Pacific remains divided
As Pacific Ocean experts gathered in Fiji in August to discuss the role of the Pacific Ocean Commission, Japan begun discharging more than one million tonnes of treated radioactive water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant into the Pacific Ocean.
The Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) Holdings commenced the first round of release, which will continue for 17 days, to discharge 7800 tons of the radioactive wastewater.
The issue has divided Pacific Island nations.
Solomon Islands Prime Minister, Manasseh Sogavare “delivered a strong statement against Japan’s decision to release nuclear treated water into our ocean which has an impact on our people, ocean, economy and livelihood,” according to a Solomon Islands government release.
Vanuatu’s Foreign Minister, Matai Seremaiah said Japan’s decision needed robust actions, urging polluters to “seriously consider other options.”
Tuvalu’s Minister for Finance, Seve Paeniu says they will continue to oppose the planned discharge.
“The ocean is our resource, our source of survival for our communities here in the Pacific, and we want to do everything possible to avoid that sort of initiative going ahead,” he said.
Niue Premier, Dalton Tagelagi said his country is worried about the release as the impacts to human health and environment are still unclear. “The majority of Niue are coastal peoples, and the ocean is an integral part of our culture, traditions and livelihoods, and we must protect it at all cost.”
However other leaders, including Fiji’s Sitiveni Rabuka and Cook Islands’ Prime Minister and Pacific Islands Forum Chair, Mark Brown, say they accept the International Atomic Energy Agency’s assessment that the release is safe.
Pacific Islands Forum Secretary General, Henry Puna noted: “We’ve done our best to get Japan not to permit the discharge until there is full agreement that it’s verifiably safe to do so, but Japan has taken a sovereign decision and that point is now past.
“What we need to focus on now is to hold Japan to account for the undertaking and the guarantees they have given us to ensure that if the water is not safe, based on monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) … then the discharge will not continue until steps have been taken to make sure that the water is safe. So that is our course of action now,” Puna said.
New Pacific Ocean Commissioner, Dr Filimon Manoni says he is personally concerned about Japan’s plan.
“But as you know, all of our positions are driven by leaders and I will take my guidance from what the leaders say and then move forward to help the region along those lines.
In Suva, protestors marched through the city centre in opposition to Japan’s action.
Reverend James Bhagwan, General Secretary of the Pacific Conference of Churches asserted that Japan was treating the Pacific Ocean as a cheap dumping ground.
“If Japan believes the wastewater is safe,” he questioned, “why not dispose of it in their own waters?”
Reverend Bhagwan emphasised the intergenerational consequences of such decisions, highlighting that today’s politicians won’t have to bear the brunt of their action’s decades down the line.
Noelene Nabulivou, a representative from feminist collective DIVA for Equality, said that the Pacific’s concerns were being overlooked in favour of short-term economic gains.
“Our Pacific elders have spoken out against this too,” she added, emphasising the need to consider the perspectives of those who have held high-level roles and possess deep knowledge of the region.
Meanwhile, the head of the Pacific Community (SPC) says the region should develop scientific capability “that is owned and trusted” to monitor and advise on radioactive isotopes.
Dr Stuart Minchin says it’s not a panic situation, as in the short term, the Pacific Islands region is unlikely to see any immediate impacts from the release from Fukushima, due to our distance from the discharge site and the way ocean currents work.
However, he says when it comes to Fukushima and other nuclear legacy issues, “the region is currently completely dependent on the science undertaken and scientific advice provided by the same nations that are responsible for the contamination.”
As a result he notes, “it’s difficult for nations in our region to fully trust the advice that they’re given by the scientists of those nations that are actually responsible for the contamination,” even if that science is robust.
The Fukushima issue is sure to be discussed by the Pacific Islands Forum leaders when they meet in Cook Islands in November.
