Peace What Peace
Published in The Letcombe Blog October 2005
So what of the IAEA being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. I am in in two minds about it, on the one hand you have the feeling that the Nobel Foundation is trying to appease the IAEA over the war in Iraq. For it was them under the guidance of Dr ElBaradei along with Dr Blix that stated there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and yet despite their assurances the Americans and the British still went in.
If you then you look at the situation in Iran you also wonder if the award is not or could not be seen as an attempt to show the legality of the position by Europe and the US against Iran. Both nations still have nuclear weapons and both show no signs cutting their nuclear arsenal in fact the British government is in the process of commissioning the replacement for the Trident system. I am not saying that Iran is right or wrong over what it is doing but this award could be taken as a sign of double standards.
On top of nuclear weapons we also have Nuclear power. We have seen over the past weeks and months that the infinite supply of oil and gas is by no means infinite and is starting to slow up. World demand for oil now outstrips supply and has lead to the high prices being paid. We have also seen the catastrophic effects of the use of fossil fuels on the global climate and as such their use needs to be reduced and eventually stopped. I have noticed in the media recently that there has been a growing call for the use of Nuclear power as an alternative. Do we all have short memories, from the tragedy's of 3 Mile Island, Sellafield and not forgetting Chernobyl . It is also worth noting that a recent report into the Chernobyl disaster, "Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts", just released by the Chernobyl Forum, came to the conclusion that the health effects have been far smaller than expected. However the sponsors of the new report include, the International Atomic Energy Agency, along with the World Health Organisation, the United Nations Development Programme and the Governments of Ukraine, Russia and Belarus. The report says 4,000 cases olf thyroid cancer, mainly in children, were attributable to the accident. In 99 percent of the cases this illness has been curable. Only 50 deaths - all among the reactor staff and emergency workers - could be directly attributed to acute radiation exposure after Chernobyl's Reactor No. 4 exploded in April 1986, the panel found. The "Chernobyl Forum" considers the impacts of poverty and psychic diseases caused by the living conditions in the former Soviet Union to have much greater health effects than the radiation from Chernobyl.
Vladimir Tsalko, from the Chernobyl committee of Belarus, one of the three main countries affected by the explosion of the reactor in Ukraine, said cancer would not be the only contributor to the eventual death toll. "Our experts predict that in the nearest future alongside the growth of thyroid cancer cases, there is high probability of increased cancer diseases as well as cardiovascular and other non-cancer diseases," Tsalko said in a speech to the opening session of the Chernobyl Forum.
The new report has however been criticised as "quite inappropriate" by radiation scientists and Chernobyl relief organisations. The report is accused to be playing down the true dimension of the catastrophe. Some statements of the study are challenged as "demonstrably false". Experts are also concerned that the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency, may have had "too great an influence" on the study. The agency that has just been awarded the Nobel Peace prize.
How can we consider using nuclear power as an alternative. If we look at the facts, it is unsafe, stays in a toxic state for millenniums and has the danger than it can be used for any type of bomb how can we consider using it again. We should be investing in fuels that are sustainable, recyclable and above all non invasive or damaging the man and the environment.
Maybe I show make my position clear, I hate nuclear full stop. There should be no nuclear power or weapons and as such giving an award of this nature to the IAEA is nothing but a slap in the face for all protesters against them - me included.
The problem however i suspect is compounded by the fact that to the Nobel Foundation there seems to be no one else that could have received it. Who else could you give it to cause at the moment it looks as if there is no one in the world who is looking at peace only war and so it is a bit ironic to be giving a prise for peace in this year. Maybe it should go to the IRA and Gerry Adams for all the work that has been done in the decommissioning of arms in the North here and that there looks as if, if the UDP can get there act together and stop bickering then there might be peaceful solution. And you? what do you think of it?
(sources: www.chernobyl.info news.bbc.co.uk )
|
