DOCSLIB.ORG

Chernobyl +20: IAEA/WHO Release Are (Italics Our Emphasis)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chernobyl +20: IAEA/WHO Release Are (Italics Our Emphasis) The main observations and conclusions of the Chernobyl +20: IAEA/WHO release are (italics our emphasis): Up to 4,000 people could eventually die of The accident continues radiation exposure from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (NPP) accident nearly 20 years ago, concluded an international team of more than 100 scientists. A “Nuclear Renaissance” requires a major As of mid-2005, fewer than 50 deaths had been re-write of history, and official agencies are directly attributed to radiation from the disaster, almost using the 20th anniversary of the Chernobyl all being highly exposed rescue workers, many who died within months of the accident and as late as 2004. accident as the springboard to do so. 4,000 cases of thyroid cancer have occurred, mainly in children, but…except for nine deaths, all of April 26th marks the 20th anniversary of the world’s them have recovered. The survival rate among such worst nuclear accident – the explosion and fire at the cancer victims, judging from experience in Belarus, has Chernobyl-4 nuclear reactor near Kiev, Ukraine. For the been almost 99%... “the team of international experts last 20 years the accident has hung like the death-shroud found no evidence for any increases in the incidence of it is over not only Eastern Europe, but also the nuclear leukemia and cancer among affected residents.” industry and its plans to build new reactors. Desperate in its stagnation in the US and abroad, the industry is now attempting to hijack the anniversary for its own ends, and re-write the tragic history that the accident caused to make building new nuclear reactors more palatable to the public. However, new understandings of the effects of low-doses of ionizing radiation on health, and a more determined and unified safe-energy/anti- nuclear community will stand in the way of these plans. 1984 – all over again… While the “nuclear renaissance” has been around officially since late 2001, the nuclear industry and its friends in world governments and agencies have been working exceedingly hard and systematically to prepare the public for nuclear expansion. To do so, the industry Approximately 1,000 on-site reactor staff and has had to work overtime to minimize the effects of both emergency workers were heavily exposed to high-level the Chernobyl accident, and newly recognized radiation on the first day of the accident; among the mechanisms and adverse health effects relating to more than 200,000 emergency and recovery operation ionizing radiation, especially at low doses. workers exposed from 1986-1987, an estimated 2,200 The first round of highly visible, made-for-public- radiation-caused deaths can be expected. consumption distortions came in September, 2005. It An estimated five million people currently live would have made George Orwell’s 1984 character in areas of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine that are Winston Smith proud that history could be re-written to contaminated with radionuclides due to the accident; such an extent. With much fanfare, the United Nations’ about 100,000 of them live in areas classified in the past International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the World by government authorities as areas of “strict control”. Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations The existing “zoning” definitions need to be revisited Development Program, and representatives from several and relaxed in light of the new findings. governments released a report titled, “Chernobyl’s Most emergency workers and people living in Legacy: Health, Environmental and Socio-Economic contaminated areas received relatively low whole body Impacts.” Their press release carried the highly radiation doses, comparable to natural background presumptuous and self-serving assertion, “Chernobyl: levels. As a consequence, no evidence or likelihood of The True Scale of the Accident--20 Years Later a UN decreased fertility among the affected population has Report Provides Definitive Answers and Ways to Repair been found, nor has there been any evidence of Lives.” Not-too-deep analysis of the report and the increases in congenital malformations attributable to conclusions and recommendations of its authors would radiation exposure. demonstrate how arrogant and erroneous these proclamations were. Poverty, “lifestyle” diseases now rampant in the former Soviet Union and mental health problems pose a significant documentation has been collated (see below) far greater threat to local communities than does demonstrating the serious flaws in the UN report. radiation exposure. “True” and “Definitive”? Flaws Abundant in Report: Relocation proved a “deeply traumatic The 600+-page UN Report is daunting reading for experience” for some 350,000 people moved out of the anyone, even those familiar with the issues and the affected areas. Although 116,000 were immediately science involved. It is outright prohibitive for the moved from the most heavily impacted area, later average person. For either group several key failures of relocations did little to reduce radiation exposure. commission and omission are quite evident: Persistent myths and misperceptions about the threat of radiation have resulted in “paralyzing fatalism” 1. “Statistical Betrayal”: The announced estimates among residents of affected areas. of health effects and reported observations are wildly Ambitious rehabilitation and social benefit incompatible with those found by other professionals, programs started by the former Soviet Union, and using even the same conservative methods of continued by Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, need calculation; and with those of health professionals “on reformulation due to changes in radiation conditions, the scene” in the affected countries: poor targeting and funding shortages. Most credible researchers agree that the exact death Structural elements of the sarcophagus built to toll attributable to the accident will never be known. It contain the damaged reactor have degraded, posing a is still recognized to be a huge and an unprecedented risk of collapse and the release of radioactive dust; industrial accident. However, through very carefully A comprehensive plan to dispose of tons of chosen wording, and selective use of focus on the trees high-level radioactive waste at and around the Chernobyl and not the forest, the IEAE/WHO have engaged in a NPP site, in accordance with current safety standards, statistical betrayal that both perpetuates former absurd has yet to be defined. estimates – the legendary “32 firefighters died” – and Alongside radiation-induced deaths and minimizes present and future ones of greater magnitude. diseases, the report labels the mental health impact of Previously, both political figures, and health Chernobyl as “the largest public health problem created professionals and agencies – even the WHO – have by the accident” and partially attributes this damaging maintained fatality figures and other effects far higher than the ones appearing on the 2005 IAEA/WHO list. In psychological impact to a lack of accurate information. th These problems manifest as negative self-assessments of 1996 on the 10 Anniversary of the accident, former health, belief in a shortened life expectancy, lack of ambassador from Ukraine to the U.S. Yuri Shcherbak initiative, and dependency on assistance from the state. stated in an article appearing in Scientific American that, (All the above bulleted points come from the initial “I believe [that the 1996 Greenpeace estimate of 32,000 deaths to that date] is defensible.” Press release of the IAEA/WHO, Sept. 5, 2005) The total estimate of 4,000 by IAEA/WHO is neither consistent with local or previous official estimates. The World Responds – Along Familiar Battle Lines: Recent analyses by several other organizations and he UN report was warmly embraced by the nuclear eminent researchers produce far more tragic estimates: T industry and its allies in governments and ● The recently released “TORCH” Report – “The Other institutions around the globe. Even the higher political Report on Chernobyl” (see “Resources”) – echelons of the governments of Belarus, Ukraine and commissioned by Rebecca Harms, a Green Party Russia collaborated on and embraced the results, with member of the European Parliament, on behalf of the the attitude that the accident was over, and the world was Greens/EFA in the European Parliament and in now safe to buy their produce and other products, and conjunction with the April 23-25, 2006 Chernobyl+20: they would no longer have to pay so many benefits to Remembrance for the Future conference in Kiev, the survivors. Indeed, in 2005 Ukraine itself announced Ukraine arrived at a range of between 30,000 and 60,000 plans to construct 11 new nuclear reactors (not of the deaths. Additionally, TORCH was very meticulous in RBMK Chernobyl-type design; one recent report its critique of the numerous failings of the IAEA/WHO suggests as many as 35), not to meet local energy needs, 2005 Report. but to sell to the eastern European electricity market. ● The recently released book “Chernobyl: 20 Years On The reaction of the safe-energy/anti-nuclear movement – Health Effects of the Chernobyl Accident,” produced and others who deal with the day-to-day effects of the by the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR; accident