Global Article 9 Campaign to Abolish War: "On Human Security & Natural Disasters" calls for people-centered human security

Although the Japanese people are grateful that the U.S. military assisted the Japan Self Defense Forces (JSDF) for a couple of months by bringing food and water to earthquake and tsunami victims, U.S. troops have now returned their focus to their primary mission: waging war and preparing for war.

The U.S. military and the JSDF did not have the expertise or means to resolve the meltdowns at the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear plant. And the U.S. military and the JSDF were unable to resolve the most challenging aspects of the triple disaster (permanent evacuation, recovering irradiated dead bodies in Fukushima, providing a rescue program for beloved pets and domesticated animals in the evacuation zone, and rebuilding lives damaged by economic devastation and psychological trauma resulting from the disasters).

The Kan administration still appears overwhelmed by the "biggest industrial accident" in world history: unable to acknowledge ongoing realities, much less able to rationally address the prevention of likely future nuclear accidents in Japan.

Natural disasters are on the rise because of global warming. Further, manmade disasters (oil spills, natural gas explosions, nuclear plant accidents...) are ever-increasing because of inadequate risk management, cost-cutting, and lack of proper oversight resulting from deregulation. 3/11 changed everything in Japan. Business as usual is not working. Relying upon and disproportionately funding short-term, incomplete military disaster assistance programs is not a solution to future natural and nuclear disasters. With all its resources and manpower, the US military was unable to lead Japan in the containment of the Fukushima nuclear disaster.

In this article from its April 2011 newsletter, the Global Article Campaign to Abolish newsletter argues that national governments need to shift their spending priorities from short-term military aid to support for efficient, peaceful, long-term disaster response programs administered at regional and local levels: civilian authorities, community-based workers and volunteers:

ON HUMAN SECURITY AND NATURAL DISASTERS

On April 14, the UN General Assembly held its fourth Informal Thematic Debate on Human Security, during which the need for holistic "people-centred" responses to world crises was discussed.

The debate took place just a few weeks after the unprecedented triple disaster that hit Japan in March and reminded the world that the unpredictability and force of nature rank among the biggest threats to human security.

The fact that a highly developed country like Japan - known to be Asia's best example for disaster preparedness and technological capabilities for predicting, monitoring and dealing with frequent earthquakes, as well as a key proponent of a Human Security approach - is struggling to manage disaster relief operations and mitigate the subsequent nuclear crisis, has led some to question how the Human Security framework is relevant to prepare for, and respond to natural disasters.

The UN University in Tokyo also held a workshop on Human Security and Natural Disasters this month, with experts from academia, NGOs, government and UN agencies, to analyze how a human security approach can be applied, and identify policy recommendations and avenues for the future.

During this month's debate and panel discussions at the UN, Member States considered how to define human security beyond the outline agreed at the World Summit in 2005. Indeed, discussions on Human Security have so far essentially focused on war, development and human rights, based on the three pillars of "the freedom from fear, the freedom from want and the freedom to live in dignity."

Yet, today's immense human suffering caused by natural disasters (with 200 million people around the world affected by natural disasters last year alone) calls for a broader definition of Human Security that would include natural disasters as a possible fourth pillar.

Based on his deep involvement in the recovery process of Japan's most affected area, Human Security Advisor to the UN Secretary General Takasu Yukio emphasizes the importance of human dignity along with basic human needs, and insists on the need to agree on a common understanding on what Human Security means and entails. Negotiations towards a UN resolution are expected to start this coming May.

Indeed, as part of the UNGA discussions, some delegations warned against replacing the concept of development by the one of Human Security, expressed concerns about possible linkages with the concept of responsibility to protect, and rejected the use of force in relation to Human Security.

Though comments on the use of force were not directly related to disaster relief operations, concerns over resorting to the military in this context are also relevant, and in fact have been raised in the current Japanese context.

Indeed, while disaster response is generally seen officially as a civilian responsibility, military forces often take the lead in case of large scale disasters, due to their great organizational capability and ability to react promptly. Like in the 1991 cyclone in Bangladesh, in the US in the wake of 2005 Hurricane Katrina or in the aftermath of the earthquake in Sichuan, China in 2008, Japan has been relying on its military at a level unseen since the Second World War with more than 100,000 of its Self-Defence Forces (SDF) - or 40% of its total military - deployed.

In light of the growing trend for military engagement in relief activities, and though it is more contentious in conflict settings and in the case of foreign military involvement in relief activities, voices, such as the one of the ICRC, are being raised to caution that this trend tends to "blur the lines between humanitarian and military actors [compromising] the neutrality and independence, restricting humanitarian access and increasing security risks" and to call for the maintenance of a clear distinction between the respective roles of military bodies and humanitarian actors.*

While some politicians and analysts have chosen to highlight the role played by the SDF in disaster relief for political ends, the current situation has on the contrary made clear that SDF alone cannot do much without the crucial assistance of local civilian authorities, community-based workers and volunteers playing a vital role. The tragic situation has also served as a bleak reminder that the military is powerless stop threats such as the one currently posed by nuclear reactors, thus bringing people to question whether SDF can really defend the people when it needs it the most and wondering what they have thus been trained for, in light of the country's pacific constitution that renounces war as a means of settling international disputes and prohibits the maintenance of armed forces and other war potential.

