time a sitting US president has visited the site of the first atomic bomb attack 鈥� their words advocating nuclear disarmament will clash with real-world security necessities.

Far from backing up the vision of a world without nuclear bombs that Obama laid out in a 2009 speech that helped secure a Nobel Peace Prize, his near-finished presidency has seen a multibillion-dollar modernization of the US nuclear force.

Japan鈥檚 long postwar commitment to disarmament, meanwhile, is only possible because of its reliance on the so-called American 鈥渘uclear umbrella鈥� that protects it from antagonistic North Korea and China. Tokyo, should it choose, could probably easily convert its advanced civilian nuclear program into a weapons program, and some conservatives in Abe鈥檚 ruling party have argued that the country鈥檚 pacifist constitution technically allows nuclear weapons.

READ: With Hiroshima, Obama goes where predecessors stayed away

Despite his own mixed record on nukes, Obama likely sees his Hiroshima visit as a worthwhile expenditure of political capital in order to shore up a global nonproliferation effort that seems at times to be crumbling.

Before the most recent of a series of nuclear security summits meant to reduce and protect nuclear material, Obama wrote in March that eliminating all nuclear weapons may not happen in his lifetime. 鈥淏ut we have begun. As the only nation ever to use nuclear weapons, the United States has a moral obligation to continue to lead the way in eliminating them. Still, no one nation can realize this vision alone. It must be the work of the world.鈥�

Obama鈥檚 vision of a world without nuclear weapons was challenged almost immediately.

His April 2009 speech in Prague happened within hours of North Korea鈥檚 launch of a long-range rocket that outsiders, including the United Nations, called a cover for a test of banned missile technology. Pyongyang is still barreling ahead in its push for nuclear-armed missiles that could reach the US mainland.

Obama secured a deal meant to limit Iran鈥檚 nuclear program, if it can be implemented amid mistrust on both sides. But Pakistan and India are still locked in a nuclear standoff. The United States and Russia, which have most of the world鈥檚 nuclear weapons, often see their geopolitical jockeying for position interfere with disarmament efforts. And there are growing worries about the security of nuclear fuel sites around the world.

Obama鈥檚 trip to Hiroshima also comes amid anxiety that North Korea鈥檚 growing nuclear and missile capabilities could lead to the top US allies in Asia, Japan and South Korea, starting their own nuclear weapons programs.

It is highly unlikely either country will go nuclear. It could cause huge political and economic damage 鈥� crippling sanctions, global condemnation 鈥� and jeopardize their alliances with the United States.

But a small group in South Korea, including some conservative members of the ruling party, and some in Japan see the North Korean danger as too grave to rely only on the protection of another country. They also question whether, despite rhetoric from US officials about an 鈥渋ronclad鈥� alliance, Washington would really use nuclear weapons and risk the lives of thousands of American troops should a belligerent North Korea attack.

The Chosun Ilbo, South Korea鈥檚 top newspaper by circulation, said in an editorial weeks after North Korea鈥檚 nuclear test in January that discussions in Seoul on acquiring nuclear weapons were inevitable.

Judging by the level of American involvement in crises in Ukraine and Syria, for example, the newspaper said any US help would come only after Seoul is turned into a 鈥減ile of ashes鈥� by a North Korean nuclear attack.

This fear has been highlighted by Donald Trump, the presumptive presidential nominee for the Republican party in the United States. He has questioned the amount of money the US military is forced to spend to protect its allies, and has suggested that Japan and South Korea should be allowed to develop their own nuclear weapons.

Japan prides itself on its pacifism and disarmament, but it is only through US nuclear deterrence that the country can live alongside nuclear-armed North Korea, China and Russia, without going nuclear itself.

鈥淪ome say this is hypocritical,鈥� said Ralph Cossa, president of the Pacific Forum CSIS think tank, 鈥渂ut I think it is just common sense and good national security policy. The Japanese would certainly be happier if no one had nuclear weapons, but as long as several of its neighbors have them, they welcome being under America鈥檚 nuclear umbrella.鈥�

Yukio Okamoto, a former Japanese diplomat, said Tokyo 鈥渋s in the most difficult position鈥� because it is a nuclear bomb victim, surrounded by potentially hostile nuclear-armed states and dependent for its survival on US nuclear deterrence.

鈥淲e have to walk through a very narrow passage of trying our sincere efforts toward total elimination in the long term, but at the same time trying to preserve the alliance with the United States and not to tarnish the security relationship, especially the nuclear deterrence,鈥� Okamoto said.

Obama finds himself divided between his anti-nuclear vision and the realities of leading a global power.

Worries about Japan and South Korea producing nuclear weapons mean the United States must offer them nuclear protection, thereby 鈥済oing against Obama鈥檚 own call for global denuclearization,鈥� Charles Armstrong, an Asia expert at Columbia University, said. 鈥淎t the same time, the US is modernizing its own nuclear arsenal. Thus, US actions and goals are not entirely consistent.鈥�

Obama鈥檚 trip to Hiroshima will be filled with images of the horrors of nuclear war, and lofty statements about the need to eliminate those weapons. But some argue that for the visit to be successful, it must highlight Asia鈥檚 real nuclear dangers.

Michael Auslin, an analyst with the American Enterprise Institute think tank in Washington, told The Japan Times: 鈥淎sia is concerned about how Washington will deal with a more assertive China and a nuclear North Korea, not with an unrealistic aspiration to rid the world of nuclear weapons.鈥�

Obama may not be able to escape criticism from all sides.

Many conservatives in the United States believe a Hiroshima visit will be a failure because it will be seen as an apology. Nonproliferation activists believe he has not gone far enough in efforts to 鈥渆arn鈥� his Nobel Prize.

鈥淚 did think Obama was serious about his nuclear-free world, but that was six or seven years ago. We are no closer today than we were when he took office to achieving that end,鈥� said Bruce Cumings, an Asia expert at the University of Chicago. 鈥淚鈥檓 sure he will bring up getting rid of nukes in his speech, but he鈥檚 in a much weaker position today, because of the ongoing upgrading of American nuclear weapons.鈥�

RELATED STORIES

After Brussels, leaders tackling threat of nuclear terrorism