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.