COLUMN

Keeping the peace torch burning

The 57th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Japan is a stark, moving reminder of the imperative to prevent another nuclear catastrophe - just when its probability seems highest since 1962. A report from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

TWO moments remain etched in the minds of the Japanese people - and on the world's conscience: 8-15 a.m., August 6, and 11-02 a.m., August 9, 1945, when atomic bombs were exploded respectively over Hiroshima and Nagasaki to wipe 200,000 human lives out of existence virtually at one go. Fully 57 years on, just the memory of those horrific events opens one's eyes to the colossal, epochal immorality of nuclear weapons.

Visiting Hiroshima and Nagasaki remains a soul-stirring experience, an occasion for deep contemplation and reflection. The pledge "never to repeat the mistake" acquires a life all of its own when you are there. The message of peace rings out time and again - when the Peace Bell is sounded at Hiroshima's Peace Memorial Park ceremony at 8-15 a.m. on August 6, when you watch the lanterns set to float in the river that evening, when you stand close to the hypocentre of the bomb explosion site at Nagasaki, when you read the inscriptions at the scores of peace monuments in the two cities, when you see children folding paper cranes as a symbol of life, and above all, when you listen to the Hibakusha, the survivors of the bombing whose dignity is only exceeded by their stoicism.

The City of Hiroshima has just completed a National Peace Memorial Hall for the Deceased Victims of the Atomic Bomb, located adjacent to the Peace Museum. In a passage leading to it are six wall panels summarising the circumstances leading up to the bombing and the damage it caused. The writing on the last panel reads: "While praying for those who died from the atomic bombing and remembering the many who fell victims to the erroneous national policy, we hereby pledge to hand down our memories of the tragedy to posterity, disseminate them here and abroad and build a peaceful world without nuclear weapons as soon as possible so that the same tragedy will never be repeated." One of the basements of the new building is covered with 140,000 tiles, representing the number of people who died in Hiroshima by the end of 1945. Today, the number of dead has risen to 226,870, a reminder that the Grim Reaper of nuclear destruction is still at work. During the past year alone, 4,977 names were added to the list of victims who have perished in Hiroshima. There are, besides, some 285,000 who are recognised as having been exposed to atomic bomb radiation in 1945.

Visiting Nagasaki is an equally intense experience. Its Atomic Bomb Museum strikes you with its graphic depictions of the history of development of nuclear weapons, their physical and biological effects, and the valiant struggle of the Hibakusha. Nagasaki underscores the aspiration for world peace as powerfully as Hiroshima - to some people, even more strongly. Once Japan's gateway to the external world, and the only port allowed to trade with it, this beautiful town of rolling hills conveys an urgent message to the globe: "We must never forget what happened that day" (August 9).

For the Japanese people, Hiroshima Day and Nagasaki Day remain landmark events. The Prime Minister of Japan attends memorial ceremonies in both cities. He, along with the Mayors of the two cities, and a representative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, also takes the pledge "never to repeat the mistake".

THIS year, Junichiro Koizumi probably made two of the worst speeches any Japanese Prime Minister has delivered at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Koizumi - compromised by his recent visit to the Yasukuni Shrine, which is a monument to Japanese Second World War soldiers and to militarism, and further tainted by expressions of ambiguity about his government's commitment to Japan's three "non-nuclear principles" - was called upon to take a categorical position against recent attempts to legitimise nuclear weapons. Instead, he took a wishy-washy stand.

By contrast, the Mayors of the two cities expressed their consternation with the world powers which have turned their backs upon the peace message of the Hibakusha. Hiroshima's Tadatoshi Akiba strongly criticised the unilateralist approach of U.S. President George W. Bush. "The United States government has no right to force Pax Americana on the rest of us, or unilaterally determine the fate of the world." He warned: "The probability that nuclear weapons will be used and the danger of nuclear war are increasing. The path of reconciliation, severing the chain of hatred, violence and retaliation, so long advocated by the survivors (of the 1945 bombing) has been abandoned."

Recapitulating the danger to world peace following September 11, including heightened strife in West Asia and Central Asia, and the India-Pakistan stand-off, besides aggressive U.S. actions, Akiba declared: "I strongly urge President Bush to visit Hiroshima and Nagasaki, to observe this human legacy and confirm with his own eyes what nuclear weapons hold in store for us all." He quoted Santayana: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

In Nagasaki, Mayor Iccho Itoh listed a number of negative developments across Asia and the rest of the world, including the U.S.' withdrawal from the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, and its plan to develop "Star Wars"-style ballistic missile defences as well as the recent evolution of its remarkably offensive strategic doctrines. Itoh said: "We are appalled by this series of unilateral actions taken by the government of the United States, actions which are also being condemned by people of sound judgment throughout the world."

