...but protests keep going on<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Protests against the French nuclear testing
\nprogram at Mururoa atoll, French Polynesia, are not new. Similar
\nprotests and acts of sabotage have been conducted since the
\nbeginning of the tests but the results have been almost zero in
\nterms of influencing the French government to stop the testing
\nprogram.<\/p>\n
A few days after Prime Minister Jacques Chirac's announcement
\nto resume the tests, Australia's Foreign Minister, Senator Evans,
\nled a mission to Paris to persuade the French government not to
\ngo ahead with the plan.<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, the mission failed. Recently, Australia's Prime
\nMinister Keating and New Zealand's Prime Minister Jim Bolger had
\nagreed to further protest the testing program and to work
\ntogether with other Pacific states.<\/p>\n
Protests against nuclear tests have been conducted extensively
\nsince the 1970s by various groups in the region, such as
\nuniversity students, unions and church leaders.<\/p>\n
Their activities have played an important role in shaping the
\nanti-French attitudes of governments in the South Pacific. Their
\ninfluence has not only been through direct political pressure but
\nit has also been due to the fact that many of those early
\nprotesters later took up important positions within their
\ngovernments.<\/p>\n
For example, Francis Saemala, former president of the
\nStudents' Association of the University of South Pacific, later
\nbecame the Secretary of the Solomon Islands Department of Foreign
\nAffairs and Permanent Representative of the Solomon Islands to
\nthe UN.<\/p>\n
Student leader Saemala declared back in 1970 in Suva that his
\nassociation would write to all South Pacific leaders, urging them
\nto take a stand against further radioactive poisoning of the
\nregion's atmosphere.<\/p>\n
Barak Sope, who was an anti-nuclear activist when he was a
\nstudent, later became the Secretary of the Department of Foreign
\nAffairs in the Vanuatu government. Other politicians who have
\nclose affiliation with the anti-nuclear movement are Father
\nWalter Lini (former Vanuatu prime minister) and Father John Momis
\nof Papua New Guinea.<\/p>\n
It was not until its third meeting in Suva, in 1972, that the
\nnuclear issue was raised. It was the first time that the Pacific
\npeoples expressed their deep concern over the tests in an
\ninternational representative body.<\/p>\n
In the period between 1972 and 1975, the nuclear testing issue
\nwas discussed intensively without any resolutions, but in 1976,
\nfor the first time, the South Pacific Forum adopted a resolution
\nagainst testing.<\/p>\n
The issue disappeared from the Forum agenda during the next
\nfour years. In 1981 and 1983, nuclear testing was discussed again
\nby the South Pacific Forum and it adopted resolutions urging the
\nFrench government to stop its program.<\/p>\n
Due to the negative response from the French government,
\nhowever, the Pacific leaders became less enthusiastic about
\nputting more pressure on France. The issue was discussed further
\nin 1984, 1985 and 1989, but no resolutions were passed.<\/p>\n
In 1972 South Pacific Forum members were unanimous in
\nexpressing their deep concern that the French government should
\nhave failed to recognize the wishes of the peoples of the South
\nPacific.<\/p>\n
They also exchanged views as to the ways and means by which
\nthey could pursue their common objective of bringing to an end
\nall nuclear weapons tests in all environments, by any country. As
\na follow-up to that Forum meeting, co-sponsored by Australia, New
\nZealand and Fiji, and supported by other Forum members, the First
\nCommittee of the General Assembly adopted, in November 1972, a
\nresolution which called for a halt to all atmospheric testing.<\/p>\n
In its fourth meeting in 1973, Forum members expressed again
\ntheir deep concern on the issue, but that time it took the
\nunusual action of approving and releasing the declaration on its
\nfirst morning. The texts were cabled to the French government.<\/p>\n
This stronger stand was actually sponsored by Australian Prime
\nMinister Gough Whitlam, with the idea in mind that negotiations
\nwere proceeding in Paris on the subject between Australia-New
\nZealand and France.<\/p>\n
These negotiations were, in fact, the French government's
\nresponse to Australia, that had sent a note to the French
\ngovernment stating that such testing constituted a breach of
