Japan’s longstanding commitment to nuclear disarmament is facing a dramatic test, as the nation’s leading atomic bomb survivors group, Nihon Hidankyo, issued a forceful statement on November 20, 2025, denouncing Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s bid to review the country’s revered Three Non-Nuclear Principles. The group, which earned the Nobel Peace Prize in 2024 for its relentless advocacy for a world free of nuclear weapons, made its position crystal clear: any move to overturn Japan’s decades-old stance against nuclear arms is unacceptable.
According to Kyodo News, Nihon Hidankyo’s statement did not mince words. The group declared it “strongly protests overturning” the government’s long-held policy of not possessing, producing, or permitting the introduction of nuclear weapons. Their message was both urgent and deeply personal, rooted in the lived experience of survivors from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the two cities devastated by atomic bombs in August 1945 during the final stages of World War II.
“Steps to abolish nuclear weapons must not be delayed,” the group emphasized, warning that atomic bomb survivors “cannot allow nuclear arms to be brought into Japan or let the country become a base for nuclear war or a target of nuclear attacks.” This plea, sent directly to Prime Minister Takaichi, reflects not only personal trauma but a national ethos that has shaped Japanese security policy for nearly six decades.
The story began in 1967, when then-Prime Minister Eisaku Sato introduced the Three Non-Nuclear Principles in the Japanese Diet, the country’s parliament. These principles—never possessing, never producing, and never permitting the introduction of nuclear weapons—became, in the words of Kyodo News, a “national credo.” Over time, they have served as a moral compass for Japan’s postwar pacifism, even as the country relied on the protective umbrella of U.S. nuclear deterrence.
In their latest statement, Nihon Hidankyo urged the government not only to uphold these principles but to enshrine them into law. “We call on the government to uphold the three non-nuclear principles and put them into law,” the group insisted, seeking to safeguard their legacy against the shifting winds of international security and domestic politics.
Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, who assumed office roughly a month before the November 20 statement, is known for her hawkish views on defense. According to government sources cited by Kyodo News and other outlets, Takaichi is considering a review of the non-nuclear weapons principles as part of a broader effort to bolster Japan’s defense capabilities. In particular, she is concerned that the third principle—the ban on the entry of nuclear weapons into Japan—could undermine the effectiveness of U.S. nuclear deterrence.
“Takaichi is concerned that the third principle, banning the entry of nuclear weapons, weakens the effectiveness of U.S. nuclear deterrence,” government sources told Kyodo News. This line of reasoning has sparked intense debate within Japan, as the government prepares to review key national security documents by the end of 2026.
For many Japanese citizens, the thought of nuclear weapons returning to their soil is not just a policy issue—it’s a visceral fear. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki left scars that have shaped generations. Survivors, known as hibakusha, have become powerful advocates for nuclear disarmament, their testimonies serving as haunting reminders of the weapons’ destructive power. The Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Nihon Hidankyo in 2024 was a global recognition of these efforts and a testament to the group’s enduring influence.
Yet, the world has changed since 1967. Regional tensions in East Asia have risen, with North Korea’s nuclear program and China’s growing military assertiveness prompting some Japanese policymakers to reconsider the country’s security posture. Prime Minister Takaichi’s willingness to revisit the Three Non-Nuclear Principles reflects these anxieties—but it also collides head-on with Japan’s pacifist identity and the moral authority of the hibakusha.
The National Security Strategy, one of three major security documents approved by the Japanese Cabinet in 2022, explicitly states, “The basic policy of adhering to the Three Non-Nuclear Principles will remain unchanged in the future.” This official stance, reported by Kyodo News, was meant to reassure both the public and Japan’s international partners that the country would not waver from its commitment. Now, with Takaichi’s administration considering changes, that reassurance appears less certain.
Domestically, the debate has ignited strong doubts and concerns. Critics argue that even discussing the possibility of allowing nuclear weapons into Japan could erode the country’s credibility as a champion of disarmament. Supporters of a review, however, point to the evolving security environment and the need for flexibility in the face of new threats. The tension between these perspectives is palpable, and the stakes—both moral and strategic—are high.
“Atomic bomb survivors cannot allow nuclear arms to be brought into Japan or let the country become a base for nuclear war or a target of nuclear attacks,” Nihon Hidankyo reiterated, laying bare the human cost at the heart of the policy dispute. Their call for enshrining the three principles into law is not just a plea for continuity but a demand for legal safeguards against what they see as an existential threat.
Prime Minister Takaichi’s supporters argue that Japan must adapt to a rapidly changing security landscape. They contend that the third principle, by restricting the entry of nuclear weapons, ties the hands of policymakers and could limit Japan’s deterrence options at a time when regional rivals are growing bolder. “Eager to bolster Japan’s defense capabilities, Takaichi is concerned that the third principle, banning the entry of nuclear weapons, weakens the effectiveness of U.S. nuclear deterrence,” government sources told Kyodo News.
On the other side, peace activists, opposition politicians, and many ordinary citizens see any weakening of the Three Non-Nuclear Principles as a betrayal of Japan’s postwar identity and a dangerous step toward re-militarization. They warn that even opening a debate on the issue could send the wrong message to the world and undermine decades of advocacy for nuclear abolition.
The coming months are likely to see heated discussions both inside and outside Japan’s parliament. As the government moves to revise its key national security documents by the end of 2026, the fate of the Three Non-Nuclear Principles will be watched closely not only in Tokyo but around the globe. For the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and for those who have dedicated their lives to nuclear disarmament, the stakes could hardly be higher.
Japan now stands at a crossroads, with its future nuclear policy hanging in the balance. The outcome of this debate will shape not only the nation’s security strategy but its very identity in the eyes of its citizens and the world.