On April 21, the Japan Confederation of A- and H-Bomb Sufferers Organization, Nihon Hidankyo, submitted a petition to the Japanese Government in which they demand that the concept of protecting people through military means be replaced by comprehensive health care and monitoring systems, as well as a major transformation of energy policy from reliance on nuclear energy to renewable energy, as nuclear energy and technology represent a man-made hazard that come in the way of preparedness and safety precautions. They also notably urge the government to "discard the notion that military might can secure Japan's safety, adhere to Article 9 of the constitution, and commit to human co-existence through the prioritization of peaceful and safe diplomatic policies."

In light of the lessons learned from the current disaster in Japan and the current debate on Human Security, the Global Article 9 Campaign joins its voice to call for a shift of priorities - from military defense to people-centered human security; from buying weapons to preventing disasters; and from expanding armed personnel to training community workers.

Read more about the UN General Assembly Informal Thematic Debate on Human Security here.

Read the full Japan Confederation of A- and H-Bomb Sufferers Organization (Nihon Hidankyo)'s petition here.

Cesium found in children's urine; effects still unknown (The Japan Times)

The Japan Times reports that cesium has been found in child urine tests in Fukushima:

Small amounts of radioactive cesium were found in the urine of 10 children in the city of Fukushima, confirming their internal exposure to radiation, citizens' groups that carried out a survey said Thursday. The groups, including Fukushima Network for Saving Children from Radiation, asked ACRO, a French independent radiation monitoring and sampling laboratory, to conduct tests on its members' own children. ACRO conducted tests in Belarus after the Chernobyl accident.

The groups said they couldn't judge whether the level of contamination was large or small, and urged the government to conduct thorough tests on all Fukushima children to find the precise levels of their internal exposure and take necessary measures to avoid any further contamination.

Cesium-134 and cesium-137 were detected in the urine samples of all 10 children aged between 6 and 16 who participated in the survey. The largest amount of cesium-134, which has a half-life of two years, was 1.13 becquerels per liter, found in the urine of an 8-year-old girl.

As for cesium-137, which has a half-life of 30 years, the largest amount was 1.30 becquerels per liter detected in a 7-year-old boy. No traces of iodine-131 were found in the test.

The government has set a safety limit of 200 becquerels of cesium per liter of water.

The samples were taken in late May in the city of Fukushima, more than 50 km from the Fukushima No. 1 plant.

"All (tested) kids are contaminated. . . . Currently the (government's) policy is mainly on external exposure, but internal exposure should be taken into consideration," ACRO Chairman David Boilley told a news conference in Tokyo...

Read the rest here.

APJ: "Protecting Children Against Radiation: Japanese Citizens Take Radiation Protection into Their Own Hands"

(A “Hot spot” map: Cesium 137 contamination in Fukushima and prefectures to the south (Ibaraki, parts of Tochigi, Chiba, Saitama) based on measurements by the University of Tsukuba. (Map from Chunichi Shimbun)

Another must-read article on nuclear radiation at APJ by the Say-Peace Project, translation by John Junkerman and introduction by Satoko Norimatsu: "Protecting Children Against Radiation: Japanese Citizens Take Radiation Protection into Their Own Hands":

Page 14 of the Japanese government's guide for Fukushima educators and parents, which explains how anxiety (over radiation) can trigger stress reactions in the brain, causing various physical ailments.

For example, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare’s pamphlet for pregnant women and mothers,3 of which three million copies were distributed to preschools, nurseries and clinics across the country, emphasizes that food, water, and breast milk are all safe within the government’s provisional standards. It is a “Don’t Worry” pamphlet with little concrete information to support their safety claims or about how to minimize radiation risks for infants, children and pregnant women. The Japanese Ministry of Education (MEXT)4 also produced a guide for teachers and parents in Fukushima, which stressed that “weak” radiation doses such as 250 mSv(millisieverts) over a number of years will have no health effects,5 and increased cancer risk was not recognized with cumulative doses of under 100 mSv, while the existing exposure limit for ordinary people is 1 mSv/year, and that for nuclear workers is 20mSv in Japan.6 Yet nuclear workers have been recognized as having radiation-caused sickness at an exposure level averaging as low as 5.7 mSv/year.7 Again, the entire guide emphasized “Don’t worry too much,” including a large section to describing the negative psychological effects of worrying about radiation.

