The Nuclear Legacy of the Pacific Islands
In 1946, on a somber day, over 160 inhabitants were instructed to vacate their homes on a lesser-known atoll named Bikini in the Pacific. This forced relocation, implemented to facilitate U.S. nuclear trials, ensured they’d never safely return. This dark chapter was one among several U.S. nuclear tests in the Marshall Islands. Bikini Atoll’s tale also mirrored the actions of British and French powers across the Pacific, emphasizing the vulnerability and helplessness of these islands against nuclear colonial powers.
As history often does, it’s echoing again. The ecological integrity of these islands and the well-being of their inhabitants are under threat. In a contentious move, Japan plans to release treated nuclear-contaminated water from its tsunami-damaged Fukushima plant into the ocean. This, despite repeated appeals from Pacific island nations to reconsider.
Seve Paeniu, Tuvalu’s Finance Minister, conveyed the sentiments of many, stating that the Pacific Ocean, a vital survival resource, should remain uncontaminated. The looming threat of the radioactive release has significant economic implications, especially for members of the Pacific Island Forum, a coalition of 17 nations. These islands, responsible for almost half of global tuna supply, rely profoundly on their fishing grounds. Samu Maraiwai, leading the Suva Fish Market Association, raises alarms about the potential devastation of 1.3 million tonnes of nuclear wastewater on the marine ecosystem, which is already grappling with climate change-induced sea-level rise and extreme weather events.
These concerns resonate not only among Pacific island NGOs but also in regions surrounding Fukushima. However, this is not a newfound predicament for the Pacific Islands. Since World War Two’s conclusion, the unique geology of these islands made them an experimental bed for Western nuclear tests. The aftermath? Grave nuclear radiation contamination and ecological catastrophes.
From 1946-1958, the U.S. executed 67 nuclear tests in the Marshall Islands. The fallout of these tests persists to this day, as both the environment and the islanders’ health continuously deteriorate. One particularly harrowing incident occurred when an underestimated hydrogen bomb explosion by the U.S. led to the tardy evacuation of nearby islanders. The immediate aftermath saw numerous residents suffering acute radiation symptoms, with many succumbing to cancer and leukemia shortly after.
Meanwhile, in the late 1950s, the UK conducted nine nuclear tests in its former colony, Kiribati. Long-term fallout from this? A heightened cancer incidence among Kiribati’s residents, which persists today.
For about four decades, Western countries, notably the UK and U.S., discarded vast amounts of nuclear waste in both the Pacific and Atlantic. The U.S., not restricting its radioactive footprint domestically, transferred 130 tonnes of nuclear-contaminated soil from Nevada to the Marshall Islands. Australia, with its nuclear ambitions, permitted the UK to execute numerous nuclear tests on islands like Monte Bello.
The Pacific islands’ pleas during these calamitous times often met with indifference. Their health was repeatedly jeopardized due to Western oversights. A poignant example: U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson’s 1968 declaration that Bikini Atoll was habitable. Residents, trusting this assertion, returned, only to be confronted a decade later with alarming radiation levels in their bodies. They were forced to relocate again. Legal recourse sought by Bikini’s residents against the U.S. government was disappointingly dismissed.
In 1985, to curb the recurrences of such nuclear atrocities, Pacific nations pioneered a Pacific Nuclear Free Zone through a treaty, prohibiting the dumping of radioactive substances. However, history’s shadows linger.
Despite the unified resistance from Pacific countries, their protests against Japan’s release plans appear ineffectual. While Tokyo, supported by the International Atomic Energy Agency, vouches for the safety of dumping the nuclear-contaminated water, the veracity of their claims and potential oversights in the 30-year release process remain, as scientists point out, shrouded in uncertainty.
Read More: