Cold War Legacies and Post-Cold War Politics: International Aid and the Victims of Nuclear Testing in Kazakhstan
Cynthia Werner
Department of Anthropology
Texas A&M University
Executive Summary
Topic of Research
Between 1949 and 1989, the Soviet government conducted more than 470 nuclear tests at the Semipalatinsk Nuclear Test Site (SNTS) in northeastern Kazakhstan. The test site is surrounded by several villages and located approximately 150 km west of the city of Semei (formerly Semipalatinsk). According to some estimates, up to two million people living in the region have been exposed to varying doses of radiation as a result of these tests.
This research project examines the political dynamics that affect international aid to the Semipalatinsk region. In the post-Cold War era, the health and environmental problems associated with the SNTS have been regarded as a global problem that requires international cooperation and support. Global solutions are necessary because the current predicament was created by a government that no longer exists and inherited by a government that is experiencing a budgetary crisis. Given the situation, the new government of Kazakhstan has turned to the international community for help.
Summary of Research Methodology
Research for this project was conducted in Kazakhstan during the summers of 2000 and 2001. During the summer of 2000, I participated in the National Research Council's Young Investigator Program on the "Health and Social Impacts of Nuclear Testing in Kazakhstan." As one of five American participants, I learned more about the current research related to nuclear testing in the Semei region by visiting Kazakhstani research institutes, medical facilities and local villages. I also made plans with two of the participants (Kathleen Purvis, an American environmental chemist, and Nurlan Ibraev, a Kazakh epidemiologist) to collaborate on a future project. During the summer of 2001, the three of us reunited in Kazakhstan to conduct preliminary research for our collaborative project on risk perception related to radiation exposure. During this visit, Ibraev, who formerly worked as a Senior Scientific Associate at the Institute of Radiation Ecology and Medicine in Semei and the Deputy Chief Doctor of the Semei Oncological Hospital, handled our logistical arrangements and scheduled our interviews.
During both summers, qualitative interviews were conducted with Kazakh villagers, Russian villagers, health care workers, research scientists, and local NGO leaders. During interviews with villagers living in Dolon, Kanonerka, Bolshaya Vladimirovka, Sarzhal and Kainar, we covered a number of topics: experiences during the nuclear tests; knowledge of the testing before and after independence; physical and psychological problems associated with testing; economic opportunities and constraints in the post-Soviet period; access to health care; and the issue of compensation for the "victims" of nuclear testing. During interviews with health care workers in five medical institutions in Semei, Kurchatov (the former SNTS headquarters) and Kainar village, we asked questions about health conditions and health care: the types of health problems commonly attributed to radiation exposure; access to and costs of diagnosis and treatment; the environmental factors other than radiation that contribute to poor health in the region; and educational programs to inform patients how to limit radiation exposure. During interviews with research scientists in Almaty, Semei and Kurchatov, we discussed existing research on the radiation doses experienced in the region; research on the long-term impact of radiation exposure on health and environment; research estimating current rates of radiation exposure in areas inhabited by humans; logistical problems of closing the test site in a safe and efficient manner. During interviews with NGO leaders in Almaty and Semei, we addressed the political power of environmental groups, such as the Nevada-Semipalatinsk Movement which helped close the SNTS; and current efforts by international and local NGOs to provide humanitarian assistance, educational awareness programs, and economic development programs to the "victims" of nuclear testing.
Research Findings and Preliminary Conclusions
* Radiation Exposure. Numerous individuals, including both Kazakh and Russian, were exposed to radiation as a result of atmospheric (1949-1962) and underground (1961-1989) nuclear testing at the SNTS. Villagers were only evacuated during a few of the largest tests. Before most tests, villagers were usually warned that there would be an "explosion" but they were neither told the reason for the explosion nor warned of the potential health risk. Individuals who were alive during the atmospheric tests have been exposed to much higher doses of radiation than those who were born afterwards. Individual dose rates vary greatly depending on the specific patterns of radioactive fallout. For example, within a village, some regions of a village are more contaminated than others.