These attempts by the government to downplay radiation effects have been successful. Even in Fukushima, life seems to go on as usual. Most people are not wearing masks, and children are at play on dusty playgrounds. But the tide is changing now, as more revelations are made about the government’s and the electric company’s failure to disclose information in a timely manner, and as more people use the Internet and social media to exchange information and organize networks. Francis Boyle, an international law professor at the University of Illinois and a nuclear policy specialist, urged people in Japan “to protect themselves from their own government and from the nuclear industry.”8 Despite the government’s and the mainstream media’s massive campaigns to promote the idea that the affected areas are safe and to encourage consumption of produce from those areas, people are finally starting to take safety into their own hands, where it belongs. This is partly because more and more “hot spots,” or, irregularly-formed highly contaminated areas, are being discovered, not only in relatively populated areas within Fukushima Prefecture such as the cities of Fukushima and Koriyama, but also throughout the Kanto region, including Tokyo, with forty million people, one third of the nation’s population. People can no longer regard the nuclear crisis as being restricted to Fukushima and its people only.

Parents’ groups, being formed everywhere,9 are conducting their own independent radiation measurements and demanding that their cities do more to protect residents, especially children, who are more susceptible to radiation. In Fukushima, a university professors’ group,10 town mayors,11 and even prefectural assembly members have raised doubts over the credibility of the government’s official radiation guidelines. They are demanding dismissal of Yamashita Shun-ichi, the prefecture’s “expert radiation adviser,” who has been teaching seminars and appearing frequently in the media to convince people in Fukushima not to worry and to stay where they are.12

One such citizen-initiated effort is “Protecting Children from Radiation Exposure” by SAY-Peace, a Tokyo-based NGO, among the first comprehensive guides of its sort,13 published in late May and immediately revised in June. We at The Asia-Pacific Journal have felt the need for such a citizen-initiated radiation guide being made available in English, especially now that the Western media’s interest has declined, and much of the latest information about contamination and radiation risks are not as readily accessible in languages other than Japanese. The struggle continues between the government, which wants to hide information and minimize radiation fears in order to evade responsibility and to minimize economic losses, and citizens, who want to know and share the truth in order to minimize radiation risks for themselves, their children and their communities, by creating, using, and spreading tools like this radiation protection guide.

Read the important article by Say-Peace Project here.

Must-read review at APJ: "Japanese Cancer Expert on the Fukushima Situation"

"Hang in there, Japan" is not going to get the country through the challenges of Fukushima...

Matthew Penney at The Asia-Pacific Journal outlines more sophisticated, expert advice in this review of "The Problem of Radiation Exposure Countermeasures for the Fukushima Nuclear Accident: Concerns for the Present Situation” by Hokkaido Cancer Center director Nishio Masamichi, a radiation treatment specialist, published by Japan's leading business journal Toyo Keizai. The article, published on June 27, is "consistent with the critical coverage of the Fukushima crisis that has appeared in independent weekly magazines, notably Shukan Kinyobi, which have taken a strong anti-nuclear stance since the March 11 earthquake-tsunami-meltdown, and have repeatedly focused on the dangers of radiation exposure while calling for far-reaching measures to protect those at risk."

Nishio begins by asserting that the Fukushima crisis has caused Japan’s “myth of nuclear safety” to crumble. He has “grave concern” for the public health effects of the ongoing radiation leak.
 
Nishio originally called for “calm” in the days after the accident. Now, he argues, that as the gravity of the situation at the plant has become more clear, the specter of long-term radiation exposure must be reckoned with.
 
Lamenting the poor state of public knowledge of radiation, Nishio writes, “Japan, with its history of having suffered radiation exposure from the atomic bombs, should have the most [direct] knowledge of radiation, but in fact, in the approach to the nuclear accident, has simply fallen into confusion.” He places blame on a number of groups:

1 TEPCO executives, who he accuses of having hidden the truth and prioritized the survival of the company over public health.

2 Bureaucrats who were unable to put together an accurate body of information about radiation effects from which to formulate policy.

3 A prime minister and cabinet lacking both leadership and an appropriate sense of urgency.

4 Politicians who sought to use the crisis in intra- or inter-party struggles.

5 Nuclear industry lobbyists and “academic flunkies” (goyo gakusha) of the government who built up the myth of nuclear safety in the first place.

Looking at these groups, he writes, “I just cannot feel any hope for Japan’s future. These circumstances are simply tragic.”
 
He leaves the press out of his main list of culprits, but points to the poor state of scientific knowledge among journalists as a major factor behind what he views as their inability to bring essential information to the public in a timely manner. He also accuses the media establishment of prioritizing “avoiding a panic” over “communicating the truth”.
 
Nishio provides a blunt and hard-hitting specialist perspective on major government decisions. Here is a summary of some of his major points:

Workers

1 He accuses the authorities of prioritizing their own convenience over the lives of nuclear workers. Nishio argues that raising the exposure limit from 100 mSv to 250 mSv can have serious health effects. He also states that reports of poor food and sleeping conditions for workers show that “… they are not even being treated like human beings.”

