PRESS CONFERENCE ON CHERNOBYL NUCLEAR ACCIDENT

The nuclear accident at Chernobyl was a grave and continuing humanitarian tragedy, and its unpredictable future could only be tackled through the combined efforts of the entire international community, correspondents were told at a Headquarters press conference today.

The press conference was one of several events at Headquarters to mark

15 years -– 26 April 1986 -- since one of the reactors at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine was destroyed.  According to material distributed at the press conference, 50 million curies of radioactive isotopes were released into the environment, contaminating more than 160,000 square kilometres in Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine, and affecting the lives of more than 7 million people, including more than 3 million children

Participating in the press conference were the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, Kenzo Oshima -– who is also coordinator of international cooperation on Chernobyl -- and the Permanent Representatives of Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine.  The Director of Public Affairs Division of the Department of Public Information, Thérèse Gastaut, acted as moderator for the discussion.

Mr. Oshima said that, unlike other emergencies, the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster were not fading away, but actually growing as time passed.  “We may not know the full extent of the Chernobyl events on the health of the affected population and on the environment for years to come”, he said.  The Secretary-General, in his statement released today, put it very clearly when he said:  “The legacy of Chernobyl will be with us, and with our descendants for generations to come.”  The scale of the accident and its impact on the peoples’ lives and the ecological situation transcended national boundaries.  Chernobyl had become a concern for the whole world.

Chernobyl was more than the worst technological disaster in the history of nuclear power, he continued.  It was also a grave and continuing humanitarian tragedy, which had displaced hundreds of thousands of people and severely damaged the social and psychological fibre of the most seriously affected regions.  Chernobyl represented a long-term problem of unprecedented complexity, which should be addressed through the combined international efforts.  The international community had provided significant technical and scientific assistance, with hundreds of millions pledged for the construction of a safer sarcophagus, but comparatively little had been done to provide direct assistance to the affected populations.

He went on to say that the international community could and should provide tangible assistance to the affected people in Belarus, Ukraine and the Russian Federation.  With victims of numerous disasters vying for donor attention, Chernobyl remained the only catastrophe with an unpredictable future, for new manifestations of radioactive contamination could become obvious in the future.  The Secretary-General had appealed to Member States, international and non-governmental organizations and private individuals to join him in a pledge not to forget Chernobyl.

Sergei Ling, Permanent Representative of Belarus, said that even now,

15 years after the disaster, few could imagine the true scale of the huge Chernobyl catastrophe.  Its consequences continued to have an impact on all aspects of life in his country, with radioactive contamination affecting about one quarter of its territory.  “Unfortunately, we cannot be sure that we have left the worst of it behind”, he said. 

Many problems had actually become more acute lately, he continued.  Huge masses of people were forced to live in the affected territory, where they continued to receive radiation.  The country was going through a transition period, and it needed assistance in tackling complex problems of unprecedented proportions and complexity.  The territory of the country had become a zone of ecological disaster.  The international community had a moral duty to join efforts in order to overcome the consequences of the accident.  International cooperation in overcoming the legacy of the disaster could be an indicator of how mankind could prevent similar accidents in the future.

Sergey Lavrov, Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation, added that scientific assessments indicated the need for continued focus on the disaster, since many of its consequences were still not clear.  In the future, it would be necessary to address enormous medical problems, which affected about

1.8 million people living in contaminated areas in Russia alone.  That number included about 300,000 children.  It was also necessary to continue studying the long-term effects of radiation.

Continuing, he expressed gratitude to the international agencies and programmes, which had contributed efforts to overcome the problems.  The Secretary-General’s appeal was very timely, for the need for assistance was not going to fall -– it would only increase with time.

“The Chernobyl chapter is not completed”, Valery Kuchinsky, Acting Permanent Representative of Ukraine, said.  His country had entered the new millennium with a wide range of new and open questions.  Now it was hardly possible to evaluate the full scope of the accident’s long-lasting impact.  That was clearly confirmed by an international conference, which had been recently held in Kiev under the title “Fifteen Years of Chernobyl –- Lessons Learned”.

