You are here


Nuclear security conference commits ... to holding more conferences

Nuclear Monitor Issue: 
Jim Green, Friends of the Earth, Australia (and editor of the Nuclear Monitor)

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) hosted a conference titled 'International Conference on Nuclear Security: Enhancing Global Efforts' from July 1−5 in Vienna. [1] There were more than 1,300 registered participants, including 34 government ministers, from 125 countries.

In his closing statement to the Conference, IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano said: "This Conference has been an important milestone for nuclear security. The Ministerial Statement, from an inclusive global forum, sends a strong message that nuclear security is recognized as a priority by Governments."

Few shared that generous opinion. One of the few solid commitments from the conference was a commitment to hold more conferences. Maybe. The Ministerial Declaration calls on the IAEA "to consider organizing international conferences on nuclear security every three years."

The conference did not result in any strengthening of the patchwork of mostly non-binding, mostly underfunded nuclear security initiatives around the world. Kissinger, Nunn, Perry and Shulz noted in a March 2013 article that "no global system is in place for tracking, accounting for, managing and securing all weapons-usable nuclear materials." [2] The same can be said for the broader range of nuclear and radioactive materials that can be used in dirty bombs.

The Ministerial Declaration encourages nations to fully implement existing international accords, including the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material and a 2005 amendment to the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz acknowledged that the US remains outside the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, but claimed that the US is a leader on nuclear security because the President made a speech on the topic (!) and the US government intends to host a conference on the topic in 2016 (!!). [3]

A report released by the Arms Control Association and the Partnership for Global Security details actions that the 53 countries that participated in the 2012 Nuclear Security Summit in South Korea have taken since the meeting. [4] It notes that there has been some progress − for example 22 countries have taken steps to "prevent the smuggling of illicit radioactive materials by enhancing transport security, expanding border controls and developing new detection and monitoring technologies." But still the emphasis seems to be on talk-fests − 44 countries have hosted nuclear security workshops, conferences or exercises. The NGOs state that "the largely nationally focused efforts to date are inadequate" and that the lack of universal reporting requirements makes it difficult to assess the overall progress of the security summit process.

International Atomic Energy Agency
The Ministerial Declaration affirmed "the central role of the IAEA in strengthening the nuclear security framework globally and in leading the coordination of international activities in the field of nuclear security."

Many delegates called for an expanded role for the IAEA. Miles Pomper from the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies expressed scepticism, noting that member states would have to agree to fund such expanded security activities through the IAEA's regular budget, but current funding for security work relies on voluntary contributions made on an irregular basis. [5] The Ministerial Declaration went no further than to recognise "the importance of the IAEA having access to appropriate resources and expertise to undertake its work, including through further voluntary contributions to the IAEA's Nuclear Security Fund by existing and new donors."

As of 2008, the IAEA relied on voluntary funding for 90% of its nuclear security program, 30% of its nuclear safety program, and 15% of its verification/safeguards program [6]. Mohamed El Baradei, then IAEA Director-General, told the IAEA Board of Governors in 2009: "I will be cheating world public opinion to be creating the impression that we are doing what we're supposed to do, when we know we don't have the money to do it."

Limited scope
Victor Gilinsky, a former member of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, noted in 2009 that "even so-called arms controllers fall over themselves trying to establish their bona fides by supporting nuclear energy development and devising painless proposals ..." [7] That mentality was in evidence at the IAEA nuclear security conference. The Ministerial Declaration calls upon states "to ensure that measures to strengthen nuclear security do not hamper international cooperation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities."

Gilinsky advocates a reversal of priorities: "Security should come first − not as an afterthought. We should support as much nuclear power as is consistent with international security; not as much security as the spread of nuclear power will allow."

Fukushima illustrates one of the issues that ought to be addressed under the umbrella of nuclear security. Kenneth Luongo from the Partnership for Global Security said that the disaster highlighted the fact that the international community does not "have an adequate system for dealing with radiation that crosses borders." He noted that "Fukushima blurred the line between nuclear safety and nuclear security." [8]

Matthew Bunn, a Harvard University professor and former White House adviser, said at a recent briefing: "Fukushima sent a message to terrorists that if you manage to cause a nuclear power plant to melt down, that really causes major panic and disruption in a society. ... All you need to do to do that is cut off the power for an extended period of time." [9]

Conventional military strikes on nuclear plants by nation-states is another issue that the nation-states assembled in Vienna were reluctant to address.