was much different, however. High-ranking see Resources) goes even farther than TORCH in both individuals in the ministries of health of the same three its critique, and its estimates. A compilation of research countries mentioned above were furious over what they papers done by independent researchers from the West, saw as obfuscation at best, denial of the reality they see Russia, Ukraine and Japan, researchers place the fatality daily at worst. Activist NGOs were equally critical, estimate in the range of hundreds of thousands to almost immediately. With the passage of time, millions of deaths from all accident-related causes. officials and journalists caught simply referring to the Further, and in stark contrast to the IAEA/WHO report, old “32 dead from Chernobyl” statistic do so at the risk these researchers actively incorporate new of their professional credibility and integrity.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tymoshenko... at the American Chamber of Commerce a System of Accountability Also Must “Offering 15 Percent for Annual Credit (Continued from Page 1) Event, Ms
    INSIDE: • Ukraine and the Second Cold War — page 2. • The Chornobyl disaster’s 20th anniversary — pages 6-13. • Interview: Ambassador Roman Popadiuk — page 14. HE KRAINIAN EEKLY T PublishedU by the Ukrainian National Association Inc., a fraternal non-profitW association Vol. LXXIV No. 17 THE UKRAINIAN WEEKLY SUNDAY, APRIL 23, 2006 $1/$2 in Ukraine Orange coalition stalled Ukraine prepares to mark Chornobyl’s 20th anniversary by Zenon Zawada on issue of prime minister Kyiv Press Bureau by Zenon Zawada KYIV – At 1:23:47 a.m. on April 26, Kyiv Press Bureau 1986, the fourth reactor at the Chornobyl nuclear power plant in the Ukrainian KYIV – Hopes for an Orange coali- Soviet Socialist Republic exploded. tion regressed after Our Ukraine’s lead- Radiation more than 18 times the ership voiced its opposition to a provi- amount of the Hiroshima nuclear bomb sion in the coalition-forming procedure escaped into the earth’s atmosphere, con- agreement that allows for the bloc that taminating people and land throughout won the most votes in the parliamentary Europe and the Soviet Union. election to select the prime minister. The Chornobyl nuclear catastrophe is The Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc, which widely believed to have accelerated the won the most votes of the three Orange demise of the Union of Soviet Socialist political forces to qualify for the Republics, and it forever altered views Verkhovna Rada, inserted the provision on nuclear energy. as the procedure agreement’s sixth and An independent Ukraine this week final point, with support from the began commemorating the 20th anniver- Socialist Party of Ukraine.
    [Show full text]
  • (TORCH) April 2006
    MS as amended by IF and DS Version 2 March 28 The Other Report on Chernobyl (TORCH) April 2006 An independent scientific evaluation of the health and environmental effects of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster with critical analyses of recent reports by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the World Health Organisation (WHO) Summary and Conclusions On 26 April 2006, twenty years will have passed since the Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded and large quantities of radioactive gases and particles were spread throughout the northern hemisphere. While the effects of the disaster remain apparent particularly in Belarus, Ukraine and Russia, where millions of people are affected, Chernobyl’s fallout also seriously contaminated other areas of the world. The disaster not only resulted in an unprecedented release of radioactivity but also a series of unpredicted and serious consequences for the public and the environment. The TORCH report aims to provide an independent scientific examination of available data on the release of radioactivity into the environment and subsequent health-related effects of the Chernobyl accident. Thousands of studies have been carried out on the issue but many are only available in Ukrainian or Russian. These constraints inhibit a full international understanding of the impacts of Chernobyl, and the authors draw attention to this difficulty and to the need for it to be tackled at an official level. It is noted that some scientists from Belarus, Russia and Ukraine are highly critical of official versions of the impacts of the Chernobyl accident. The Report critically examines recent official reports on the impact of the Chernobyl accident, in particular two reports by the “UN Chernobyl Forum” released by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the World Health Organisation (WHO) in September 20051 which received considerable attention by the international media.