He went on to say that Ukraine had been trying to mitigate the consequences of the disaster.  The Government’s most important action had been the decision to close the nuclear power station at Chernobyl on 15 December 2000.  The importance of that step was widely recognized all over the world.  By closing the plant, his country had demonstrated its strong commitment to the establishment of new global nuclear culture.

Although much international assistance had been rendered, he said, the need to alleviate the consequences of Chernobyl was no less today than 15 years ago.  He expressed his appreciation to those who continued to contribute to Chernobyl, in particular to the plan to ensure the environmental safety of the sarcophagus of the destroyed reactor.  It was hard to over-estimate the role of the United Nations in supporting the affected countries in their efforts to eliminate the consequences of the disaster.  It was important that several recent international events had addressed the problem, including the tenth international conference on health and the environment.  He also noted the launching of the book Chernobyl Legacy and the international bazaar, which was taking place today at the entrance to the Secretariat.  The international community could not afford to weaken its efforts, not only for the sake of the victims, but also for the sake of future generations.

Asked about the fate of Chernobyl children treated in Cuba, Mr. Lavrov said that they went there for rehabilitation.  As far as he knew, the children would usually spend a month or so in Cuba and then return home.

Mr. Kuchinsky added that the Government of Cuba had been providing Ukrainian children a good opportunity to improve their health.  Some other countries were also involved in similar programmes, including Brazil, Italy and Spain.

Responding to a question regarding “donor fatigue”, Mr. Kuchinsky said that he did not think that the world was forgetting Chernobyl.  The assistance was coming in, and international, regional and bilateral programmes of assistance were in effect.  Definitely, 15 years after Chernobyl, other disasters had gained attention, but international conferences and events like today’s press conference were drawing attention to the existing problems and to the affected children.  It was an opportunity to make an additional call for assistance. 

Would you say that it is easier to participate in events than provide assistance? a correspondent asked.  “Definitely”, Mr. Kuchinsky answered.  However, international events and press conferences helped to remind people that the problem had not been solved.  It was a constant problem, with which his people had to live on a daily basis.

Mr. Ling added that it was only natural that over the years any disaster would “fade into the background”, with other events taking centre stage.  Another contributing factor was that many people could not comprehend the real scale of the catastrophe.  There had been no precedent.  In terms of the economic damage, international assistance could not compensate Belarus for what it had suffered. According to estimates, the damage was approximately $235 billion -– 32 annual budgets of the country.  The country was deeply grateful for all the aid it had received, but it was important to realize the scale of international assistance in relation to the magnitude of the problem.  Many people were providing monetary, physical and psychological assistance.  Now it was important to move from spontaneous emergency assistance to resolving long-term economic problems.

Responding to a question about the people living in affected areas,

Mr. Kuchinsky said that thousands of hectares around the power station were a

so-called “closed area”.  There were also several buffer zones around the plant.  However, there was no barbed wire enclosing the dangerous territory to keep people out and many people had returned to the areas surrounding the plant.  Some people, especially old ones, tended to say, “I cannot feel or see the radiation.  This is my house, and I am going to live there.”  To deal with the problem, the country had rehabilitation centres and medical facilities for several million people, who had been affected by radiation. 

Mr. Ling added that about 1.8 million people lived in the affected areas in Belarus; 450,000 of them were children.  About 130,000 people had been evacuated.  In addition to the closed area, there were several areas with certain limitations and restrictions.  The country was carrying out decontamination programmes, based on a five-year plan.  Special technology was being used to cultivate agricultural crops in the affected areas.  Clean products were being brought in for the population, and 150,000 to 160,000 people left the affected areas annually to undergo treatment and rehabilitation.  A special medical programme monitored people’s health.  Approximately 10 to 20 per cent of the national budget was spent on such programmes annually.

