Nuclear fait accompli<\/p>\n
The House of Representatives last week began deliberation of
\nthe government-sponsored bill on nuclear power, which deals with
\nways of managing Indonesia's nuclear reactors -- including
\nnuclear power plants -- should the country go nuclear in the
\nfuture.<\/p>\n
There are two basic differences between the bill and the
\ncurrently used 1964 law on nuclear energy which it seeks to
\nreplace, as was explained by State Minister of Research and
\nTechnology B.J. Habibie during the bill's first reading. One is
\nthat the proposed law renders operators and developers of nuclear
\nplants liable for any leakage or other type of accident --
\nsetting a Rp 450 billion ($195 million) cap on the financial
\nliability of an operator or developer. The second is that the
\ntask of supervision and administration of nuclear plants --
\ncurrently in the hands of the National Atomic Power Agency
\n(Batan) -- will be divided, in compliance with international
\nconventions. This allows for the possibility of state companies
\nand private, local or foreign companies to run Indonesia's
\nnuclear plants, with Batan acting as a watchdog agency.<\/p>\n
Habibie promised that the government would not make any
\ndecisions or even begin debating the use of nuclear energy before
\nthe bill is passed by the House. He stressed that the proposed
\nlaw not only accommodates technological changes that have
\noccurred since 1964, but also anticipates future developments,
\nincluding the time when the nation may be forced to turn to
\nnuclear energy which he emphasized, as he has done repeatedly in
\nthe past, is a last option among various alternative sources of
\nenergy.<\/p>\n
On the face of it, the bill appears to give more bargaining
\ntime to those who object to the use of nuclear energy. The way
\nthe government has pushed the bill into the House's already tight
\nagenda, however, follows a pattern that should raise alarm bells,
\nin spite of Habibie's assurances.<\/p>\n
Even before the decision has been made, the government has
\nalready commissioned -- at no small cost -- foreign consultants
\nto undertake feasibility studies for the country's first nuclear
\npower plant in Mt. Muria in Central Java.<\/p>\n
Many fear that the decision to go nuclear will be made without
\na thorough public debate. The widely perceived scenario is that a
\ndecision to go nuclear will be made this year, construction will
\nbegin in 1997 and the plant will become operational in 2003.
\nAdditional plants will then be built in other parts of Java to
\nmeet the growing energy demands of burgeoning Indonesia.<\/p>\n
Several attempts by the Indonesian Forum for the Environment
\n(Walhi), which is heading the antinuclear movement, to hold
\npublic debates on the issue were banned by the police last year.
\nMeanwhile, similar discussions by Batan and other groups more
\nsympathetic towards nuclear energy have proceeded and their
\ncontents widely disseminated as part of an attempt to sell the
\nnuclear idea to the public.<\/p>\n
The public, however, has not been entirely sold on the idea. A
\npoll by the Kompas daily newspaper published last week found that
\n52 percent of educated middle-class Indonesians living in Java
\nrejected the planned power plant at Mt. Muria.<\/p>\n
In February, Wahli had published its own poll, which found
\nthat 80 percent of Indonesians in eight cities in Java were
\nagainst nuclear power. Those opposed to nuclear power cite fears
\nof a potential catastrophe in case of an accident as their chief
\nreason.<\/p>\n
There may be some questions about the way the surveys were
\nconducted, but one has to bear in mind that opposition appears to
\nbe strong, despite attempts to prevent the antinuclear movement
\nfrom presenting its arguments before the public.<\/p>\n
In the face of such opposition, and given that the question of
\nwhether or not to use nuclear energy is far from settled, why is
\nthe House already debating a bill that presumes the decision has
\nalready been made? By discussing the bill, the House is helping
\nto shift the debate from one on whether or not Indonesia should
\ngo nuclear, to one concerning how to manage nuclear plants,
\nprevent accidents and what to do in case of an accident.<\/p>\n
Although it is a government-sponsored bill, House members
\nshould not view this as a partisan issue. So much more is at
\nstake than simply winning, losing or making the kind of
\ncompromises that have gone on behind many deliberations in the
\nHouse. The lives of millions of people, including those of our
\nchildren, are at stake.<\/p>\n
Habibie was right when he said that by presenting the bill to
\nthe House, the issue is now entirely in the hands of the people.
\nHouse members have the opportunity to reject the bill altogether
\nrather than deliberating on its contents. They could insist that
\nthe matter of whether or not to use nuclear energy be discussed
\nfirst, with as much discourse as possible encouraged. Only when
\nthe question has been settled in a truly democratic way, can a
\nnew bill which reflects the public's opinion be presented.<\/p>\n
House members should avoid being part of any fait accompli on
\nthe nuclear issue.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/nuclear-fait-accompli-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}