Keynote Speech at the Opening Session of the 2011 International Conference of Asia-Pacific Peace Research Association
ASIA--PACIFIC, 17 Oct 2011
Ikuro Anzai, Ph.D. – TRANSCEND Media Service
Agenda for Peace Research after 3/11
- 1. What happened and is still happening in Fukushima
2011 Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami (March 11,2011) / Forty-five times greater than the Kanto Earthquake of 1923 which killed 140,000 people / Four nuclear facilities unprecedentedly fell into a crisis simultaneously / “Level 7” / Radiation levels in Fukushima / Radioactive contamination of foods / What we should and can do for minimizing risks from radiological health viewpoints
- 2. Personal experience during my academic life at University of Tokyo in 1970s
Pioneer student of the Department of Nuclear Engineering, University of Tokyo (1962)/ Recognition of social responsibility of scientists in 1960s in Japan / Japan Scientists Association (1965) / Criticism against Japan’s nuclear power policy (1967) / Proposing “Six Check Points” at Science Council of Japan (1972) / Declaring against governmental nuclear policy at the National Diet (1973) / Openly opposing nuclear power plants in Fukushima (1973) / The first public hearing on the Fukushima nuclear power plant (1973) / Criticism against Japan’s nuclear ship project (1974)/ Censuring the government on the fabrication of monitoring data regarding port calls of US submarines (1974) / Entering a lawsuit against Fukushima nuclear power plant(1975) / Experience of “academic harassment” (1973-1986) / Unconstitutional suppression of academic freedom as one of the background causes of corruption of Japan’s nuclear safety
- 3. Japan’s Nuclear Power Policy in Relation to US Strategy
Development of the first practical nuclear power plant by USSR (1954) / Construction of US nuclear power plant using nuclear reactor for submarine (1954-58) / Impact of WASH740 report / Price-Anderson Nuclear Industry Indemnity Act / Japan’s tragedy caused by a US hydrogen bomb test at Bikini Atolls in 1954 / Activation of anti-nuclear movement and counterattack by political and financial circles / Campaign for “Atoms for Peace” / Reorganization of electric power generation system along US occupation policy / From hydraulic to thermal power, then to nuclear power / Act on Tax for Promotion of Power-Resources Development / Involvement of local communities and citizens / Formation of national mobilization structure for nuclear power development
- 4. Contract with future generations without consent to the disposal of high level radioactive waste
Disposal of long-lived radioactive waste resulted from nuclear power generation / Can science and technology deal with the safety issues tens of thousands of years after? / negative legacy of radioactivity forced to future generations
- 5. Agenda for Peace Research after 3/11
(1) Urgent agenda for several decades of years: Construction of comprehensive aid system for the people in disaster areas by integrating useful potentiality in the fields of politics, administration, economics, science & technology, culture, etc., including decontamination of living environment, adequate control of contamination of foods, dissemination of literacy about radiation/radioactivity for eradicating social discrimination and prejudice against sufferers, and establishment of health check system to find and cure stochastic effects of radiation in the earliest stage.
(2) Agenda for peace research suggested from my own personal experience in academic life: Development of method to sense dangerous social signs in the earliest stage, including signs in the fields of structural and/or cultural violence such as academic harassment, irrational policy execution without sincere attitude toward science, emasculation of democracy, etc.
(3) Agenda for peace researcher to elucidate the whole story of Fukushima tragedy: Efforts to totally clarify the direct and indirect reasons why such a catastrophic nuclear disaster has been caused in Japan by comprehensively analyzing and synthesizing historical facts in the light of subordination of Japan’s politics to US strategy in the postwar period, quite Japanese way of old-fashioned politics symbolized by the combination of taxation system for promoting nuclear power and “Yarase” culture, i.e. faking people’s opinion favorable to nuclear power. Lessons from such research, when combined with sincere efforts of educationalists and journalists, may become crucially important for Japanese people to choose a more peaceful future.
(4) Agenda for peace for future generations: Consensus building about acceptability/ unacceptability of technologies that may leave unmeasurable potential risk as “negative legacy” such as very long-lived radioactive waste which will tremendously cost but will never produce any value for future generations. Is it ethically acceptable for us to enjoy nuclear energy for our life and to leave unmeasurable risks to hundred generations to come with no chance to obtain their consent?
【SPEECH】
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to Japan, welcome to Kyoto and welcome to Ritsumeikan University.