References and Sources
1. IAEA, July 2013, 'IAEA Ministerial Meeting Concludes With Focus on Stronger Nuclear Security',
2. Henry A. Kissinger, Sam Nunn, William J. Perry, George P. Shultz, 5 March 2013, 'Next Steps in Reducing Nuclear Risks: The Pace of Nonproliferation Work Today Doesn't Match the Urgency of the Threat', Wall Street Journal,
3. Douglas P. Guarino, 1 July 2013, 'In Vienna, a Focus on National Responsibility for Nuclear Materials Security', Global Security Newswire,
4. Arms Control Association and the Partnership for Global Security, 1 July 2013, The Nuclear Security Summit: Progress Report,
5. Rachel Oswald, 19 July 2013, 'U.S. Energy Chief Hopes for Bigger IAEA Role in Global Nuclear Security', Global Security Newswire,
6. IAEA, 2008, '20/20 Vision for the Future: Background Report by the Director General for the Commission of Eminent Persons',
7. Victor Gilinsky, 'A call to resist the nuclear revival', Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 27 January 2009,
8. Douglas P. Guarino, 14 March 2012, 'U.S. Defends Narrow Focus for Nuclear Security Summit', Global Security Newswire,
9. Jonathan Tirone, 4 July 2013, 'Fukushima Shows Nuclear-Terrorism Risks at UN Meeting',

US officials warn of risks in the Middle East and North Africa

Obama administration officials have warned of the possibility that nations in Africa and the Middle East could become sources of sensitive components or materials for weapons of mass destruction. Simon Limage, deputy assistant secretary of state for nonproliferation programs, told "In North Africa and the Middle East, you have terrorist organisations, unstable governments, in some cases actual civil conflict and lack of control over sovereign territory. In the former Soviet Union we still have remaining challenges, but we are dealing with relatively stable governments with which we have a history of engagement." Anne Harrington, a US Energy Department nonproliferation official, said concerns extend beyond those regions, citing Pakistan.

Earlier this year, Algerian customs officers discovered radioactive waste in three containers shipped from China to Algiers' port. The containers were imported by an Algerian businessman, North Africa Post reported on May 18: "The origin and the final destination the radioactive cargo have not yet been determined but the investigators suspect international traffickers of nuclear waste to be involved in the affair as Africa is seemingly becoming a dumpster of radioactive waste for greedy international corporations and super powers."

'U.S. Officials: Dirty Bomb Risk in Mideast, Africa Unprecedented', 14 June 2013,
Radioactive Waste Found in Algiers Port, 18 May 2013,

Anti-nuclear camp Poland

Nuclear Monitor Issue: 
WISE Amsterdam

A coalition of various Polish groups and organizations struggling against nuclear energy and for social and environmental justice are coming together to give a public voice to the opposition against these plans and to promote public action and organizing in the directly affected communities. The camp will take place from 23-29 July in Lubiatowo on the Baltic Sea Coast.

The final decision on the Polish nuclear program is still to be made, and the nuclear contracts are yet to be signed. We are reaching the turning point – if the state succeeds in its plans, for the next few generations Polish society will pay the cost of building, exploiting and decommissioning of nuclear reactors, and the radioactive waste will stay here for thousands of years. The future depends on our actions, and on the scale of social resistance to the nuclear power. Meanwhile the whole world is sinking in economic and energy crisis, caused by the uncontrolled expansion of transnational corporations. The great debate on the future of democracy, on the new balance of power has begun.

The anti-nuclear camp in Lubiatowo is our voice in this debate, a voice for the social self – organization and self – governance. It’s up to all of us! We want every participant in the camp to take part in making decisions, and to share the responsibility for its success. That’s why we welcome any ideas for the workshops, meetings and actions as well as every discussion on the idea of the camp proposed by us. By organizing the camp we are creating the space for collective initiatives and actions – its final shape depends on all of You.

The main working languages of the camp will be Polish and English, with other languages possible if needed. Workshops and presentations can also take place in other languages, with translation provided, if organizers are told in advance.

EYFA youth gathering
EYFA will be organizing an international youth gathering as part of the anti-nuclear camp. Participants in the EYFA gathering will take part in general camp activities, workshops, and public events, as well as being part of a smaller international youth gathering with trainings on topics like campaigning and media-work and info-sessions on nuclear power and general energy issues. All participants will be expected to take part in the day-to-day running and decision-making of the camp.

EYFA is looking for activists from all over Europe with a focus on young people from Central and Eastern Europe to take part in the camp. Travel reimbursement is only available for those who are able to stay for the full duration of the camp, arriving no later than July 23rd and leaving no earlier than July 29th. EYFA can reimburse 70% of travel (by train and/or bus - no planes!), food and camping costs. EYFA will provide visa support for those who need it. Just let us know.

If you are interested in participating in the camp as part of the EYFA Youth Gathering please go to Application Deadline: June 1, 2012

Please keep in mind that everyone is welcome to the camp. You do not need to apply unless you would like to take part in the EYFA youth gathering at the camp.


Global conference for a nuclear power free world

Nuclear Monitor Issue: 
WISE Amsterdam

The “Global Conference for a Nuclear Power Free World” was held in Yokohama on 14 and 15 January 2012. More than 6000 people on the first, and 5500 on the second day, including 100 international participants from over 30 countries, gathered at the conference.

The entire conference was broadcasted live over the internet, with an audience of approximately 100,000. At the closing of the conference, the "Yokohama Declaration for a Nuclear Power Free World" was announced. It demands:

1) the protection of the rights of those affected by the Fukushima nuclear power plant accident;
2) Responsibility of the Japanese Government and the Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco);
3) Minimization of residents' exposure to radiation;
4) A global road map for the phase out of the nuclear fuel cycle and the decommissioning of all nuclear power plants;
5) Currently closed Japanese nuclear power plants to not be reopened;
6) The prohibition of export of nuclear power plants and components, especially to industrializing nations; and
7) It emphasis of the role of local and municipal authorities; and declares to develop a global network to support Fukushima. It also calls for actions to be taken throughout the world on 11 March 2012.

The diverse proposals for action made by conference participants are being gathered on a web site entitled the "Forest of Action for a Nuclear Power Free World". These many proposals include a range of levels, from recommendations to governments to suggestions of what individuals can do, and this web site provides a forum to develop to concrete future actions.

Eight current and former mayors, including two from Fukushima, joined the Mayors' Forum which was held as a special session at the conference. Here, it was decided to form a network of mayors to work to break free from nuclear power, and announced that a preparatory meeting for this network will be held in late February 2012. The Yokohama Declaration supports this proposal, and calls for citizens' support of this initiative.

The conference was coordinated by an Organizing Committee comprised of six Japanese NGOs, with Peace Boat as Secretariat. Many other organizations also cooperated in the coordination of programs throughout, and the conference was supported by a great number of endorsing organizations and corporations, and supporting organizations. More than 100 groups also held self-organized events at the conference, including around 20 organizations from Fukushima, and several international groups including WISE. A further characteristic of the conference was a diverse range of participatory workshops and opportunities for exchange, including in the Fukushima Room and children's programs.

The international guests visited the Fukushima town and region with a one-day bus tour. They spoke with farmers, civil servants of the City of Fukushima and villagers who have been evacuated out of the 20 kilometer zone to live in just a few miles out of this zone. One thing was made very clear to the foreign guests; the disaster is not over! Thousands of people still live in highly contaminated areas, the economy of the whole region has collapsed and thousands of families are disrupted because quite often children are evacuated to family far away while the adults stay in Fukushima to protect their houses and fight with national authorities and Tepco over compensation issues. 

More information:


For a nuclear power free world

Nuclear Monitor Issue: 
Organizing Committee

The Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami, and accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, have had dramatic impact around the world. In response to this massive disaster and its tragic consequences for people's lives and environment, the people of Japan are trying to take steps towards recovery.

Meanwhile, the nuclear power plant is still unstable and workers are forced to continue working in life-threatening conditions. As the radioactive contamination spreads, many people including children are forced to suffer from prolonged radiation exposure, unable to evacuate due to lack of support from the government.

It is vital that we do not keep making the same mistakes. It is now time for humanity to put an end to the nuclear age that started with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In Japan, well over half the population now supports the goal of breaking away from nuclear power. However, many people question whether it is practically possible to bring nuclear power to an end. For these reasons and more, a coalition of Japan-based organizations will hold the Global Conference for a Nuclear Power Free World in Yokohama, Japan on January 14-15, 2012.

This conference will create a venue for people from all around the world to gather in Japan and respond to the reality of Fukushima. At the same time, we will bring together the voices of people who suffer from radiation exposure all around the world, whether by nuclear power or nuclear weapons - in other words, Global Hibakusha - and learn from each other's experiences, thus illustrating the human and environmental consequences of the nuclear chain. Combining the experiences of countries around the world, the conference will also aim to demonstrate that it is realistically possible to create a society that is not dependent on nuclear power. Through learning from experiences from around the world, we aim to create a road map for the safe removal of existing nuclear power plants, and from there present alternative policies based on renewable energy and propose action plans that can be implemented by Japan and other countries.

The input of people from around the world is vital to the success of this conference. Join us to together take these steps towards a sustainable, nuclear free world!

Contact: Global Conference for a Nuclear Power Free World

In brief

Nuclear Monitor Issue: 

No Nukes Asia Forum in Taiwan
Activist from Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, the Philippines, Thailand and India wil hold their (almost) annual meeting in Taipei, from September 18- 22.

NNAF began in 1993 and unites Asian based antinuclear organizations. The forum always combines education and exchange with direct action and media outreach. This year the international delegation will travel to Taiwan’s nuclear power station no. 1 and 2 at the northeast coast and nuclear power plant no. 3 at the southeast coast. At the University of the capital Taipei a two-day program will discuss the danger of  nuclear power plants in earthquake prone areas, the debate on climate change and the role of nuclear power and the situation in the different countries.
Contact and more information:

Doctors against uranium.
The International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) on September 1 adopted a resolution at its International Council meeting in Basel, Switzerland, calling for a ban on uranium mining and the production of yellowcake (uranium oxide). The resolution described both processes as “irresponsible” and “a grave threat to health and to the environment”.
The resolution also describes uranium mining and yellowcake production as a “violation of human rights”. The right to life, liberty and security, to physical integrity, self-determination, the protection of human dignity, the right to clean water are just some of the rights that are afflicted by uranium mining and its processes, say the doctors. IPPNW calls for appropriate measures to ban uranium mining worldwide
Although many national branches of the IPPNW network have been campaigning against uranium mining and nuclear energy for many years already it is seen as a major breakthrough that now the international federation has taken a firm position and has committed itself to support campaigns against uranium mining.
Source and contact: IPPNW, Anne Tritschler, Tel.: +49 (0) 30-698074-14,

Iran: Busher reactor finished after 36 years!
On August 21, Russia started loading fuel into the reactor at Iran's first nuclear power station Bushehr. The Bushehr plant is on the Gulf coast of southwest Iran. It is Iran's first nuclear power plant. Construction of two pressurized water nuclear reactors began in 1974 with the help of German contractor Siemens and French scientists. The Bushehr I reactor was 85 percent complete and the Bushehr II reactor was partially complete prior to the 1979 Iranian Revolution and the fall of the Shah. The project was halted and the site was then damaged during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, and equipment was looted.

The project was later revived with Russian help but construction ran into repeated delays blamed by Russia on problems with receiving payment from Iran. Current plans are for one reactor to be launched. Bushehr will have an operating capacity of 1,000 MW.
Reuters, 21 August 2010

Sudan: 4 reactors in 2030.
Well, if you think you read it all…. Sudan plans to build a four-reactor nuclear power plant to "fill a gap in the energy needs" of Africa's largest country by 2030, Mohamed Ahmed Hassan el-Tayeb, head of Sudan's atomic energy agency, said on August 24. He also said that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) would help to build a research reactor and power plant for Sudan by providing expert training for staff, fellowships and feasibility studies.

He said Sudan was hoping for "a medium size four-unit power plant with each reactor producing between 300-600 MW per year". El-Tayeb said bidding for equipment and technology could begin in five years time and a further 10 years for construction of the plant, so it could be completed by 2030, costing between US$3-6 billion.

