-
-
- Imagine if you will: in the pursuit of higher profits, a large foreign company engages in negligent research and exposes millions of innocent people to a health risk.
~
- Imagine if you will: in the pursuit of higher profits, a large foreign company engages in negligent research and exposes millions of innocent people to a health risk.
-
- I could be talking about Frankenstein corn, but I’m not. Some months after the Chernobyl explosion, I read an article that noted that although there were dozens of protests in front of US embassies for the bombing of chemical plants in Iraq (which exposed a few thousand people at most), there was little protest in any of Europe towards the USSR for the Chernobyl disaster, even though there wasn’t any argument that it had the capability to affect a far greater number of people. I didn’t live there so I don’t know. To any EuroDopers: is this true? Were there any giant protests or not? If not, why not? Were all the activists taking holiday that week? - MC
Well what the hell would the point of protesting about an event that was several days old by the time we in the west knew of it.
The damage by then was already done and it was clearly the result of incompetance and under investement.
When a company knowingly decides that the risks are acceptable and denies all knowledge until it has been independantly verified beyond doubt we usually protest by suing their asses off.
When a company proposes something that has not yet caused problems but might like GM crop production then protets might be a worthwhile tool in getting that decision reversed.
The bombing of chemical plants was in Sudan which is the one that was in the news as regards protesters as the US wa claiming it was making weapons of mass destruction, whereas it was claimed that it was producing hospital pharmaceuticals by the protesters.
IIRC there has been little evidence that it was a chemical warfare production facility but that does not mean it was not.
Note that today 15 December the Russian authorities have agreed to close down the remaining reactors at Chernobyl and the whlo lot is to be decommissioned at an estimeted cost of well over $1.5bill and guess who is paying, the west so yes we have acted in our interest by putting our money where our mouth is.
There have only been a few protests about British Nuclear Waste in the Irish Sea.
I’ve seen a couple in Dublin but do not know if there has been any in the UK.
-
-
- Well, how about the fact that at first the Soviet government tried to cover it up completely? That would have made me wonder. ~ It just seems odd to me for Europeans to stage mass demonstrations over a chemical plant in Sudan getting destroyed (which never have placed any Europeans’ health at risk) while ignoring the largest nuclear disaster to date, that happened close enough to rain heavy water o’er the back garden. Especially considering that they kept operating the other three identical reactors at the site until just a few days ago. I don’t get it. - MC
-
MC, I have seen it all my life: in Europe (and all over the world) they beg the US for bread when they are hungry (e.g., after the war(s) they start). Then, after they recover, they have sort of guilt/shame complex and love to protest anything they say is wrong with th U.S. (e.g., if an American general farts too loud). The USSR was considered “worker’s paradize” initially and, therefore, did nothing bad, by definition. Then they were so afraid of Uncle Joe (Stalin) that they were afraid to say anything about the USSR too loud (after all, you are in Milwakee, and they live within 3 hour tank drive of Soviet/Polish border).
Besides, Soviet cover up nonwithstanding, it was clearly an accident, not a deliberate act of malice. A better care should have… bluh…bluh, the whole country collapsed shortly thereafter, one nuclear reactor…ah!
Casdave, check your sources: Chernobyl is in Ukraine, “the Russian authorities” agreement is not needed anymore.
Peace
This is such a strange claim it’s hard to know how to answer.
Yes, there were, and from time to time still are, protests in Europe against the Gulf War and its aftermath (e.g. the continuing sanctions). Realize though that these are as much against the protestors’ own governments as the US, since most Western European countries also support(ed) the war and the sanctions. Yes, there were some protests against the bombing in the Sudan… but not much; quite frankly most Europeans couldn’t care less (unfortunately) about what’s happening in Africa, any more than most Americans could.
On the other hand, NO, Europeans most certainly did not roll over and take it when the whole Chernobyl thing unfolded. There were official protests at the diplomatic level, a rare thing for European governments at that time. If there weren’t many street protests (there certainly were some outside Soviet embassies in many countries), there were two logical reasons for this. First, most people were too frightened and confused to think up catchy slogans. Second, there was no evidence that the Soviet government would care. The US has some history, at least, of listening to international opinion. The USSR had none. And if it was beginning to open up under Gorbachev, it was still not an open country by any definition.
But it does not follow that because the entire population didn’t storm the barricades, they weren’t angry. There has been steady pressure ever since then to close all Chernobyl-type reactors, but since the post-Soviet republics are barely more open than the USSR, it’s taken fourteen years to close Chernobyl itself 
There are thousands of environmental ticking time-bombs in the xUSSR. Unfortunately. Chernobyl just grabbed the headlines for a while. Sorry, I’m rambling now, but if the environmental destruction in the Kola peninsula doesn’t frighten you, nothing will.
OK, an attempt to answer the OP:
Public outrage can take other forms than rallying in front of embassies. After Chernobyl, it did - see flodnak’s post. And as casdave pointed out, noone had a clear picture of what was happening until days after the event. Our elected officials made sharp protests through the official channels, which IMHO is a more severe rebuke than a bunch of activists chanting. And, of course, help was offered, which is also a rebuke of sorts - “Say, why don’t we give your superpower a bit of assistance, here ?”
Anyway, who’d want to rock the boat back then ? It wasn’t as if Gorbatjov wasn’t too secure in his power. Putting his government under more stress was not a very good option.
Other reasons: In most European countries, yelling at embassies is more or less a left-wing specialty. These folks were shattered & confused in those days - while they could easily agree on the US being bad, they were confused & bewildered as to what was really happening in the East. A lot of the activist groups were still dominated by the Communist parties, who were in free fall at the time, which IMHO served the bastards right. Assholes.
peace, stop whining. People were expecting the US to play by the rules and the USSR to do whatever was convenient. If you want to be the leader of the Free World, you’d better be prepared to be judged by the highest standards. Yup, it’s unfair - live with it.
S. Norman