My name is Ikuro Anzai, Honorary Director of Kyoto Museum for World Peace at this university. As I retired from Ritsumeikan University last March at the age of 71 years old, I established my personal office named Anzai Science & Peace Office, and planned to carry out varieties of activities for disseminating scientific way of thinking and building a more peaceful future.
At 14:46 on 11 March 2011, there occurred a tremendously destructive earthquake in the north-east part of mainland Japan, which has been depriving approximately 28,000 people of their lives. More than 300,000 people took refuge from the quake, tsunami, and radiations originating from nuclear power stations in the damaged area. The magnitude of the quake was estimated to be 9.0, the biggest in the modern history of Japan. The earthquake was named “Great East Japan Earthquake”, which is more than 11,000 times greater than the New Zealand Earthquake on 22 February 2011 in Christchurch, and even 45 times as great as the 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake which drove approximately 140,000 people to death.
When I was told about the occurrence of this serious accident for the first time in that evening, I felt very sorry for not having been able to prevent such a catastrophe, although I am a specialist in radiation protection who has been strictly criticizing governmental nuclear power policy since 1967 for more than 40 years. But as a scientist who has been involved in the field of nuclear science and technology, I am ashamed of my incapacity for not having been successful in persuading our government and the people of Japan about the risks of nuclear power generation.
I originally graduated from University of Tokyo in 1964 as one of the first students of the Department of Nuclear Engineering in Japan. My graduation paper at the age of 23 was on the investigation into preventive measures against severe nuclear accidents although there were no nuclear power plants in this country yet. As is well known among Japanese people, 1960s began with the revision of US-Japan Security Treaty which deeply involved Japan in Vietnam War by offering so many military bases throughout the nation especially in Okinawa. In addition to various new types of casualty weapons such as pineapple bomb, ball bomb, nail bomb, and defoliant, the US military force even had a plan to use hydrogen bombs B43 in Vietnam, and the training for dropping the bomb was executed in Okinawa. One of the mock-up B43 bombs for training is now exhibited in Kyoto Museum for World Peace, Ritsumeikan University.
1960s was also the period when Japanese government was promoting so-called “income-doubling policy” by rapid economic growth, which resulted in incidence of serious public nuisance, workmen’s accidents, poisoning of mass-produced medical drugs, etc. Many people including workers, teachers, researchers, engineers, citizens, mothers, youth, and so on were beginning to be aware of the importance of social responsibility of corporations, technologists and scientists. In 1965, a scientists’ organization named Japan Scientists Association was established for the development of science based on the principles of independence, democracy and harmony. The Association was affiliated by individual researchers and educationalists in the fields of not only natural science but also social science and human science. I joined the association in 1966, and became one of the board members responsible for the activities watching governmental nuclear power policy. I learnt much more about nuclear issues comprehensively not only about scientific and technological aspects but also political, economical, social and cultural aspects of nuclear power policy. I was also severely educated by the people in the local communities who invited me to the lecture meetings about nuclear safety issues, and threw varieties of questions that were far outside my scientific field but vitally important for their life in the local community, although they were extremely difficult for me to answer. The first and the very significant opportunity came in 1972, 39 years ago, when I was requested to make a keynote speech at the first symposium on nuclear power generation organized by the Science Council of Japan (JSC) which is sometimes referred to as the parliament of Japanese scientists. JSC was substantially the official representative organization of Japanese scientists, and 210 members of JSC, 30 scientists in 7 different academic fields, were elected by the direct vote of about 300 thousand scientists all over Japan. I was as young as 32 years old at that time, and it was very exceptional for a young scientist like me to be able to have such an opportunity to make a keynote address about such an important agenda.
I proposed six fundamental check points about the healthiness or unhealthiness of Japanese nuclear power policy, which were (1) independence of national energy policy, (2) development not for economic growth first but safety first, (3) national nuclear power policy not to devastate development policy of local community, (4) prevention of military use of nuclear energy, (5) safety assurance of the lives of nuclear power plant workers and residents, and proven safety measures against severe accidents, and (6) democracy of nuclear power administration. These check points functioned for some time as leading principles for anti-nuclear power movement in Japan in 1970s.
Next year in 1973, I was invited to the National Diet as one of the ten scientists in the field of nuclear science and technology who were requested to state their opinions and viewpoints about national nuclear power policy, when I sharply criticized governmental policy. I was then an assistant lecturer working for the Department of Radiological Health, Faculty of Medicine of the University of Tokyo which is a national university. So I was one of the Government employees who nevertheless strictly criticizing national nuclear policy, which resulted in my experience of varieties of harassment in my academic life which I would introduce you later.