2 The JSDF helicopters that dropped water on the Fukushima Daiichi reactors and spent fuel pools in the days after March 11 were outfitted with the types of radiation shields used in hospital x-ray rooms. Nisho says that this  was akin to “putting on a lead helmet in order to protect yourself from radiation from space”. The planners, he argues, did not even understand the difference between airborne radiation from a nuclear accident and radiation used in the controlled environment of hospital treatment.

3 Referring to “protective” suits is a misnomer bordering on fraud in Nishio’s view since nothing can offer total protection from radiation exposure.

4 A lack of nutrition and rest can make workers more susceptible to radiation symptoms. Nishio speculates that having the workers sleep together in gymnasium-like barracks with no privacy is simply designed to keep them from running away. Just 30 minutes from the site, he points out, there are empty hotels which could offer those on the front line a quiet, secure place to rest and recuperate.

5 He accuses TEPCO of being up to the old tricks of the nuclear industry: giving dispatch and temporary workers broken radiation monitors, only giving them monitoring devices when they are working despite high levels of radiation throughout the site, and so on.

6 Without accurate assessment of internal radiation exposure through “whole body monitoring”, there is no way to tell how much exposure workers are actually suffering.

7 Measures must also be taken to gauge different types of exposure (i.e. alpha rays from plutonium and beta rays from strontium).

8 Around 5000 workers have worked at the site since March. This number is high, but if radiation release continues, 100 or even 1000 times that number may be needed over time.

9 The MOX fuel in reactor number 3 is particularly dangerous but Nishio doubts that special measures to protect workers are being taken. 

10 “Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Harvest” treatment has been put forward by doctors as a way to minimize the chances of bone marrow deterioration among workers, but this was turned down by the Nuclear Safety Commission of Japan. Nishio asserts that this is evidence that they simply do not grasp the severity of the situation.

11 Apart from the iodine that they are being given, workers should also be taking Radiogardase (Prussian blue insoluble capsules). Not working to bring together the best preventative medicine, Nishio asserts angrily, is an example of “graveyard governance”.

Fukushima Residents:

1 The threat to public health is not simply a matter of distance from Fukushima. Wind patterns and topography are even more important.

2 The release of data from the expensive SPEEDI system, was delayed until March 23. This delay resulted in unnecessary radiation exposure. “It is only conceivable that the high rate of radiation released was not reported because of fears of a panic.”

3 Former Minister for Internal Affairs Haraguchi Kazuhiro has alleged that radiation monitoring station data was actually three decimal places greater than the numbers released to the public. If this is true, it constitutes a “national crime”, in Nishio’s words. He follows with, “Giving us the truth once is much more important than saying ‘hang in there Japan!’ a million times.”

4 According to Japanese law, the rate of radiation exposure permitted for ordinary citizens is 1 mSv / year. This has been raised to 20 mSv / year in a “time of crisis”. Such a dramatic increase in permitted exposure is akin to “taking the lives of the people lightly”. Nishio believes that 20 mSv is too high, especially for children who are far more susceptible to the effects of radiation.

5 Even more important than a permitted 20 mSv exposure rate, however, is the lack of adequate provision for measuring internal radiation exposure among the Fukushima population.

6 The American Academy of Sciences 2008 “Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation” report claims that there is no safe level of radiation exposure. Despite this and other examples of leading research, however, the Japanese government has moved on the assumption that there is no evidence for increased cancer risk at under 100 mSv of exposure. The European Committee on Radiation Risk argues that existing risk models do not take internal exposure into account. High rates of internal exposure will mean a dramatic increase in cancer risk for Fukushima residents, with as many as 400,000 cases predicted by 2061. Nishio argues, however, that these calculations rest on some shaky assumptions and that the number is too high. He believes strongly, however, that internal radiation exposure must be taken seriously by the Japanese government.

7 Comparing the 6.9 mSv exposure from a CT scan to a similar amount of radiation exposure outside of a controlled environment is misleading. Long term exposure and internal exposure can have unpredictable effects on the human body. Comparisons with radiation used in cancer treatment are also scientifically shaky.

8 The large amounts of radioactive waste water at the Fukushima Daiichi site will contaminate the soil and water supplies, significantly increasing the risk of internal radiation exposure.

Necessary Countermeasures:

1 Among people living in the same area, rates of exposure can vary greatly based on lifestyle and movement patterns. As a result, it is important that every resident in at risk areas be given a device to monitor personal radiation exposure. Apart from protecting individuals and allowing them to make informed decisions about their safety, the data gathered can be used in future medical research and in court cases that will no doubt originate from the Fukushima Daiichi accident.