* Current Threats from Radiation. Although the majority of radionuclides are significantly decayed within thirty days of a nuclear test, a few radionuclides (such as plutonium) have extremely long half-lives, and thus the average exposure to radiation continues to be slightly higher than background radiation would otherwise be in the areas near the test site. Unfortunately, regional variations in radiation levels have not been adequately mapped and distributed to local villagers. Further, international scientists are not in agreement as to the threat from chronic, low-dose radiation exposure. Some scientists believe that the current levels of radiation exposure are not harmful to human health (though accumulated doses from testing and post-testing periods can certainly affect health), while others believe that current levels of radiation exposure do present health risks to individuals living near the test site. The latter point out that there are various pathways for radiation exposure (i.e. through water, food, air) which must be considered in addition to simply measuring the levels of radiation in a particular substance. Further, some scientists believe that man-made forms of radiation are more dangerous than natural forms of radiation.
* Economic Survival Options. Economic opportunities in the villages surrounding the test site are very limited. Following the privatization of agriculture, most villagers lost their jobs with the state farm (and consequently lost their salary and benefits as well). Most villagers are struggling to survive on subsistence agriculture and subsistence herding. The "Russian" villages north of the test site (Dolon, Kanonerka, and Bolshaya Vladimirovka) have better conditions for cultivating plants, while the Kazakh villages south of the test site (Kainar, Sarzhal) are more suitable for herding livestock. Compared to other rural regions in Kazakhstan, there is limited "shuttle trade," most likely due to the long distances between villages and cities. Desperate for income, a small number of villagers have turned to the dangerous activity of mining copper from the former nuclear test site.
* Health Care Problems Associated with Radiation Exposure. Comparative studies with control populations demonstrate that the populations near the test site experience higher rates of cancers (including leukemia), benign thyroid abnormalities, and birth abnormalities. Some scientists believe that chronic, low-dose radiation can lead to an immunodeficiency problem that mirrors AIDS, though is not contagious. In addition, populations near the test site experience higher rates of depression, and the suicide rate is quite high.
* Other Factors That Affect Health in the Region. Radiation exposure from nuclear testing has clearly affected the health of local populations. According to local doctors, the impact of radiation exposure is compounded by other factors, most notably diet. Poverty rates in the post-Soviet period have made it difficult for villagers to provide their families with a healthy, balanced diet. Kazakh villagers living south of the test site, in particular, do not eat enough vegetables and fruits.
* Health Care Options. Free health care was one of the benefits of the Soviet state. In the post-Soviet period, health care is becoming increasingly expensive. According to local doctors, certain types of diagnoses and treatments are still free, if supplies are available, but the more expensive medicines and more effective treatments are no longer free. In addition, not all villagers can afford the cost of traveling to Semei to receive early diagnosis and treatment. Many put off the hospital visit until it is too late.
* Health Education. Based on our interviews, there is little information for villagers regarding basic things they can do to improve their health and minimize radiation exposure. Although at least one NGO has introduced some educational outreach programs to villagers, their efforts are constrained by a limited budget and a lack of information based on empirical research.
* Government Assistance to "Victims" of Nuclear Testing. Shortly after independence, the Kazakh government attempted to provide "compensation" for the victims of nuclear testing. The level of compensation was determined based on where an individual lived during his lifetime in relation to various zones of exposure. The program largely failed due to sudden inflation (the amounts granted were worthless by the time they were received) and limited funds. Currently, government employees (and pensioners) who live near the former test site receive an "ecological supplement" as part of their monthly wage.
* International Aid and Assistance. In the early 1990s, the health and environmental problems associated with the SNTS received some attention in international policy circles, and a number of promises were made for humanitarian assistance and economic development projects in the Semei region. The United Nations, in particular, outlined a number of expensive development projects to rehabilitate the health and economy of the region. Based on interviews with NGO leaders in Semei, it is clear that international attention faded shortly after the test site closed in 1991 as regional problems were redefined. By 2001, many of the international commitments to the Semei region have yet to be fulfilled, and international attention has shifted to new issues, including the pollution of the Caspian Sea.