In the same year in September 1973, I became deeply involved in anti-nuclear power movement in Fukushima together with the people residing in the vicinity of nuclear power plants. The Government held a public hearing regarding Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant No.2, which was the first official public hearing about nuclear power generation ever organized in Japan. But it was a typical example of so-called “Yarase” in Japanese which means a fake. Majority of speakers and audience of the public hearing were intentionally chosen from among the people who agreed with inviting nuclear power plants to Fukushima. Nevertheless, I collaborated with other scientists, lawyers and the people in the local community to send our delegates to the public hearing to raise questions about risks of nuclear power and to clarify the unhealthiness of the national nuclear policy. I myself had a chance to make a speech there by the efforts of the anti-nuclear residents who nominated me as a delegate speaking for them, but the most astonishing thing I experienced there was a speech made by a pro-nuclear woman who was sent from the local community in the vicinity of Fukushima Nuclear Power Plants now in crisis. She said “We need not fear mal-effects of nuclear radiations, because, in the 1973 All Japan Senior High School Base Ball Tournament, championship was gained by the high school baseball team from Hiroshima, the A-bombed city, where, once said, no grasses and trees would grow in 75 years.” She seemed to suggest that radiations are not so harmful as actually feared by referring to remarkable vitality of the young people grown up even in the area devastated by a nuclear weapon, but it was too sad to me to witness such kind of unscientific storyteller had some effects on the formation of public acceptance of nuclear power.
Now, let me introduce brief history of nuclear power development.
Immediately after the end of the Pacific War, the electric power in Japan was dominantly generated by hydraulic power plants, and there was only one electric power company named “Japan Electric Power Generation and Supply Company”. Japan was virtually ruled by the US Occupation Army, and the US adopted an administrative policy to rule Japan not directly but indirectly through Japanese Government with Emperor Hirohito as a nominal symbol of the unity of Japanese people. In 1951, the US decomposed Japan Electric Power Generation and Supply Company into 9 regional power companies such as Tokyo Electric Company, Kansai Electric Company, and so on. It was done in the name of democratization of Japan’s economy system by disorganizing so-called “Zaibatsu”, which means intensive financial combine. But the real strategic intention of the US was to make Japanese electric power production dependent upon US. For instance, Kansai Electric Company was limited to serve the Kansai area covering big cities such as Osaka, Kobe and Kyoto. These cities needed vast amount of electric power in the process of reconstruction in the postwar period, but Kansai Electric Power Company did not possess enough hydraulic power resource within its territory which inevitably made the company dependent upon thermal power plants which can be built near the area consuming much electric power. In the earlier stage, considerable amount of coal produced in Japan was used for thermal power generation, but the fuel was gradually switched to petroleum which drastically and rapidly rendered Japan dependent on the US energy strategy. Nuclear power development of Japan was fundamentally characterized on its extended line by accepting the offer of nuclear technology from US and introducing nuclear power plants originally developed in US.
On the other hand, Japan is the only nation that experienced nuclear holocausts by the US atomic bombing on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. More than 300,000 people have been driven to death by the use of these classical nuclear weapons. But the international community could not have enough chance to know terrible damage and aftereffects of atomic bombing, because the US forbade writing reports and sending photos about the tragedy by press code or news censorship, and restarted nuclear testing from July 1, 1946 on. But 3 years later in 1949, USSR succeeded in developing plutonium bomb, which urged US to the development of hydrogen bomb. On March 1, 1954, Japanese tuna fishing boat named “Lucky Dragon” was exposed to lethal level of radioactive fallout produced by a US hydrogen bomb test carried out on the Bikini Atolls, the detonation yield of which was 15 megaton, five times as great as the total yield of bombs used in the World War 2 including two atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Seven years later in 1961, USSR conducted a hydrogen bomb test nicknamed “Tsari Bomba” of 50 megaton, 17 times greater than World War 2. 1950s and 60s were the period when US and USSR were in the midst of nuclear arms race based on the strategic thinking of nuclear deterrence and power balance, which finally resulted in Mutually Assured Destruction abbreviated as MAD.