To a question about a new generation of nuclear reactors, Mr. Lavrov said that it was related to a larger issue of the safe use of nuclear energy.  Speaking at the Millennium Summit, President Putin had proposed to develop internationally a new type of reactor, which would not use enriched uranium or plutonium.  A memo was also circulated providing a more detailed description of the proposal, which was now being discussed in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Asked about everyday life of the people in the affected areas, Mr. Kuchinsky said that they knew that they were not living in the best surroundings and needed to take additional precautions.  There was also a social problem with the Chernobyl specialists, who had lost their livelihoods as a result of the closure of the plant.  Some of the 2.5 million affected people in the Ukraine needed to be under constant medical care.  Others required longer vacation periods and received special allowances.  Most were ordinary people with an additional burden of dealing with the consequences of the disaster.

Mr. Oshima said that the three governments of the affected countries shared the major burden of providing for their populations, while undergoing deep economic reforms.  Despite its economic difficulties, Ukraine had also closed down the Chernobyl plant.  He was sure that everybody felt safer as a result of that responsible action.  He appealed to the international community not to forget about Chernobyl and come forward with the needed assistance.  More specifically, to mitigate the long-term effects of the disaster, he had asked the donors who had contributed to the construction of the shelter, to contribute an additional amount equivalent to 1 or 2 per cent of that contribution to the humanitarian needs.  If donors responded to that appeal, $10 million to $15 million would be raised for the affected people.  It was also important to shift the focus from emergency relief to a long-term development approach.

In response to a question regarding the health impact of Chernobyl,

Mr. Lavrov said that he had heard some reports that the death rate in the contaminated areas reflected the natural rate.  However, that depended on “which part of the Government was presenting its assessment”.  Those who dealt with health and not with “presenting good statistics” provided figures indicating that a rate of cancer had clearly increased.  Much more time was needed to come to definite conclusions.  In Russia, between 1992 and 2000, the additional burden on the budget because of Chernobyl amounted to $6 billion.  The situation was not “business as usual” and the effects of Chernobyl were certainly felt in Russia. 

Mr. Oshima added that the jump in thyroid cancer among the children was the most tragic.   Over 11,000 cases of such cancer had already been reported.  Most vulnerable were those who were one or two years old at the time of the accident.  The risk was proportionate to the time they remained in the contaminated zone.  The rate of thyroid cancer was estimated to be 100 to 500 times the pre-Chernobyl rate and the peak was not expected for another 30 years.  Other forms of cancer could also start to show 20 years after the accident.

The representative of the Ukraine added that it was still important to create an ecologically safe zone around the exploded reactor.  The existing

sarcophagus, putting it mildly, “was not 100 per cent proof”.  That presented additional health risks, and assistance was needed to cover the area and to provide safety in the future.  After the closure of the plant, Ukraine was continuing to experience additional economic, financial and social problems.  It also needed to find the capacity to cover its energy needs.  The more assistance it received, the more problems it would be able to solve.

Mr. Ling said that the rate of thyroid cancer among the children in Belarus amounted to 280 times the previous rate.  He could only guess what other consequences would manifest themselves in the future.  There was also a high incidence of a wide variety of illnesses, including immunological and cardiological problems, and it was necessary to closely monitor the situation.

Asked about his advice for other countries to prevent nuclear disasters in the future and to minimize problems, Mr. Oshima said that the recent Kiev conference was a fitting example of sharing the lessons learned.  There was great interest in the event.  The Conference had produced some practical recommendations for the international community.  Dissemination of valuable information should continue. 

Regarding growing agricultural crops cultivated in the contaminated area, Mr. Ling said that he did not want to go into specifics, but certain agricultural crops could be grown without absorbing radioactive elements.  One such example was flax, which could be grown to produce oil.  Livestock raised inside would not be contaminated if clean feeds were used.  Agriculture was affected not only in the immediate vicinity of the Chernobyl plant.  For example, the Gomel and Mogilev regions in the north of the country had also suffered some contamination.  The population at large was very cautious, and radiological monitoring was widely used.  Information was being provided to the population.  In the areas where it was impossible to raise crops, clean food products were being brought in, including bananas, oranges and apples. 

* *** *