2 There is little conclusive scientific data on the risks of low level radiation exposure. The government, however, must not let this turn into a case of “We don’t know, so we can assume it is safe”. On the contrary, Nishio argues that it is necessary to proceed under the assumption “We don’t know, so we must assume that it is dangerous”.

3 Residents must be given real time radiation data as well as the best possible advice about how to decrease their exposure.

4 While there are limits to what this can achieve, dirt from schoolyards should be regularly removed and replaced.

5 Strontium 90, which has a half-life of 28.7 years and can have a serious impact on child bone development, must be carefully measured.

6 In planning of future solutions, radiation effects on the body should take priority over the potential stresses associated with relocation.

7 The government should buy houses and land in irradiated areas at pre-crisis market value and provide additional aid for resettlement. Cleanup measures should be undertaken and when the areas become safe, the government should sell property back at reduced rates. A respect for both present necessity and the deep attachment that many have to land that has been in their families for many generations is necessary if the government wants to convince nuclear refugees that they are being treated fairly.

8 The government should make every effort to provide accurate information, but should not forcibly remove elderly residents who wish to remain in their homes.
 
Some Radical Thoughts:

1 The current crisis has called the very foundation of Japanese society into question. An unprecedented crisis calls for new ideas.

2 Dependence on nuclear energy, which was slated to fulfill 50% of Japan’s energy needs in the future, must be rethought.

3 Nuclear energy and energy policy have never been adequately debated in Japan. Those with a vested interest in nuclear energy were able to build up the “myth of nuclear safety” virtually unchallenged and they continuously covered up “inconvenient facts”.

4 Energy demands will continue to increase and simply trying to convince the public to reduce energy use will not be enough. Now is the time for new debate about how to meet Japan’s energy needs while moving away from nuclear power.
 
Nishio’s article provides a realistic, nuanced portrait of the problems currently facing Fukushima and Japan. The Japanese government has addressed some of them on a limited scale, but serious deficiencies remain. Nishio’s powerful statement, however, appearing in a major establishment outlet, is indicative of a shift in public discussion of radiation issues as more critical Japanese scientists outside of the circle of “academic flunkies” (goyo gakusha) make their voices heard.

Read the original and see links at APJ (along with the best English-language coverage of Fukushima) here.

John Vidal: "Fukushima spin was Orwellian" (UK govt. downplayed Fukushima)

John Vidal:"Fukushima spin was Orwellian: Emails detailing how the UK government played down Fukushima show just how cosy it is with the nuclear industry" posted July 1, 2011 at the Guardian:

It was an open secret that Britain's decision to back nuclear power in 2006 was pushed through government by a cosy group of industrialists and others close to Tony Blair, and that a full debate about the full costs, safety and potential impact on future generations was suppressed.

But the release of 80 emails showing that in the days after the Fukushima accident not one but two government departments were working with nuclear companies to spin one of the biggest industrial catastrophes of the last 50 years, even as people were dying and a vast area was being made uninhabitable, is shocking.

What the emails shows is a weak government, captured by a powerful industry colluding to at least misinform and very probably lie to the public and the media. When the emails were sent, no one, least of all the industry and its friends in and out of government, had any idea how serious the situation at Fukushima was or might become.

For the business department to then argue that "we really need to show the safety of nuclear" and that "it's not as bad as it looks", is shameless. But to argue that the radiation was being released deliberately and was "all part of the safety systems to control and manage a situation" is Orwellian. An ignorant government that relies for its information on companies it is planning to reward with contracts for billions of pounds smacks of corruption.

See also Rob Edwards" "Revealed: British government's plan to play down Fukushima: Internal emails seen by Guardian show PR campaign was launched to protect UK nuclear plans after tsunami in Japan." More links at Vidal's article.

June 25, 2011 - Monju "unclogged" for "restart"

JT via Kyodo: "Monju reactor unclogged for restart."

Japanese interfaith group headed by Kyoto temple seeks closure of Futenma air base & cancellation of proposal for new U.S. base in Henoko

On June 21, 2011, a new Japanese interfaith group comprised of Protestant and Catholic Christians and Buddhists (represented by a temple located in Kyoto) announced their support of the Okinawan prefectural and local governments in their goal for the unconditional closure of U.S. Marine Air Station Futenma and the abolition of plans to destroy biodiverse Oura Bay to make way for a new U.S. military base.

Berard Toshio Oshikawa, the Bishop of Naha made a similar announcement on June 27, 2011, calling for the closure of US military bases in the Japanese prefecture. The Conventional Franciscan declared, “Japan has enjoyed peace for over 60 years, but the war has still not ended in Okinawa."

This follows a 2010 appeal from the National Christian Council in Japan (NCCJ) urging U.S. churches to gain awareness, pray and appeal to their government about the impact of U.S. plans for military expansion in Henoko and Oura Bay. Rev. Isamu Koshiishi, the moderator of the NCCJ, explained, "The beautiful coral reef, which had provided a livelihood for the villages and which was the seabed home of the endangered dugong, would now be destroyed with landfill for the purpose of constructing a military base for waging war."