    [Show full text]
  • Bowl Round 2 Bowl Round 2 First Quarter
    NHBB Nationals Bowl 2015-2016 Bowl Round 2 Bowl Round 2 First Quarter (1) Nearly 2,000 people died when the Sultana exploded in this river, but John Wilkes Booth died the day before, so the tragedy received shockingly little press coverage. Monks Mound was built on the eastern banks of this river, which names a civilization that built the city of Cahokia. A control structure was built to reduce its flow into the Atchafalaya River. For ten points, name this American river whose source was identified in 1832 as Minnesota's Lake Itasca, from which it flows to the Gulf of Mexico. ANSWER: Mississippi River (2) One performer of this instrument wrote the Hohenfriedberger March to celebrate victory in the Second Silesian War. This is the first instrument to play the melody in Ravel's Bolero, and a solo near the low end of its range opens Debussy's Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faun. A treatise on playing this instrument was written by Johann Quantz, who taught Frederick the Great. For ten points, name this transverse woodwind instrument whose higher-pitched relatives include the fife and piccolo. ANSWER: flute (3) The success of this work led to a plagiarization lawsuit from Harold Courlander. Sequels to this work include \The Gift" and \The Next Generations." Tom Moore teaches the intricacies of cockfighting in this series, in which Jemmy deserts the Confederate Army. It ends with Chicken George tracing his lineage from Africa to Tennessee. ABC aired this series, an adaptation of a \Saga of an American Family," in 1977.
    [Show full text]
  • Chernobyl Disaster
    Chernobyl disaster Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen Independent consultant member of the Nuclear Consulting Group April 2019 [email protected] Note In this document the references are coded by Q-numbers (e.g. Q2). Each reference has a unique number in this coding system, which is consistently used throughout all base papers by the author. In the list at the back of the document the references are sorted by Q-number. The resulting sequence is not necessarily the same order in which the references appear in the text. m02Chernobylv2 1 26 April 2019 Contents 1 Accident 2 Spatial extent of the Chernobyl disaster Dispersion of cesium-137 Definition of contaminated areas Dispersion of strontium-90 Dispersion of plutonium Dispersion of radioiodine 3 View of WHO and UNSCEAR on the Chernobyl catastrophe Uncertainties Report WHO 2011a Report UNSCEAR 2011 4 Health effects: disparities in estimates 5 IPPNW 2011 report Societal and economic effects 6 IAEA Chernobyl Forum 7 Observable effects in the environment 8 Dismantling of Chernobyl 9 Crtical notes References FIGURES Figure 1 Surface deposition of cesium-137 in Europe (UNSCEAR) Figure 2 Surface deposition of cesium-137 in Europe and Asia (CEREA) Figure 3 Surface deposition of cesium-137 in the Chernobyl accident Figure 4 Surface deposition of cesium-137 in immediate vicinity of the reactor Figure 5 Surface deposition strontium-90 Figure 6 Surface deposition plutonium-239 + 240 Figure 7 Surface deposition iodine-131 in Belarus and Russia Figure 8 Tree rings of pine logs in the Chernobyl region Figure 9 New Safe Confinement at the site of Chernobyl m02Chernobylv2 2 26 April 2019 1 Accident On 26 April 1986 reactor 4 (type RMBK, graphite-moderated water-cooled) of the nuclear power plant at Chernobyl (Ukraine) went out of control during a test of the cooling system and exploded.