Japanese people activated anti-nuclear movement in 1954 which was ignited by US hydrogen bomb test in Bikini Atolls on March 1. Two days after that, Japanese Conservative Parties, with the initiative of Nakasone Yasuhiro, later Prime Minister of Japan, hastily passed in the Diet a budget of 235 million yen for building a nuclear reactor. The figure 235 came from uranium-235. One year before, Nakasone took part in a seminar held in Harvard and had an idea to promote “Atoms for Peace” project in Japan in cooperation with US. Then, Shoriki Matsutaro, owner of Yomiuri Newspaper Company, launched travelling expositions to popularize the possibility of peaceful use of nuclear energy. I myself had a chance to see one of such expositions held in Tokyo in 1959, where a genuine nuclear reactor was exhibited in the middle of Tokyo Metropolis.
But it is significant to know that the first practical nuclear power plant of 5,000 kW was built and went into operation in 1954 not by US but by USSR in Obnisk near Moskow. At that time, the US Atomic Energy Act was prohibiting private enterprises from taking part in nuclear energy exploitation until its revision 2 months after the Soviet success in practical nuclear generation. US hastily developed nuclear power generation by making use of a nuclear reactor system developed for submarine, and managed to operate the Shipping Port Nuclear Power Plant in 1957. In that year, a report named WASH-740 titled “Theoretical Possibilities and Consequences of Major Accidents in Large Nuclear Power Plants” indicated possible effects of “maximum credible accident” as 3,400 deaths, 43,000 injuries and property damage of 7 billion dollars, more than the double of Japan’s national budget in those days, which seems to be too serious for a private electric power company to cope with such a situation. About half a year later, The Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act, usually referred to as “Price-Anderson Act”, was legislated by which private companies can be indemnified for any claims above approximately 12.6 billion dollars (as of 2011) . This Act was considered necessary to create an incentive for private nuclear power production. Four years later, a similar act named “Act on Contract for Indemnification of Nuclear Damage Compensation” was legislated in Japan. It is obvious that nuclear power industry cannot survive such catastrophic situations without aid of the nation.
In Japan, this connection between the government and the electric power company was further strengthened by involving local government by legislating “Act on Tax for Promotion of Power-Resources Development” which brought a vast amount of special subsidy up to several billion yen for 3 years, if the local government accepts the plan to build an electric power plant. Every contractor must pay about 5 dollars per 1,000 kW-h electric power consumption, creating about 50 billion dollars of tax income every year. The local community can be blessed with special subsidy for three years, but infrastructures constructed during the period require persistent fund for maintenance, thereby more nuclear power plants are apt to be invited.
In addition, residents in the local community concerned were also mobilized to invite nuclear power plants. For example, in Futaba District, Fukushima Prefecture, where nuclear disaster is now going on, a residents’ group named “Organization for Building a Bright Futaba District” was formed in early 1970s, which even put up a poster saying “Let’s Promote Construction of Nuclear Power Plant by Our‘Power’and Open a Way to Build an Affluent Futaba District”. People in local communities concerned were thus involved in a national mobilization structure for nuclear power.
Needless to say, very many specialists in the field of nuclear engineering were officially requested to authorize the governmental judgment about the safety of nuclear power generation. Journalism could not play a sufficient role for criticism, and rather functioned as disseminators of illusions and mythical fallacies that nuclear power generation is safe and economical.
It is sometimes said that nuclear power generation in Japan has been promoted by a “pentagon” consisting of central government, nuclear power industry, local government, specialists and journalism. I personally feel that residents’ organization for inviting nuclear power plants to local community should be added to this “pentagon”, thereby forming a “hexagon”, which is almost a national mobilization structure that was once constructed in the war time. This hexagon formed a so-called “nuclear village” which is unusually closed, exclusive and ungenerous. I myself started my study life as a member of this “nuclear village” in early 1960s, but I was ruthlessly ejected from the village in 1970s when I was identified as a harmful criticizer.
Since I began to openly criticize the governmental nuclear policy in early 1970s, I experienced extraordinary harassment in my academic life at University of Tokyo. I was excluded from the education system, and research budget was completely cut. My lecture tours to various parts of Japan were often tailed by a power company staff in charge of watching me. A medical trainee sent from Tokyo Electric Power Company sat next to me at the laboratory to spy out my idea about the anti-nuclear movement. Nobody was permitted to talk to me from morning till evening. I experienced different types of obstruction or interference in the process of application for a professorship of other colleges or universities.