An estimated 12,500 US troops, 95,000 Japanese troops, and up to 150,000 civilians lost their lives in the Battle of Okinawa, which took place in 1945.

Japanese interfaith group opposes U.S. bases on Okinawa
By Hisashi Yukimoto
ENI News
21 June 2011

Tokyo (ENInews): A new interfaith group in Japan has joined local opposition to the U.S. military presence on the southern island of Okinawa as the two countries announced on 21 June that they have postponed the 2014 deadline for relocating a U.S. Marine base there, due to the plan's unpopularity.

"The lives of Okinawan people are still threatened [by the bases]," said the Tokyo-based group composed primarily of Buddhists and Christians. "We as religionists have the same resolution in caring for life and protecting peace," the group said in a statement adopted at its launch on 17 June. "We will address the problem of U.S. military bases in Okinawa," it said.

In Washington, D.C. on 21 June, a joint statement by the two countries said plans for the relocation would not meet the 2014 date, but would be carried out "at the earliest possible date" after 2014. Japanese Foreign Minister Takeaki Matsumoto and Defense Minister Toshimi Kitazawa are in the U.S. capital for talks with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Under a 1996 agreement between the U.S. and Japan, the U.S. Marine Corps Air Station, currently based near the densely-populated area of Futenma on the main Okinawa island, was to be relocated to an offshore coral reef area near the village of Henoko.

In 2006, the relocation plan was to be completed by 2014 as part of a U.S. military realignment, but the plan has been strongly opposed since 1996 by local residents and supporters nationwide, including Okinawan Governor Hirokazu Nakaima and many Okinawan residents. The local government has said that the bases hinder regional development and that there are concerns with crime, aircraft operations, noise pollution and environmental pollution.

The interfaith group is led by Tainen Miyagi, a Buddhist Abbot of Seigoin temple in Kyoto; the Rev. Isamu Koshiishi, moderator of the National Christian Council in Japan and Bishop Daiji Tani, president of the Japan Catholic Council for Justice and Peace. The group's name in Japanese is: "Religionists Group for Okinawa Without Bases - To Seek Removal of Futenma Base And Cancellation of the Construction of New Base in Henoko."

The site of a significant World War II battle, Okinawa hosts about half of the nearly 50,000 U.S. military personnel in Japan. After the war, the Okinawa bases were used to dispatch U.S. troops to conflicts in Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Religious leaders see forced seizure of Jeju farms as attack on life, peace & community; arrests of priests, nuns, & ministers

In 2006, during a conversation about the movement to save what is left of the spirit of the Japanese Peace Constitution, Jean Stokan of Pax Christi (the Catholic peace organization) compared the grassroots struggles of ordinary people in Asia against militaristic state encroachment to similar struggles of people living in Latin America military dictatorships during the 1980's. In both hemispheres, faith-based groups have long been at the center of movements for democracy and peace.

Christians and Buddhists have come together to challenge the abuse of state power to force construction of military bases in both Jeju Island and Okinawa. Their interfaith effort is part of a tradition dating back to Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and Desmond Tutu's frameworks for nonviolent action to bring about peace and social justice.

Benediction for the Life, Peace, and Community before a 100-day Korea Peace Pilgrimage that began March 1, 2011 at the Jeju April 3rd Peace Park (which memorializes the lives of tens of thousands of indigenous inhabitants killed on Jeju Island on April 3, 1947, during the South Korean government's violent repression of demonstrations calling for humane living conditions) and ended at the Demilitarized Zone.

In the following article, Claire Schaeffer-Duffy details the engagement of Catholics and other Christians opposing the South Korean government's attempts to forcibly seize and destroy the property of the indigenous farmers at Gangjeong to make way for a proposed naval base targeting China. Proceeding on base construction would destroy Gangjeong's beautiful coastline (one of most beautiful places on Jeju Island) and make a mockery of S. Korean democratic process.

The base also makes no strategic sense: the S. Korea's Ministry of National Defense stated that the base is not needed for national security. Incongruously, the South Korean government is collaborating with Beijing in developing policies to draw wealthy Chinese tourists to Jeju Island at the same time it is building this base to militarily target China.

Koreans resume hunger strikes opposing proposed naval base

by Claire Schaeffer-Duffy
The National Catholic Reporter
June 15, 2011

The gutsy and persistent campaign to oppose the construction of a South Korean naval base on Jeju Island continues.

Bruce Gagnon reports that Professor Yang Yoon-Mo, former chair of the South Korean Film Critics Association, and Sung-Hee Choi, a member of the Korean peace organization SPARK, have resumed their hunger strike in protest of the base.
Gagnon, a Maine-base peace activist and founder of Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, has been chronicling the Jeju campaign on his blog, http://space4peace.blogspot.com...