\ninternational law. The Australian government also told Forum
\nmembers that if their negotiations with France failed, then the
\nForum should take the matter before the International Court of
\nJustice in the Hague. All Forum members supported the proposal,
\nalthough they predicted that France would not comply with the
\ndecision of the Court.<\/p>\n
Although that approach was not completely successful, at least
\nit affected French policy. A few months later, in August 1973,
\nFrance announced that it would cease its atmospheric tests and
\nbegin testing underground. Thus, it can be seen as the Forum's
\nfirst success in putting pressure on France, although at a
\nminimum level.<\/p>\n
In its fifth meeting, in 1974, the Forum reiterated its
\nopposition against French nuclear tests. The discussion was
\nsimilar to that of the previous year, but more attention was
\ngiven to whether the Forum should single out France in its Final
\nCommunique, or should also mention China.<\/p>\n
The wording of the Final Communique stated, among other
\nthings, that members once again called on governments, and in
\nparticular the government of France, the only government testing
\nin the South Pacific, to heed the views of the Forum, the calls
\nof the United Nations General Assembly and other international
\nbodies and obligations under international law by bringing about
\nan immediate halt to all tests.<\/p>\n
At its sixth meeting, in 1975, in Nuku'alofa, Tonga, the
\nmembers restated their strong opposition to the tests, and a
\nproposal by the New Zealand government to establish a nuclear
\nfree zone in the South Pacific as a means of achieving that aim
\nwas added.<\/p>\n
From 1976 until 1980 the issue was not discussed. This was due
\nto the negative French response and the re-election of the
\nAustralian Labour and New Zealand Labour governments in 1976.<\/p>\n
This implies strong influence by Australia-New Zealand and
\nFrance on the issue. The Pacific leaders then wanted to spend
\nmore of their time discussing other issues which had immediate
\nbenefits for the Pacific peoples.<\/p>\n
In 1981 the issue reappeared on the agenda. The Forum, then,
\nreaffirmed its condemnation of the tests and even, for a second
\ntime, succeeded in adopting the resolution that \"urges France
\nimmediately to cease its nuclear weapons testing program and
\nprovide full details of the effects of its past testing
\nactivities on Pacific people and environment\".<\/p>\n
Also at that meeting, Vanuatu Prime Minister Walter Lini
\nproposed that the Forum should consider declaring a nuclear free
\nzone for the Pacific.<\/p>\n
Similar resolutions were produced by the next Forum meeting in
\n1982. After struggling hard to condemn the French government on
\nthe issue, the Forum, in 1983, finally received a positive
\nresponse from the French government.<\/p>\n
France invited the Forum members to visit the test site at
\nMururoa atoll and conduct scientific research on the effects of
\nthe tests, both on the health of the people and the environment.
\nIt was the first positive gesture by France since 1971, in
\nresponse to the Pacific peoples' demands.<\/p>\n
However, the experience of confronting the issue of French
\nnuclear testing had a positive impact on the Pacific leaders.
\nThey finally became more united in dealing with issues of common
\nconcern. As Australia's Deputy Prime Minister Doug Anthony said,
\n\"There was no other issue which united the Pacific countries more
\nthan that of nuclear testing and dumping\".<\/p>\n
As a group, they had a strong voice on common issues in other
\nregional groupings, such as in the South Pacific Conference.
\nBesides, there were also other issues on which they later became
\nmore unified, for instance, on decolonization.<\/p>\n
Nevertheless, the Pacific leaders still had one voice in
\nopposing French nuclear testing in the region, though the degree
\nof their opposition varied.<\/p>\n
The Melanesian states' opposition was stronger than that of
\nthe Polynesians. The Polynesian leaders, such as Tom Davis of the
\nCook Islands, opposed the testing only because he wanted to join
\nthe Forum leaders in protest. Unity was more important than
\npersonal conviction. Davis confessed that he personally disagreed
\nwith the Forum's view due to lack of evidence of the danger of
\nthe underground tests.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/but-protests-keep-going-on-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}