    [Show full text]
  • Projects Summary Reports
    Projects Summary Reports ISTC/STCU Technical Review Committee Meeting of Fukushima Initiative ‘On the environmental assessment for long term monitoring and remediation in and around Fukushima 5-6 November 2015 Hitotsubashi University Hall Tokyo, Japan SCIENCE &TECHNOLOGY CENTER IN UKRAINE Contents Preface .............................................................................................. 4 Overview of the ISTC/STCU Fukushima Initiative ‘on the environmental assessment for long term monitoring and remediation in and around Fukushima’ by Secretariat Contributing Parties ....................................................................... 8 Session 1: Waste Interim Storage and Waste Volume Reduction Organic Waste Volume Reduction with Incineration STCU-5952 ................................................................................... 10 Compaction of radioactive waste produced by decontamination of territories polluted due to the accident at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station by Dr. Volodymyr Tokarevskyy, Institute of Chernobyl Problems (Ukraine) Inorganic Waste Volume Reduction with Polymer ISTC-A-2071 .................................................................................. 27 Advanced polymer systems providing deactivation of different surfaces and soil from radioactive pollutions by Dr. Zoya Farmazyan, CJSC “Yerevan SRI Plastpolymer” (Project Manager) (Armenia) Session 2: Recovery of Agriculture Reduction of Cesium Transfer from Soil to Plant with Polymer ISTC-A-2072 ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Chernobyl Death Toll
    THE CHERNOBYL DEATH TOLL Nuclear-Free Campaign ‒ Friends of the Earth, Australia www.nuclear.foe.org.au March 2018 Nuclear advocates often claim that just 30-60 people collective dose figures and risk estimates to estimate died as a result of the April 1986 Chernobyl nuclear total deaths. The problem with that recommendation disaster, comprising some highly-exposed emergency is that there is simply no other way to arrive at an responders and a small percentage of those who estimate of the death toll from Chernobyl (or suffered from thyroid cancers as a result of Chernobyl Fukushima, or routine emissions from the nuclear fuel exposure. Such claims are ill-informed. cycle, or weapons tests, or background radiation, etc). It is difficult for epidemiological (public health) studies Indeed UNSCEAR itself co-authored a report which to demonstrate statistically-significant increases in cites an estimate based on collective dose figures and cancers or other diseases caused by Chernobyl fallout risk estimates of around 4,000 long-term cancer exposure for various reasons such as the relatively deaths among the people who received the highest high incidence of the diseases, the latency period of radiation doses from Chernobyl (emergency workers cancers, and limited data on disease incidence. from 1986-1987, evacuees and residents of the most However, the difficulty of demonstrating the impacts contaminated areas). UN agencies estimated an is no reason to ignore them or to claim they don't additional 5,000 deaths among populations exposed exist. to lower doses in Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine. (Chernobyl Forum, 2005; WHO, 2006) Some of the difficulties are described by Dr Elizabeth Cardis (1996) from the International Agency for The estimated death toll rises further when Research on Cancer (IARC): "Although some increases populations beyond those three countries are in the frequency of cancer in exposed populations included.
    [Show full text]
  • Radiation and Borders: Chernobyl As a National and Transnational Site of Memory
    Radiation and borders: Chernobyl as a national and transnational site of memory Citation for published version (APA): Kalmbach, K. (2013). Radiation and borders: Chernobyl as a national and transnational site of memory. Global Environment, 11, 130-159. http://www.whp-journals.co.uk/GE/Articles/Kalmbach.pdf Document status and date: Published: 01/01/2013 Document Version: Publisher’s PDF, also known as Version of Record (includes final page, issue and volume numbers) Please check the document version of this publication: • A submitted manuscript is the version of the article upon submission and before peer-review. There can be important differences between the submitted version and the official published version of record. People interested in the research are advised to contact the author for the final version of the publication, or visit the DOI to the publisher's website. • The final author version and the galley proof are versions of the publication after peer review. • The final published version features the final layout of the paper including the volume, issue and page numbers. Link to publication General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. • Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal.
    [Show full text]
  • Dark Tourism, Heterotopias and Post-Apocalyptic Places: the Case of Chernobyl
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by CLoK From the SelectedWorks of Dr Philip Stone 2013 Dark Tourism, Heterotopias and Post- Apocalyptic Places: The asC e of Chernobyl Philip R. Stone, University of Central Lancashire Available at: https://works.bepress.com/philip_stone/31/ Author’s Final Draft To cite this paper: Stone, P.R (2013) Dark Tourism, Heterotopias and Post-Apocalyptic Places: The Case of Chernobyl. In L.White & E.Frew (Eds) Dark Tourism and Place Identity. Melbourne: Routledge. Dark Tourism, Heterotopias and Post-Apocalyptic Places: The Case of Chernobyl Philip R. Stone Introduction On 26 April 1986, during a procedural shut down of reactor number four at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (now Ukraine), a catastrophic surge of energy led to a vessel rupture and, subsequently, resulted in the world‟s worst nuclear accident. The reported numbers of deaths from the disaster vary enormously, including from the radioactive fallout that encroached great swathes of northern Europe, to the apparent generational health maladies that now affect local populations. Nevertheless, despite obvious health and safety concerns, illegal tourism to Chernobyl has flourished over the past decade or so. In 2011 – the 25th anniversary of the disaster – the Ukrainian government sanctioned official tours to the site, as well as to the nearby abandoned „ghost- town‟ of Pripyat. Arguably, therefore, Chernobyl has become a destination associated with dark tourism and the „darker side of travel‟ (Sharpley and Stone, 2009; Stone, 2011). The purpose of this chapter is to critically explore the touristification of Chernobyl and, in particular, examine how a place of industrial disaster can convey broader political narratives and identity.