I could narrowly survive this very difficult time firstly by my own personal belief in life with dignity, secondly solidarity with the understanding people in the fields of science and public movement, and thirdly, maybe most importantly, the support of my partner. Very interestingly, human relation between my boss and me was ironically a little bit improved after a severe nuclear accident in US which took place at Three Mile Island in March 1979. He seemed to have understood that my warnings about the risks of nuclear power generation were not entirely false. But my position was frozen to an assistant lecturer for 17 years until 1986, when I moved from University of Tokyo to Ritsumeikan University here, which was a great happiness for me.
I should say that there was such unconstitutional suppression of freedom as I experienced in the background of nuclear power exploitation in Japan which, I feel, was one of the significant elements that endangered Japanese society.
Now I would like to make some comments about the situations in radiation disaster area in Fukushima. I visited there three times after the accident, mid-April, early May and early August for the purposes to see my friends who have been co-working for nuclear-risk-free community for about 40 years, to make several lectures for educationalists, citizens, workers, young mothers and specialists, to make advice on radiation protection to the people who need me, to measure radiation levels and to sample soils contaminated with radioactive substance.
The radiation levels have been and still are very high in nearby area and so-called hot-spots, even in Fukushima City populated by about 280,000 residents some 60km apart from the nuclear power plant. I made a radiation survey between Iwaki City and Namie Town, about 80 km distant, the result of which is shown below. Radiation exposure rate was about 0.5 μSv/hr in Iwaki, but it gradually rose up to 20, 30 even to 50 μSv/hr in the northwest area of nuclear power plant.
Radiation levels in Fukushima City are different from place to place, but, on an average, current exposure rate is about 1 micro-Sievert per hour at the height of 1 meter above the ground, which is roughly equivalent to 150-200 chest X-ray examinations per year.
The major cause of external radiation exposure is radioactive cesium-137 deposited on the ground. The total amount of cesium-137 released from Fukushima Nuclear Power Plants has been estimated to be about 168 times greater than that released by Hiroshima A-bomb according to the evaluation by the Ministry of Economics, Trade and Industry. The most of these radioactive substances now deposited on the ground were mainly released during the first 1 week after the hydrogen gas explosions in the plant, and the radioactivity freshly coming down in recent days is quite little. It is noteworthy to recognize that radioactive cesium is very tightly caught by several centimeters of surface soil layer, and I myself verified in cooperation with Ms. Yoshiko Tanigawa that cesium-137 is not easily dissolved into water, even if we wash the contaminated soil by large quantity of water. This property is peculiar to the clay-like soil in Fukushima. This soil quality is the main reason why the levels of radioactive contamination of rice cropped this fall in Fukushima were considerably low. It also suggests that rainfall will not easily wash out radioactive cesium, and sunflower may not effectively decontaminate the soil in Fukushima case.
Therefore, in order to reduce radiation levels above the ground, it is quite effective to remove only several centimeters of surface soil layer. During my second visit to Fukushima in May, I carried out an experiment in a kindergarten in Fukushima City to demonstrate the effectiveness of surface soil clearance. Radiation level was remarkably decreased by removing only 2~3 centimeters of surface soil layer, and the administrators of the kindergarten made efforts to eliminate the contaminated surface soil thereafter, which enabled them to have an outdoor event for children a week ago.
I am convinced that we should earnestly endeavor to carry out every possible measure to protect people, especially young children, from harmful ionizing radiations due to serious accident of nuclear power plants upon which our generation has been being dependent to an extent. Here in Kyoto, we are now unconsciously enjoying electric power generated by nuclear power plants only 60 kilometers from this conference venue. There are 14 nuclear power plants in Fukui Prefecture just adjacent to Kyoto, and vast amount of high-level radioactive waste has already been accumulated, which is to be taken care of by the future generations. Future generations to come after us have to manage to isolate such dangerous nuclear waste from civil life for thousands of years . They must expend huge resource for disposal of nuclear waste which will not produce any value for them. We, people of today, are enjoying nuclear power, and are going to leave tremendous “negative fortune” to our children, grandchildren, and future generations over tens of thousands of year. We must ask ourselves whether or not it is ethically justifiable.