The two Mayors' peace declarations captured a major component of the deliberations of a number of conferences held in different cities in the first 10 days of August under the auspices of Japan's two big peace groups - Gensuikyo (Japan Conference Against A- and H-Bombs) and Gensuikin (Japan Congress Against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs), as well as Nihon Hidankyo (Japan Confederation of A- and H-bomb Sufferers' Organisations).

At the biggest of these conferences (Gensuikyo's), which I attended, along with more than 60 foreign delegates from 30-odd countries, the principal focus was on the shadow September 11 has cast over the world - not as the cause, but as a trigger, of radical shifts in perceptions of terrorism and security. No recent event has led to such a one-sided and warped definition of terrorism (reduced to sub-state terror alone), or to such far-reaching legitimation of the use of force as a universal solution to all security problems.

Post-September 11, any military action, whether punitive or pre-emptive, can be rationalised so long as it has the approval of the U.S. America is undermining the whole complex architecture of multilateral agreements on arms control and disarmament, and on rules about warfare. It has taken the world two centuries, countless wars, and the loss of millions of lives, to evolve this multilateral edifice. Mindless of the consequences, Bush is hacking away at its base.

With its Ballistic Missile Defence plans, the U.S. is about to inaugurate a Second Nuclear Age with a not-so-clandestine Manhattan Project-II. Its Nuclear Posture Review opens new avenues for the development and actual use of weapons of mass destruction against seven named states (including Russia and China, as well as U.S.-designated "rogues") and for a variety of purposes and objectives which go well beyond the standard concepts of deterrence, flawed as these are.

Bush may be about to put into practice his reckless, if not downright lunatic, doctrine of "pre-emption" in Iraq. This not only would make a mockery of international law - which, in the absence of Security Council authorisation, only permits use of force in self-defence after a state has been attacked - but of all the premises upon which states base their security. The U.S. is not seeking self-defence against known or likely threats. It is searching for permanent open-ended military supremacy against all real or imaginary adversaries, present and future.

It is the world's gravest misfortune, and a consequence of the present "unipolar moment" conjuncture (which U.S. hawks want to prolong as much as possible) that there is so little resistance to the U.S. from its allies/friends, neutral powers, and rivals. Russia, which in nuclear terms is the sole power in America's league, prefers genuflection over serious engagement with Washington leading to arms reduction. China is in no position to compete or negotiate. Japan is too timid to matter. Tony Blair's Britain is America's loyal poodle. France and Germany can make all the dissenting noises they want, but they cannot deflect the U.S. from the course it is determined to pursue.

As for the Non-Aligned Movement, it has been considerably weakened by the defection of erstwhile leaders like India into the U.S. camp - and into the Nuclear Club, albeit as its third-rate member - by the failure or collapse of about half the Third World states under "free market" policies combined with monumental corruption and crises of governance, and by the undermining of a number of forums once available to put moral and political pressure on the Great Powers.

THIS, then, is a dangerous moment. It is marked by a distressingly high probability of the use of nuclear weapons, far higher than any time since the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. India and Pakistan have contributed in their own sordid ways to the cynicism that has produced this moment - through a reversal of their nuclear doctrine and the 1998 tests, by courting the U.S. on unequal terms, and through intensified mutual rivalry. It is a South Asian sideshow to America's "War against Terror". Particularly deplorable is the post-December 13 conduct of the two countries, and Atal Behari Vajpayee's viscerally communal and jingoistic regime leads here. This stand-off highlights Kashmir's potential as a trigger for a nuclear conflagration. This has convinced many in the world that the two countries are incapable of responsible behaviour.

The need for a truly international peace movement, with strong organic roots and an ability to act simultaneously in a number of countries and regions, has never been more pressing. What exists today is largely a collection of national movements and discrete campaigns with some minimal cooperation between them, but without the mobilising abilities available, say, in the early to mid-1980s. The once-powerful peace movements of Western Europe went into decline post-Cold War. They are in revival mode, but their influence remains limited. Peace movements are growing in the Global South, but have a long way to go. This is also true of Central and Eastern Europe.

The peace movement in the U.S. has some impressive things to show for itself, including a 100,000-strong rally on April 20 in Washington, a revival of interest in peace issues on university campuses, and growing links with the anti-globalisation movement. But it is woefully short of effecting a major change in public perceptions, leave alone official policy.

Perhaps the greatest message from the 57th anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is that the peace movement needs to go global - not just in perspective, but in effective action. Only then can the menace of nuclearism be combated and the battle for a world without mass-destruction weapons joined.

Postscript: International peace campaigners do not hold the U.S. alone responsible for today's grave global insecurity. I conducted an informal survey of the conference participants in Japan. As a threat to world peace, about half of them rate the nuclear danger in South Asia higher than, or on a par with, a U.S. attack on Iraq. A much larger percentage - roughly 80 - takes a very dim view of the Indian and Pakistani states. For instance, on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 as "failed states", and 1 as responsible and performing states, they rate India at six to eight, and Pakistan seven to nine. A sobering thought for the two "nuclear giants"!