    [Show full text]
  • Midnight in Chernobyl
    Notes PROLOGUE 1 Saturday, April 26, 1986: Precise time given on Alexander Logachev’s dosimetry map of Chernobyl station from April 26, 1986, archive of the Chernobyl Museum, Kiev, Ukraine. 1 Senior Lieutenant Alexander Logachev loved radiation: Alexander Logachev, Com- mander of Chemical and Radiation Reconnaissance, 427th Red Banner Mecha- nized Regiment of the Kiev District Civil Defense, author interview, Kiev, June 1, 2017; Yuli Khariton, Yuri Smirnov, Linda Rothstein, and Sergei Leskov, “The Khariton Version,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 49, no. 4 (1993), p. 30. 1 Logachev knew how to protect himself: Logachev, author interview, 2017. 1 As he sped through the suburbs: Alexander Logachev, The Truth [Истина], mem- oir, 2005, later published in another form in Obozreniye krymskih del, 2007; Colo- nel Vladimir Grebeniuk, commander of 427th Red Banner Mechanized Regiment of the Kiev District Civil Defense, author interview, Kiev, February 9, 2016. 2 But as they finally approached the plant: Logachev, The Truth. 2 Their armored car crawled counterclockwise: Logachev dosimetry map of Cher - nobyl station, the Chernobyl Museum. 3 2,080 roentgen an hour: Logachev, The Truth. Part 1. Birth of a City 1. THE SOVIET PROMETHEUS 7 At the slow beat: Viktor and Valentina Brukhanov (husband and wife; director and heat treatment specialist at Chernobyl nuclear power plant in April 1986), author interviews, Kiev, September 2015 and February 2016. Author visit to Ko- pachi, Ukraine, February 17, 2006. Cognac and the driving of the stake are men- tioned in the documentary film The Construction of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant [Будівництво Чорнобильської АЕС], Ukrainian Studio of Documentary Chronicle Films, 1974.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Monitor, in This Issue of the Monitor, • Dr
    April 24, 2014 | No. 785 Editorial Dear readers of the WISE/NIRS Nuclear Monitor, In this issue of the Monitor, • Dr. Ian Fairlie writes about the latest UNSCEAR report on radiation exposure from the Fukushima Monitored this issue: disaster. For all its predictable faults, the UNSCEAR report does at least provide collective radiation dose New UNSCEAR Report on Fukushima: estimates, from which Dr Fairlie deduces an estimated Collective Doses − Ian Fairlie 1 long-term cancer death toll of around 5,000. Czech Republic: Temelin expansion • Nuclear Monitor editor Jim Green writes about the cancelled − Jim Green 2 cancellation of plans for two new reactors in the Czech The US nuclear power industry thinks Republic. it’s under siege − Michael Mariotte 4 • Michael Mariotte from the Nuclear Information and The Chernobyl death toll − Jim Green 5 Resource Service writes about the siege mentality of the nuclear power industry in the US. The Long Shadow of Chernobyl 7 • Jim Green untangles the debates over the Chernobyl Nuclear News 8 death toll. − US NRC issues uranium license on Lakota Indian land The Nuclear News section has reports on disputed − Protecting against insider nuclear threats plans for uranium mining on Lakota land in South Dakota, USA; insider nuclear threats; the latest set-back − Small reactor prospects diminishing for ‘small modular reactors’; criticisms of Rio Tinto’s activities in Namibia, Australia and elsewhere; the − Rio Tinto under fire gradual erosion of nuclear safeguards; and more. − Kazakhstan nuclear company head arrested Feel free to contact us if you have feedback on this for corruption issue of the Monitor, or if there are topics you would like − Eroding nuclear safeguards to see covered in future issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Reading Chernobyl: Psychoanalysis, Deconstruction, Literature