Currently 20% of the population has access to electricity.
Reuters, 24 August 2010

Nuclear power: Goal or means?
Vice President Boediono of Indonesia said on August 20, that a proposal to build a nuclear power plant in Indonesia was still on the table although he could not say when or where it may be built. “We will continue trying. Someday, somewhere we will build the nuclear power plant.”

More often than not it seems that nuclear power is rather a goal than a means to boil water (because that’s all there is to it, or not…?).
Jakarta Post, 20 August 2010

Radioactive boars on the rise in Germany.
Almost a quarter century after the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear meltdown in Ukraine, its fallout is still a hot topic in some German regions, where thousands of boars shot by hunters still turn up with excessive levels of radioactivity and considered potentially dangerous for consumption. In fact, the numbers are higher than ever before. The total compensation the German government paid last year for the discarded contaminated meat shot up to a record sum of  425,000 euro (US$558,000), from only about 25,000 euro ten years ago, according to the Federal Environment Ministry in Berlin. "The reason is that there are more and more boars in Germany, and more are being shot and hunted, that is why more contaminated meat turns up," spokesman Thomas Hagbeck told The Associated Press. Boars are among the species most susceptible to long-term consequences of the nuclear catastrophe 24 years ago. Unlike other wild game, boars often feed on mushrooms and truffles which tend to store radioactivity and they plow through the contaminated soil with their snouts, experts say.

However, boars are actually the beneficiaries of another ecological crisis — climate change. Central Europe is turning into a land of plenty for the animals, as warmer weather causes beech and oak trees to overproduce seeds and farmers to grow more crops the boars like to feast on such as corn or rape, said Torsten Reinwald of the German Hunting Federation.

"The impact of the Chernobyl fallout in Germany, in general, has decreased," said Florian Emrich, spokesman of the Federal Office for Radiation Protection. For example, radiation has ceased to be a problem on fields cultivated with commercial crops, he said. But forest soil in specific regions that were hit hardest after Chernobyl — parts of Bavaria and Baden-Wuerttemberg in southern Germany — still harbors high amounts of radioactive Cesium-137 which has a half life of roughly 30 years, Emrich said. In fact, the Cesium from the Chernobyl fallout is moving further into the ground and has now reached exactly the layer where the boars' favorite truffles grow. Therefore, the season for such truffles — a variety not eaten by humans — usually means a rising number of radioactive boars.
AP, 18 August 2010

Russian reactor too expensive for Belarus?
Alyaksandr Lukashenko said that Belarus might abandon plans to have its nuclear power plant project built by Russia and financed with a Russian loan, according to BelaPAN. The Belarusian leader said that the signing of an interstate agreement on the project had been postponed once again, and that the government did not reject the possibility of the plant being built by a contractor other than Russia s Atomstroiexport. Belarus chose Russia on the basis of "what they promised to us," Mr. Lukashenko noted. "They urgently demanded from us that they build this plant and then they started putting pressure on us for, I believe, purely subjective reasons. You know what the reasons are," he said.

Russia wanted Belarus to pay "in fact a double price," but Minsk refused, saying that there had been an agreement that the price would be "the same as in Russia," he said, adding that Belarus had agreed to pay the price at which the last nuclear power plant was built in Russia., 16 August 2010

U.S.: national grassroots summit & forum on radwaste policy

Nuclear Monitor Issue: 
Summit planning group

Earlier this year, the Obama Administration's Dept. of Energy announced the creation of its "Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) on the Future of Nuclear Power in America", ostensibly to "study and recommend" what the U.S. should do about its radioactive  waste problems. Many of us watched or attended the first meeting of the Commission in April -- and are deeply disturbed by what we have seen and  heard.

As a response to the first meeting of the Commission a number of organizations have come together to create a  National Grassroots Summit and Forum on Radioactive Waste Policy -- to articulate a national radioactive waste policy for the other 350 million Americans the DOE Panel seems intent on ignoring.

Having both an educational and strategic planning component, this Summit and Forum in June will create an activist tool to tell the DOE and Administration what the real public wants in terms of radioactive waste disposal; educate ourselves and interested members of the public on radioactive waste options and techniques; and establish a "Peoples Green Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Waste Future" on radioactive waste policy that will monitor and critique the work of the BRC, and develop its own list of recommendations and body of public testimony to be offered to the DOE as guidance in developing national radioactive waste policy.

