In recent Sino-Japanese relations, Japan's discharge of nuclear-contaminated water has been the focus of intense debate between the two countries. Japan tried to justify its actions through a triple war, while China fought back resolutely, demonstrating a diplomatic firmness.
First, Japan questioned the rationality of China's ban on the import of aquatic products, arguing that it was hostile to the Japanese. However, China's position, which is based on concerns about public health and environmental safety, resonates with many countries around the Pacific. China*** stressed that China** has always protected the safety and legitimate rights and interests of foreigners in China, including Japanese citizens, in accordance with the law.
Second, Japan has sought to question China's concerns about the scientificity of its emissions plans. The data released by TEPCO claimed that there was no problem with the concentration of tritium in seawater, but Chinese Ambassador Wu Jianghao raised the "three questions of the soul", pointing out that the Japanese side ignored the risks of other radionuclides, lacked comprehensive monitoring of the marine environment, and refused to participate in the international monitoring mechanism, which revealed the contradictions and opacity of Japan.
Finally, Japan tried to use the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report to defend itself, but China's deputy permanent representative to the United Nations, Geng Shuang, made it clear that the IAEA never supported Japan's plan to discharge the sea, but stressed that it was Japan's decision. China has been emphasizing that if Japan** considers the nuclear-contaminated water safe, there is no need to discharge it into the sea;This behavior should be avoided even more if it is not safe.
In this battle, China's response has demonstrated its importance to international concerns and its commitment to environmental protection. If Japan is unable to respond to the concerns of the international community with concrete actions, then doubts about it will continue. This debate is not only about the relationship between the two countries, but also about the future of global environmental protection and public health.