    Reading Chernobyl: Psychoanalysis, Deconstruction, Literature Stuart Lindsay Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of Doctor of Philosophy Division of Literature and Languages University of Stirling 29th September 2014 Abstract This thesis explores the psychological trauma of the survivors of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, which occurred on April 26, 1986. I argue for the emergence from the disaster of three Chernobyl traumas, each of which will be analysed individually – one per chapter. In reading these three traumas of Chernobyl, the thesis draws upon and situates itself at the interface between two primary theoretical perspectives: Freudian psychoanalysis and the deconstructive approach of Jacques Derrida. The first Chernobyl trauma is engendered by the panicked local response to the consequences of the explosion at Chernobyl Reactor Four by the power plant’s staff, the fire fighters whose job it was to extinguish the initial blaze caused by the blast, the inhabitants of nearby towns and villages, and the soldiers involved in the region’s evacuation and radiation decontamination. Most of these people died from radiation poisoning in the days, weeks, months or years after the disaster’s occurrence. The first chapter explores the usefulness and limits of Freudian psychoanalytic readings of local survivors’ testimonies of the disaster, examining in relation to the Chernobyl event Freud’s practice of locating the authentic primal scene or originary traumatic witnessing experience in his subjects’ pasts, as exemplified by his Wolf Man analysis, detailed in his psychoanalytic study ‘On the History of an Infantile Neurosis’ (1918). The testimonies read through this Freudian psychoanalytic lens are constituted by Igor Kostin’s personal account of the disaster’s aftermath, detailed in his book Chernobyl: Confessions of a Reporter (2006), and by Svetlana Alexievich’s interviews with Chernobyl disaster survivors in her book Voices from Chernobyl: The Oral History of a Nuclear Disaster (2006).
    [Show full text]
  • Listen to Women for a Change”
    Listen toWo Irmgard Heilberger (WILPF) and Barbara Lochbihler (Editors) Listen to Women men For a Change 15 Years after the Beijing Conference on Women – ForaC15 Years after the Peacetrain: Balances and Outlooks hange1 Imprint Listen to Women - For a Change 15 Years after the Beijing Conference on Women – 15 Years after the Peacetrain: Balances and Outlooks Editors Greens/EFA in the European Parliament Barbara Lochbihler, MdEP Rue Wiertz 60 1047 Brussels Belgium www.barbara-lochbihler.de [email protected] Women`s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) – German Section Haus der Demokratie Greifswalder Straße 4 10405 Berlin Germany www.wilpf.de [email protected] The titel of this publication was inspirated by Kay Camp, the former international president of WILPF. To mark the International Women’s Year 1975, Kay Camp created a book called ”Listen to Women for a Change”. It featured 50 women working for peace and social justice. Editorial Kristin Gebhardt, Wolf-Dieter Vogel, Ali Al-Nasani Editorial Board Linda Bell, Felicity Hill, Irmgard Heilberger and Barbara Lochbihler as participants of the Peace Train 1995 Translation Ken Heigh (www.candu.de), Raphael Kreusch, Susanne Münn, Elif Camyar, Bernhard Clasen (www.clasen.net), Sichel Pachal Graphic and Art Design Marco dos Santos Pina Diplom-Designer www.santospina.com Copyright by the authors October 2010 ISBN 2 Irmgard Heilberger (WILPF) and Barbara Lochbihler (Editors) Listen to Women For a Change 15 Years after the Beijing Conference on Women – 15 Years
    [Show full text]