Now I think I must conclude my speech by raising several agenda for peace researchers after 3/11 as is expected by the organizer, Professor Akio Kimijima. Based on my personal experience as a nuclear scientist specializing in radiation protection over 45 years and also as a peace researcher who has been confronting this unprecedented difficulty, I would like to suggest following 5 points:
(1) Regarding the definition of peace, I fundamentally agree with Dr. Johan Galtung, and understand peace not only as “absence of war” but also “absence of violence” which is categorized into direct violence, structural violence and cultural violence. Although the enormous scale of earthquake itself and accompanying tsunami were of natural origin, we still observed a number of structural and cultural violence which enhanced the damage and pain of the sufferers in devastated area. It is a role of peace researcher to make investigations to explain how the effects of an originally natural disaster were further aggravated by interconnections of structural and/or cultural violence.
(2) An urgent agenda for several decades of years to come is to construct a comprehensive aid system for the people in disaster areas by integrating useful potentiality in the fields of politics, administration, economics, science, technology, and culture, including preserving efforts for decontamination of living environment, adequate control of radioactive contamination of foods, dissemination of literacy about radiation/radioactivity for eradicating social discrimination and prejudice against sufferers in an abyss of despair, and establishment of health check system to find out and treat stochastic effects of radiation such as cancers and leukemia in the earliest stage. In order to integrate individual effort into a most effective total system, a peace-minded general coordination system must be established.
(3) An agenda for peace research suggested from my own personal experience in academic life is to develop a method to sense dangerous social signs in the earliest stage, including signs in the fields of structural and/or cultural violence such as academic harassment, irrational policy execution without sincere attitude toward science, emasculation of democracy, etc. It may be of some help if we will be able to develop some indicators such as the Global Peace Index which was developed by Institute for Economics and Peace (UK), or the Universal Human Rights Index by UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Such a indicator, if possible, may be able to function to an extent for warning people to the latent danger in the society.
(4) .Another agenda for peace researcher is to elucidate the whole story of Fukushima tragedy not only from short term point of view but also long term point of view in the world history. Efforts should be made to totally clarify the direct and indirect reasons why such a catastrophic nuclear disaster has been caused in Japan by comprehensively analyzing and synthesizing historical facts in the light of, for example, subordination of Japan’s politics to US strategy in the postwar period, a quite Japanese way of old-fashioned politics symbolized by the combination of taxation system for promoting nuclear power and “Yarase” culture, i.e. faking people’s opinion favorable to nuclear power. Lessons from such research, when combined with sincere efforts of educationalists and journalists, may become crucially important for Japanese people to choose a more peaceful and safer future.
(5) Finally I will add an agenda for peace of future generations. This is the agenda in connection with the point I already referred to as to the long-lived radioactive waste disposal. How can we deal with the consensus building about the acceptability of technologies which may leave immeasurable potential risk as “negative legacy” just like the very long-lived nuclear waste which will tremendously cost but will never produce any value for future generation. Peace researcher is expected answer the question: Is it ethically acceptable for us to enjoy nuclear energy for our life and to leave risks hard to estimate to hundred generations to come with no chance to obtain their consent?
Now I am closing my keynote speech by expressing my heartfelt welcome to you and my appreciation for listening to my speech. Fukushima is serious, but I will continue to encourage the sufferers in difficulty. And I hope all of you will be with us. Thank you.
____________________
Born in 1940 in Tokyo. Moved from Tokyo to Fukushima in 1944 to avoid air raids, and lived there until 1949. Graduated from Department of Nuclear Engineering, Faculty of Technology, University of Tokyo. Ph.D. specializing in radiological health science. Assistant lecturer of Department of Radiological Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tokyo (1969-1986). Professor of College of Economics, Ritsumeikan University (1986-1988). Professor of College of International Relations, Ritsumeikan University (1988-2011). Professor emeritus. Honorary director, Kyoto Museum for World Peace (2008-). Director, Anzai Science & Peace Office (ASAP, 2011-). Advisory Board Member, International Network of Museums for Peace (INMP, 2008-). Received Distinguished Service Medal for Contribution to Culture and Communication (Vietnam, 2004). Awarded the 22nd Kubo Medical Culture Prize (Japan, 2011). Authored more than 100 books on various topics including radiation protection, nuclear power generation, effects of atomic bombing, nuclear disarmament, peace studies, global environmental issues, critical thinking, etc.
This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 17 Oct 2011.
Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source, TMS: Keynote Speech at the Opening Session of the 2011 International Conference of Asia-Pacific Peace Research Association, is included. Thank you.
If you enjoyed this article, please donate to TMS to join the growing list of TMS Supporters.
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 License.