Suggestions for Future Research Agendas
With my colleagues, I plan to conduct future research on risk perceptions related to radiation exposure from nuclear testing. We plan to compare risk perceptions of Kazakh villagers, health care workers and research scientists. It is possible that villagers underestimate the risk of radiation exposure, as evidenced by copper mining practice, or that they over-exaggerate the risk of radiation exposure, as evidenced by tendency to blame all illnesses on radiation. Either way, the results of this study should provide practical benefits for constructing health education programs.
Other suggestions for research include:
* A study to examine the link between the health of a household and their economic survival strategies
* A study to examine the politics of international aid, with the Semei region as a case study
* A more thorough study of the current threats from radiation (based on land, water, air and food samples).
Policy Implications for the United States
* Consider Regional Problems that Don't Fit Current Development Trends. In the contemporary world, there are a number of important causes worthy of assistance from the international aid community. Funding for international development is often driven by political as well as humanitarian interests. In the late 1990s, as the pursuit of oil interests in the Caspian Basin increased, international attention shifted away from SNTS towards new issues, including the pollution of the Caspian Sea. Although pollution is a real issue, the Caspian region is better off than the Semei region of Kazakhstan when it comes to the average standard of living and health conditions. Thus, it appears that the economic and social development of the Semipalatinsk region has lost its priority now that the nuclear test site has been closed and nuclear weapons have been removed from Kazakhstan.
* Understand the Political Leverage of Aiding the Victims of Semipalatinsk. Given that the problems associated with the former nuclear test site have been highly publicized in Kazakhstan and given the fact that the Kazakhstan government has gone to great lengths to disassociate itself from the Soviet government that conducted the tests, the US government has much to gain politically by aiding the victims of nuclear testing in Kazakhstan. On the one hand, aid to test victims could be viewed as a "goodwill gesture" to the government of Kazakhstan for closing down its nuclear weapons sites shortly after independence. The US government spent approximately $184 million assisting with this process. It seems reasonable that the US government, a leading provider of humanitarian assistance, would package assistance to close the nuclear weapons facilities with some forms of humanitarian assistance and development aid for some of the innocent victims of the nuclear weapons industry. On the other hand, aid to the victims of nuclear testing could be viewed as a way to gain some political leverage over the government of Kazakhstan. Such leverage may be necessary in the near future for the Global War Against Terrorism (GWAT), political negotiations over oil contracts and pipeline routes, and efforts to further the democratization process in Kazakhstan.
* Understand the Potential Danger of Having Underdeveloped Regions in Kazakhstan. Aid to the Semei region should be seen as a measure to prevent uneven economic development in the region, which if left untouched, can fester into political conflict. Although there are no extremist groups in Semei today, it is not inconceivable that this region could develop into a hot spot, given the relative inequities compared to other regions of Kazakhstan and the level of mistrust for the government.
* Fulfill Commitments to UN Projects. In the 1990s, the United Nations went to a great effort to outline specific programs that could be implemented to help the social and economic development of the Semei region. The total cost of these programs is $42 million dollars, an expense that is supposed to be shared by the wealthier nations of the UN. The United States has yet to fulfill its commitment to these United Nations programs. Rather than spending more resources on developing new programs, the US should consider sending money through the United Nations.
* Improve Humanitarian Aid to Region. Certain problems in the area require direct humanitarian assistance. This includes medical supplies and equipment for hospitals (to lower costs for patients and increase access), transportation vouchers (to hospitals) and food aid (to improve the diet of poor villagers).
* Initiate Development Programs to Help People Help Themselves. Other problems in the area require indirect economic development programs. Several villagers recounted the need for micro-credit loans with low interest and long terms to help make the transition from state farm employment to a market economy. Any micro-credit program should include local people in the planning process, and should consider the need to come up with projects that keep radiation exposure to a minimum.
* Introduce Health Education Programs. Health education is crucial for villagers to learn more about the risks of radiation exposure (from water, soil and food); to learn about the importance of early diagnoses and treatment for cancer and other illnesses; and to learn about the importance of a healthy diet.