Goals of the Summit will be to identify common ground (geographically and in terms of challenges, concerns and goals) and bottom lines. We will work in small groups and  as a spokes council in addition to sharing time all together. In addition, a Green Ribbon Commission on  America's Nuclear Waste Future will be elected and charged to produce a report which will provide an  alternative plan from that of the federal Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future. In order to  set the outlines of the debate, we will issue the Green Ribbon Commission Report before the federal Blue  Ribbon Commission issues its report over the next 18 -- 24 months.

This event is the next step in a dialog that has been on-going since the first pile of nuclear waste was generated by the Manhattan Project -- most irradiated fuel is still  sitting on the reactor sites where it was made. The cancellation of Yucca Mountain creates an enormous new set of  questions and challenges for the nuclear industry and the public interest. Similarly, the restriction  of waste allowed at the Barnwell, South Carolina so-called "low-level" waste dump in 2008, leaves nuclear  power plants (the primary generators of this waste in the civilian sector) in more than 30 states  with no place to bury this enormous, and often highly radioactive waste category; similar challenges exist in  the military waste world. The new plan to expand both the civilian reactor fleet and the nuclear weapons  production complex threaten our heart-felt goal to see the end to more radioactive waste production. 

Come join this discussion on June 4, 5, 6 at the Loyola University, Lake Shore Campus, Chicago.
For more information on the Summit contact Mary Olson at NIRS – maryo[at] (+1 828-252-8409 or Alfred Meyer at Alfred.c.meyer[at], (+1 202-215-8208).

U.S.A.: Southwest Indigenous Uranium Forum

Nuclear Monitor Issue: 
Southwest Indigenous Uranium Forum

During the last weekend of October, over 200 Indigenous Peoples from Alaska, North America, Bolivia and Japan converged near Acoma Pueblo for the 7th Southwest Indigenous Uranium Forum in Sky City, New Mexico, USA.

Although the forum focused on the uranium developments being proposed at Mount Taylor and throughout the grants mineral belt of New Mexico, it also provided an opportunity for affected communities to share knowledge, experiences, and strategies to combat the current onslaught of nuclear power throughout Indigenous territories worldwide.

Over the two and a half days, participants shared knowledge about a variety of topics related to uranium mining including ongoing resistance efforts, the health affects on uranium mining, the implications of U.S. energy and climate policy, and the emerging green economy. Suzanne Singer, a young Navajo woman new to the issues of uranium mining reflected, "I have learned a lot here. This summit has been very different than other conferences I've been to because it brought out so much emotion in me: anger, happiness, and most importantly, inspiration."

Michaela Stubbs traveled from Melbourne, Australia representing the Australian Nuclear Free Alliance, a network of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous people sharing skills and strategies to campaign against nuclear development in Australia. "The tactics used by multi-national corporations on the Indigenous Peoples here -division, bribery, and bullying- are the same tactics used in Indigenous communities in Australia. We need to find the resources to connect, support and strategize together. If we can accomplish that on the grassroots level, I believe we can shut 'em down."

The Indigenous Environmental Network, Honor the Earth, and the Seventh Generation Fund for Indian Development will be key strategic partners in strengthening connections between national and international communities fighting the nuclear industry. Next steps for the forum include improving communication between communities, coordinating smaller international and inter-tribal dialogues, and planning for the 8th Indigenous Uranium Forum in Australia.

Winona LaDuke, Executive Director of Honor the Earth closed the summit by restating a key theme present throughout the summit. "We need to move past being reactive to the attacks on our communities and be more proactive in creating the communities we want." The 7th Indigenous Uranium Summit was a success in moving this important discussion forward for communities affected by the uranium and nuclear industry.

Contact: Anna Rondon, Southwest Indigenous Uranium Forum. Post Office Box 5058, Gallup, NM 87301, U.S.A.
Tel: +1 505 726-9392

MILKAS conference invitation

Nuclear Monitor Issue: 

Nuclear Waste Problems - from Mining to Reactor Waste

International Conference, 17-18 Oct. 2009, Stockholm, Sweden

International speakers will give presentations about issues as:

  • Which consequences does radiation has on the biologic diversity?
  • ​Is deep underground disposal the solution for radioactive waste?
  • Does a nuclear power station during ‘normal’ operation emits radiation? If so, how much?

The conference is in English. Costs are 55 euro per person, including refreshments and lunch. Travel and accomodation are at own costs.

17 October:

  • ASSE II - A Notorious Nuclear Repository in Germany
  • Depleted Uranium (DU) in Weapons - Action group against Radioactive Warfare, Sweden
  • Radioactive Emissions into Air from Nuclear Reactors - Dr. Ian Fairlie, UK
  • Medical Effects of Radiation - Ulla Slama, Physician, Finland
  • Male Supremacy in the Nuclear Industry - Ewa Larsson, Green Women, Sweden
  • Uranium: not only mining - Professor Gordon Edwards, Canada
  • Workshop 1: International cooperation in the environmental movement on radioactive waste issues.
  • Workshop 2: Uranium mining and Indigenous Peoples.
  • Workshop 3: Health effects of radiation.
  • Workshop 4: Other aspects of nuclear waste.
  • Report from the working groups, discussion and summary


18 October:

  • Swedish Final Repository for Low and Medium Level Nuclear Waste (SFR), Lars-Olof  Höglund, Nuclear Engineer, Sweden
  • Central Interim Storage Facility for Spent Nuclear Fuel (CLAB), Roland Davidsson, National Organisation of Energy Associations (SERO), Sweden
  • High Level Nuclear Waste and the European Pressurized Reactor, Lauri Myllyvirta, Greenpeace, Finland
  • Nuclear Waste in the UK, Dr. David Lowry, UK
  • High Level Nuclear Waste & Very Deep Boreholes, Dr. Johan Swahn, The Swedish NGO Office for Nuclear Waste Review (MKG), Sweden
  • High Level Nuclear Waste & The Dry Rock Deposit Method, Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, Sweden
  • Nuclear Waste in Russia - Andrey Ozharovskiy, Ecodefence, Moscow
  • Problems and Financing of Nuclear Waste in Japan, Dr. Göran Bryntse, Sweden
  • Nuclear Future - Ulla Klötzer, Finland
  • Press conference / coffee and tea
  • Panel discussion

Please, register at: 
The registration deadline is 6 October 2009

Anti-nuclear European Forum

Nuclear Monitor Issue: 
Anti-nuclear European Forum (ANEF)

In the autumn of 2007 the European Nuclear Energy Forum (ENEF) was established. Within ENEF it was aimed that all aspects of this controversial form of energy should be discussed. Both, Czech Republic and Slovakia showed intensive efforts for the organization of ENEF. Semi-annual meetings take place in Prague and Bratislava alternately. The next ENEF meeting will be held in Prague on 28th - 29th of May 2009. This is already going to be the fourth meeting.

Unfortunately, ENEF failed to fulfill ENEF´s official objectives and is used one-sided as a propaganda instrument for the promotion of nuclear power instead. The Prime Ministers Topolanek and Robert Fico used the opening of the forum several times for unqualified unilateral cheering speeches on nuclear energy, while the discussion of the negative aspects of nuclear energy use has been largely ignored, which resulted in increasing dissatisfaction of the critical participants.

A balanced discussion within the next ENEF meeting on 28th- 29th of May seems impossible and therefore we decided - after intensive discussions with Austrian and international NGOs –to organize a counter event – the European Anti-Nuclear Forum (ANEF) -, under which at least some of the negative aspects of nuclear energy will be discussed on an international level. At the same time ANEF aims to send a strong signal across Europe that the EU-funded renaissance of nuclear energy is not an appropriate instrument to fight climate change. The event is organized by the office of the Anti-nuclear Representative of Upper Austria - Radko Pavlovec-in cooperation with the NGO's Antiatom Szene and Antiatom-Komitee.

Anti-Nuclear European Forum (ANEF) will take place in Linz, Upper Austria on 17th of June 2009. Your participation is very important because it needs a strong signal against the nuclear renaissance. The organizers would like to warmly invite you to participate in ANEF.

Please register by sending an email to  and to the office of the Antinuclear Representative of Upper Austria

Antiatom Szene - Das Zukunftsnetzwerk gegen Atomenergie, Thurnerweg 3, 4061 Pasching, Austria.
Tel. +43 650 6660065