...Activists over the past week have daily tried to block construction at the naval base which is ongoing despite strong local opposition. Protestors have held banners, prayed, laid in front of machines at the construction site, and even gone out in inflatable rafts to demonstrate aboard ships clearing the Gangjeong coastline.

A self-governing province of South Korea, Jeju Island lies south of the Korean mainland and between China and Japan. Because of the island’s strategic location in Northeast Asia, the South Korean government wants to build a base here that will port South Korean and U.S. Aegis destroyers equipped with missile defense systems.

Jeju is a designated World Heritage site. Critics fear the base will damage the island’s unique eco-system, escalate a naval arms race in Northeast Asia, and place Jeju residents in the crosshairs of a U.S./China stand-off.

Catholic religious have been at the forefront of the no-base campaign, according to the Union of Catholic Asian News (UCAN). A quick perusal of the news agency’s reports reveal a remarkable account of Catholic leaders speaking out against militarism and environmental destruction, and speaking up for those whose voice has been ignored for the sake of national security interests [ROK officials have admitted there is no national security interest for the base, according to The Hankyoreh].

Nuns and priests have been arrested during no-base protests, some repeatedly. Priests have also gone on hunger strikes. In June 2007, the year the South Korean government announced plans to build the navy base at Gangjeon (two other villages had successfully fought locating the port in their environs), the Jeju diocese launched the Special Committee for the Island of Peace to actively oppose the port’s construction...

More recently, Jeju’s Special Committee hosted Christmas Mass at the construction site for the navy base. Bishop Peter Kang U-il of the Cheju diocese presided. Three days later, four priests, two Protestant pastors, and twenty-nine activists and villagers were arrested during a demonstration there.

In January, the Catholic Priests Association for Justice held their three-day annual plenary assembly on the island and issued a statement calling for an end to the base’s construction. UCAN reports that the statement highlighted the examples of Okinawa, Guam and Saipan as beautiful islands with military bases whose native culture declined after the establishment of military bases. There were more arrests of priests later that month.

Catholic involvement in the Jeju conflict prompted the National Council of Churches in Korea (NCKK) to join the no-base campaign in May. Last week representatives of hundreds of civic and religious leaders in South Korea held a press conference in Seoul to express their solidarity with the residents of Gangjeong. Among those present was Reverend Kim Young-ju, secretary general of the NCCK.

Shortly after his release for one of his arrests during a no-base demonstration, Fr. John Ko Byeong-soo, chair of Jeju diocese’s Special Committee for the Island of Peace, told UCAN that he felt obliged to continue the anti-base campaign “as we need to follow Catholic teaching to be a peacemakers . . . Since the Gangjeong villagers have decided to maintain their opposition to the plan, we will accompany the people to the end.”

Read the entire article here.

On June 19, Sung-Hee Choi stopped her most recent 10-day fast. Read her letter from jail at her blog.

For background on the Korean Peninsula interfaith peace pilgrimage, see "In Solidarity with the Gangjeong Villagers of Jeju Island and the Peace Pilgrims for Life, Peace, and Community in the Korean Peninsula" (Reverend Jeon of the Life & Peace Fellowship said, “Our organization opposes those things related to war. We oppose the naval base plan (in Jeju Island) with the thought that the peace in the Korean peninsula and North East Asia will be threatened if it is built on Jeju Island. “We are walking with our praying hearts.”), TTT (March 2, 2011)

Action suggestions in support of residents of Jeju Island:

• SPARK and Pax Christi Int: Call for Solidarity & Action for Gangjeong Village & Sea, Jeju Island, South Korea

• Please contact the Embassy of South Korea in your country and ask them to stop the construction of the Navy base for U.S. warships on Jeju Island.

• Organize a prayer vigil.

• Write a letter of solidarity to Bishop Peter Kan-U-Il, president of the Bishops Conference of South Korea. e-mail: catholic-cheju@hanmail.net

For information, you can contact Regina Pyon in Korea: reginapy@hanmail.net

Solidarity for Peace and Reunification of Korea (SPARK) is a member organisation of Pax Christi International

Dr. Janette D. Sherman on Chernobyl, Fukushima, Nebraska nuke plants, babies, animals, trees, nuclear power, nuclear weapons, seven generations...

• Must-see 10-minute video report from Link TV, "Chernobyl: The Real Story" with Dr. Janette D. Sherman and Professor Alexey Yablokov.

• "Is the Dramatic Increase in Baby Deaths in the US a Result of Fukushima Fallout?" by Janette D. Sherman, MD & Joseph Magano:

Spewing from the Fukushima reactor are radioactive isotopes including those of iodine (I-131), strontium (Sr-90) and cesium (Cs-134 and Cs-137) all of which are taken up in food and water. Iodine is concentrated in the thyroid, Sr-90 in bones and teeth and Cs-134 and Cs-137 in soft tissues, including the heart. The unborn and babies are more vulnerable because the cells are rapidly dividing and the delivered dose is proportionally larger than that delivered to an adult.

