Radiation from the Chernobyl meltdown 30 years ago still has the potential to harm and so does the realisation that producing nuclear power is not more dangerous than other ways of generating electricity. After the blast in the nuclear plant in Soviet Union on April 26, 1986, Chernobyl became a leitmotif of failure — administrative and political. The powerful Union of Soviet Socialist Republics had tried to challenge American might and Washington’s purported supremacy in all spheres. But the Chernobyl disaster hastened the decline of an exhausted Leviathan.
But the fallout from the meltdown seeped into, so to say, the social fabric of the nation. It brought to the fore inefficiencies and recklessness dogging the Soviet empire, tearing into the facetious facade built up with the help of Stalinism and Leninism. The metaphor of a supra-efficient and pro-poor Communist empire was crushed and Chernobyl had become the rallying cry against a putrid, secretive and corrupt administration.
Then Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev addressed the nation on May 15, 1986 in an attempt to salvage the reputation of his government. Whether he succeeded in pacifying an anxious nation was answered five years hence when USSR broke up into fragments.
Now independent, Ukraine has been grappling with an insurgency that has sapped its resources. Paying tribute to Chernobyl victims, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko described the tragedy as the worst to hit the country between the Second World War and the rebellion in the east. Not to be outdone, Russian President Vladimir Putin called it a lesson for humanity. It indeed is a tragedy that an energy-starved world can learn from. Especially after the Fukushima nuclear disaster that brought the evils of nuclear power to the fore in the 21st century. The tragedy the fallout of which Japan has been grappling with since 2011 prompted a German rethink on nuclear power. Chancellor Angela Merkel decided to discontinue nuclear power production eventually shutting down all plants.
Every year on April 26 leaders of Ukraine and Russia parade platitudes over the nuclear energy question. However, few have the courage to take hard decisions.
Energy security scores over all ethical and normative questions. Energy is an important determinant of state power and the international standing of a country. Disasters notwithstanding, the nuclear energy question remains an open one. It is hard for countries struggling with financial and political instability to discontinue a source of energy considered efficient in the long run and traditionally clean.
Radiation from the Chernobyl meltdown 30 years ago still has the potential to harm and so does the realisation that producing nuclear power is not more dangerous than other ways of generating electricity. After the blast in the nuclear plant in Soviet Union on April 26, 1986, Chernobyl became a leitmotif of failure — administrative and political. The powerful Union of Soviet Socialist Republics had tried to challenge American might and Washington’s purported supremacy in all spheres. But the Chernobyl disaster hastened the decline of an exhausted Leviathan.
But the fallout from the meltdown seeped into, so to say, the social fabric of the nation. It brought to the fore inefficiencies and recklessness dogging the Soviet empire, tearing into the facetious facade built up with the help of Stalinism and Leninism. The metaphor of a supra-efficient and pro-poor Communist empire was crushed and Chernobyl had become the rallying cry against a putrid, secretive and corrupt administration.
Then Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev addressed the nation on May 15, 1986 in an attempt to salvage the reputation of his government. Whether he succeeded in pacifying an anxious nation was answered five years hence when USSR broke up into fragments.
Now independent, Ukraine has been grappling with an insurgency that has sapped its resources. Paying tribute to Chernobyl victims, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko described the tragedy as the worst to hit the country between the Second World War and the rebellion in the east. Not to be outdone, Russian President Vladimir Putin called it a lesson for humanity. It indeed is a tragedy that an energy-starved world can learn from. Especially after the Fukushima nuclear disaster that brought the evils of nuclear power to the fore in the 21st century. The tragedy the fallout of which Japan has been grappling with since 2011 prompted a German rethink on nuclear power. Chancellor Angela Merkel decided to discontinue nuclear power production eventually shutting down all plants.
Every year on April 26 leaders of Ukraine and Russia parade platitudes over the nuclear energy question. However, few have the courage to take hard decisions.
Energy security scores over all ethical and normative questions. Energy is an important determinant of state power and the international standing of a country. Disasters notwithstanding, the nuclear energy question remains an open one. It is hard for countries struggling with financial and political instability to discontinue a source of energy considered efficient in the long run and traditionally clean.
