The go-nuclear issue

The go-nuclear issue

Last Friday, for the third time in six months, a public debate on nuclear energy organized by the Indonesian Forum for the Environment (Walhi) was canceled. This was reportedly because the Ministry of Home Affairs refused to issue a recommendation for the organizers to enable them to hold the meeting. Some 50 would- be participants then marched to the House of Representatives to lodge their complaints.

Last week's incident must surely have raised eyebrows. Just a few weeks ago a similar incident occurred when the police dispersed a crowd just minutes before a scheduled debate started. The excuse was that the organizers had failed to obtain a permit.

Apparently to avoid a similar fate, last week the organizers followed the necessary procedures, including obtaining a recommendation from the Office of the State Minister of the Environment. Still, as it turned out, the debate failed to materialize.

The obvious question now is: Why did the authorities ban the debates? Was it because the organizers were staunch anti-nuclear non-governmental organizations, such as Walhi? Or, were the bans related to the government's fears that such debates might generate stronger anti-nuclear sentiment among the public?

To be fair, many of us are baffled by the government's seemingly dubious stance on the issue.

For one thing, one could easily detect a cautious tone in President Soeharto's remark just two weeks ago that nuclear power should be considered when all other energy sources -- including coal, water, wind and sun, which are not yet fully exploited -- are no longer sufficient.

Yet, the President also suggested that the use of nuclear- propelled power plants in Indonesia might be unavoidable in the future to meet the ever increasing domestic energy needs. He hinted at this by saying that "we have to prepare ourselves very carefully to begin using nuclear power to meet our energy needs in the future".

While President Soeharto, and also Minister of Research and Technology B.J. Habibie, have repeatedly stated that nuclear energy would be "the last option" to meet our energy needs, the chief of the National Nuclear Power Agency (Batan), Djali Ahimsa, has repeatedly said that the government has decided to begin constructing a nuclear power plant in Ujungwatu village, close to Mount Muria, in Central Java, next year. The power plant, with a generating capacity of about 800 megawatts, is expected to go into operation in 2003.

The question thus is: What is to be believed?

Is it possible that the President's statement that "we have to prepare ourselves to begin using nuclear power" alludes to the construction of the first nuclear power plant which will start operating by 2003?

We are of the opinion that the government should be more transparent on this issue. In this age of environmental awareness, going nuclear is a sensitive and controversial issue. And because it concerns public safety, secretiveness should be set aside and as much as possible public participation should be invited. One way to achieve this is by organizing a series of open and public debates. In other words, the decision on whether we will go ahead with the construction of the nuclear power plant should rest with the public.

Last month the government promised to hold a public debate on the issue later this year. But the fact that the authorities have banned debates organized by certain NGOs may be interpreted as meaning that only a government-sponsored debate would be allowed and that the general public, particularly the anti- nuclear groups, are being shut off from organizing their own debates.

Of course, judging from the current situation, the government could opt to simply disregard the opposition to its nuclear program and start the construction of the nuclear power plant anyway. But, then, nobody could possibly foresee what future protests or opposition might emerge.

We are sure of one thing however. And that is that by putting all of the cards on the table, everyone will benefit. A series of public debates will certainly provide a good and valid lesson for us in our democratization process.