Minamitorishima as a Final Disposal Site: Do media that focus only on criticism still serve a meaningful role?

This marks tangible progress. Yet major newspapers such as Asahi Shimbun and Hokkaido Shimbun quickly responded with sharp criticism. Their arguments, however, raise a fundamental question: are they contributing to progress, or merely commenting from the sidelines?

A first under government initiative

The Minamitorishima case would be the fourth literature survey in Japan, following Suttsu and Kamoenai in Hokkaido and Genkai in Saga Prefecture. What makes this case different is that it is the first initiated directly by the government, rather than through local application.

The literature survey—conducted over two years using existing data—is only the first stage in a multi-step process that could lead to overview investigations (such as drilling) and eventually detailed underground studies. The government provides financial support of ¥2 billion for this stage.

Minamitorishima, Japan’s easternmost island, lies roughly 2,000 km from Tokyo and has no permanent residents. Given past criticism that site selection should not be “left entirely to local governments,” an uninhabited island could be seen as a pragmatic and objective candidate.

Framing the decision as “overzealous”

An Asahi Shimbun editorial (April 16) cautioned that the government may be “pushing ahead too aggressively,” suggesting a risk of overriding opposition.

Yet such a claim is presented without clear evidence. Labeling the decision as “overzealous” risks substituting assumption for analysis.

The same editorial speculates that the government’s move may be intended to deflect criticism of its broader policy of “maximum utilization of nuclear power,” and questions whether selecting a remote island reflects an expectation of easier local acceptance.

But the latter point is precisely one of the rational considerations in site selection. Fewer residents mean fewer direct conflicts, which can facilitate smoother dialogue and implementation. That is not a flaw in the process but an inherent factor in choosing among imperfect options.

At a time when geopolitical instability can threaten energy supply, governments are expected to weigh such trade-offs carefully. Minimizing foreseeable conflict while advancing necessary infrastructure is a legitimate policy objective.

Persistent skepticism, limited engagement

Another concern lies in how uncertainty is framed. Suggesting possible “intentions” behind government decisions, while simultaneously stating they are “unclear,” creates ambiguity without providing clarification.

If motives are uncertain, the role of journalism should be to investigate and verify them. Without that effort, commentary risks appearing detached from the responsibility of informing the public.

Coverage has also tended to amplify opposition voices while maintaining a consistently critical stance regardless of circumstances. This raises the question of whether the goal is to evaluate policy or simply to challenge it.

A similar tone from Hokkaido Shimbun

Hokkaido Shimbun (April 15) questioned whether selecting smaller, less populous municipalities amounts to “targeting vulnerabilities,” casting doubt on the fairness of the process.

Yet identifying feasible sites for a national infrastructure project is inherently complex. It requires balancing geological suitability, social acceptance, and administrative feasibility. Describing this process as “targeting weaknesses” risks oversimplifying a multifaceted decision.

The same editorial also implied that Ogasawara Village deferred judgment to the central government without sufficient independent consideration. Such phrasing may be perceived as dismissive of local decision-making, particularly given the responsibility borne by local leaders in engaging with national policy.

Lessons from genetically modified crops

Japan’s experience with genetically modified (GM) crops offers a relevant parallel. Although widely cultivated worldwide, GM crops have never taken root domestically, largely due to persistent opposition movements.

Even trial projects by public research institutions have faced lawsuits, placing significant strain on researchers and, in some cases, halting progress altogether.

This history illustrates how sustained opposition can shape policy outcomes—not always in ways that align with scientific or economic considerations.

The advantage of limited opposition

From a practical standpoint, minimizing conflict can significantly influence project viability. Government officials often face substantial stress and resource burdens in managing opposition, sometimes exceeding the challenges of technical implementation.

In this context, Minamitorishima’s lack of residents presents a clear procedural advantage. Even if costs are higher, the absence of local opposition may allow for steady progress.

A rare note of support

Among major newspapers, Sankei Shimbun (April 15) offered a contrasting view, calling the decision “extremely important for ensuring nuclear power remains a sustainable energy source in resource-poor Japan” and expressing respect for what it described as a rational decision.

This perspective may resonate with a broader segment of the public that prioritizes forward movement over prolonged debate.

The role of the media

Critical scrutiny is an essential function of the media. However, when criticism becomes reflexive and offers little in the way of constructive alternatives, it risks undermining its own relevance.

If public discourse is to contribute to solving complex issues such as HLW disposal, it must go beyond identifying flaws. It must also engage with the difficult question of how to move forward.