Data from Chernobyl, which exploded 25 years ago, clearly shows increased numbers of sick and weak newborns and increased numbers of deaths in the unborn and newborns, especially soon after the meltdown. These occurred in Europe as well as the former Soviet Union. Similar findings are also seen in wildlife living in areas with increased radioactive fallout levels.

Janette D. Sherman, M. D. is a specialist in internal medicine and toxicology. She has recently completed the translation and editing of the book Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and Nature, written by A. V. Yablokov, V. B. Nesterenko and A. V. Nesterenko, published by the New York Academy of Sciences in December 2009.

See more at Janettesherman.com.

Karl Grossman on cover-ups & Anne Landman on U.S. media failure re Fukushima

"The Big Fukushima Lie Flies High"

By Karl Grossman
Karl Grossman's Blog
June 16, 2011

The global nuclear industry and its allies in government are making a desperate effort to cover up the consequences of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. “The big lie flies high,” comments Kevin Kamps of the organization Beyond Nuclear.

Not only is this nuclear establishment seeking to make it look like the Fukushima catastrophe has not happened—going so far as to claim that there will be “no health effects” as a result of it—but it is moving forward on a “nuclear renaissance,” its scheme to build more nuclear plants.

Indeed, next week in Washington, a two-day “Special Summit on New Nuclear Energy” will be held involving major manufacturers of nuclear power plants—including General Electric, the manufacturer of the Fukushima plants—and U.S. government officials.

Although since Fukushima, Germany, Switzerland and Italy and other nations have turned away from nuclear power for a commitment instead to safe, clean, renewable energy such as solar and wind, the Obama administration is continuing its insistence on nuclear power.

Will the nuclear establishment be able to get away with telling what, indeed, would be one of the most outrageous Big Lies of all time—that no one will die as a result of Fukushima?

Will it be able to continue its new nuclear push despite the catastrophe?

Nearly 100 days after the Fukushima disaster began, with radiation still streaming from the plants, with its owners, TEPCO, now admitting that meltdowns did occur at its plants, that releases have been twice as much as it announced earlier, with deadly radioactivity from Fukushima spreading worldwide, and with some countries now changing course and saying no to nuclear power, while others stick with it, a nuclear crossroads has arrived.

“No health effects are expected among the Japanese people as a result of the events at Fukushima,” the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear industry trade group, flatly declared in a statement issued at a press conference in Washington last week.

“They’re lying,” says Dr. Janette Sherman, a toxicologist and contributing editor of the book Chernobyl: The Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment published by the New York Academy of Sciences in 2009. Using medical data from between 1986 and 2004, its authors, a team of European scientists, determines that 985,000 people died worldwide from the radioactivity discharged from the 1986 Chernobyl disaster...”

"What Happened to Media Coverage of Fukushima?"

By Anne Landman, PR Watch
June 24, 2011

After a few weeks of covering the early aftermath of Japan's earthquake and tsunami, the U.S. media moved on, leaving behind the crisis at Fukushima which continues to unfold. U.S. politicians, like Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, have made disappointing and misleading statements about the relative safety of nuclear power and have vowed to stick by our nuclear program, while other countries, like Germany and Italy, have taken serious steps to address the obvious risks of nuclear power -- risks that the Fukushima disaster made painfully evident, at least to the rest of the world...

Efforts to bring problems at Fukushima under control are not going well, either. Japanese authorities only just recently admitted that nuclear fuel in the three damaged Fukushima reactors has likely burned through the vessels holding it, a scenario called "melt-through", that is even more serious than a core meltdown. Months of spraying seawater on the plant's three melted-down fuel cores -- and the spent fuel stored on site -- to try and cool them has produced 26 million of gallons of radioactive wastewater, and no place to put it.

After a struggle, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), finally managed to put in place a system to filter radioactive particles out of the wastewater, but it broke down soon after it started operating. A filter that was supposed to last a month plugged up with radioactive material after just five hours, indicating there is more radioactive material in the water than previously believed.

Meanwhile, TEPCO is running out of space to store the radioactive water, and may be forced to again dump contaminated water into the Pacific Ocean. TEPCO already dumped some water into the ocean weeks ago, amid protests from fisherman, other countries and environmental organizations. And even if TEPCO does successfully filter the contaminated water and manage to bring its radioactivity down to acceptable levels, the utility will still have to deal with the pile of radioactive sludge the process will produce.

The plan they've come up with to deal with the sludge is to seal it in drums and discard it into the ocean, which may cause even more problems. Greenpeace has already found levels of radiation exceeding legal limits in seaweed and shellfish samples gathered more than 12 miles away from the plant. The high levels of radiation in the samples indicate that leaks from the plant are bigger than TEPCO has revealed so far...