Hiroshima Peace Institute
Giving Up the Nuke?
By Haruhiro Fukui"Do you believe it to be possible to eliminate nuclear weapons?" is one of
the questions, and the hardest of all, that I have often been asked since myappointment as the next HPI president was officially announced. "Maybe, …"
has typically been my lame answer. In what follows, I would like to address thequestion once more and raise a few related questions.
Let me begin with a few comments on the charming little book by Noel
Perrin published in 1979, Giving Up the Gun. It relates the remarkable tale ofJapan's meteoric rise and fall as the "matchlock superpower" of the earlymodern world. What was remarkable was not so much the speed with which
the nation manufactured and armed itself with more guns than all European
nations combined within a few decades of its first encounter with the couple ofmatchlocks brought by the Portuguese adventurers stranded on Tanegashima in
1543. Nor was it the demonstration of the formidable destructive power of theweapon in the series of famous battles fought by rival bands of warriors during
the last half of the century, notably the Battle of Nagashino in which Oda s
3,000 matchlockmen literally obliterated Takeda s entire cavalry. It was rather
that Japan abandoned the formidable weapon soon thereafter and strictly on its
own initiative.
An important lesson of the Japanese encounter and parting with the gun issurely that, as Perrin suggests, "progress" in military technology, such as theinvention of the gun or nuclear weapons, is not something "semidivine" and"inexorable" but something "we can guide, and direct, and even stop." As heputs it: "Men can choose to remember; they can also choose to forget." Men in
Tokugawa Japan indeed appear to have chosen to forget rather than remember.
It would be, however, to misconstrue the main reasons for their choice toattribute it, as Perrin does, principally to the power of moral norms, such as the
symbolic value of the sword for the "samurai" and his view of the gun as a"foreign" weapon. Far more important was no doubt the peace and stability
enforced by the Tokugawa regime. Remember that, when the peace was broken
and widespread violence broke out again during the last years of the Shogunate
and the first years of the Meiji regime, the gun, rather than the sword, was themain weapon used by the combatants.
As so-called realists among Western students of international politics,
from Thucydides to Hobbes to Carr to Waltz, have been arguing for centuries
with unfailing consistency and unshakable conviction, international peace is far
more difficult to attain than domestic peace. This is primarily becauseinternational politics, unlike domestic politics, takes place in a state of anarchy,
that is, the absence of government, among sovereign states. Anarchy creates
the legendary Hobbesian "state of nature," or a permanent state of "war of all
against all." This condition leads all states to arm themselves as heavily asnecessary and possible for survival, giving rise to a vicious circle known as the
security dilemma or arms race, a situation that raises the level of tension andheightens the risk of war. Should a war break out, the states involved are likely
to employ any and every means available, including the most advanced andmost destructive weapons at their disposal.
In a state of anarchy, the realist would go on to argue, disarmament is thus
as difficult to achieve as international peace. In order to appreciate the degree

CONTENTS
Giving Up the Nuke? by new HPI President Haruhiro Fukui …………１
HPI s New President …………………………………………………１
Radiation Exposure Caused by Nuclear Tests by the Former Soviet Union
and China, and Its Effect on Health by Masaharu Hoshi ……２〜４
Research Project on Nuclear Disarmament in the 21st Century― Missile
Defense, Rogue-state Doctrine and Israel s Nuclear Weapons ‥４〜５
NGOs, Citizens Meet in Nagasaki;Unite with Call for Nuclear-free Future ……………………………５
HPI Project Discusses the Definition of New-interventionism ‥‥‥６〜７
East Timor Must Overcome Obstacles Before Becoming Truly Independent ‥‥７
Optimism, Pessimism Mix;
Symposium on Korea and Search for Peace in Northeast Asia ‥‥‥７
DIARY‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥‥８

HPI s New President
Dr. HARUHIRO FUKUI was appointed
president of HPI effective as from April 1, 2001.
Fukui specializes in contemporary Japanesepolitics, international relations, international politics
and policymaking. He gained a B.A. from Tokyo
University of Foreign Studies, an M.A. in International
Relations/American Studies from Tokyo University,and a Ph.D. in International Relations from theAustralian National University. He has worked as assistant professor, associate
professor and professor in the department of political science at the Universityof California, Santa Barbara, of which he is also professor emeritus. He wasalso professor at Tsukuba University and Nanzan University. Fukui was bornin Tokyo in 1935.
of the difficulty, imagine that all states but one disarmed themselves in order toescape the security dilemma and prevent war. The one state that remained
armed then could dominate the world, easily conquering, occupying or
destroying any and every disarmed state. The same logic should apply tonuclear disarmament: Should all extant nuclear powers but one give up their
nukes, the one that refused to fall into line would be in a position to bully all
the others into submission and impose its will upon the entire world. Thatwould be the case if the one remaining nuclear power were only a minor
maverick state or even a local terrorist group.
To be sure, solutions to the realist conundrum can be and have beensuggested. If peace and disarmament require government, why not create one?
In fact, the idea was propounded already in the 18th century, in Kant's
Perpetual Peace. In the 20th century, first the League of Nations and then the
United Nations embodied the same basic idea in the wake of, respectively, thefirst and the second world wars. The League without the participation of themost powerful state of the day, the United States, proved too weak even to betaken seriously by, not to mention impose its will on, any of the major powers,
such as Germany and Japan. The United Nations, sponsored and led by theUnited States, has proved far more effective and durable, but has a very long
way to go before it attains the status of a functioning world government, if itever will.
If a world government is not to be available in the foreseeable future,should we look for a proxy in a hegemon and "hegemonic stability" under Pax
Americana? Unfortunately, the vaunted benefits of hegemony are highly
problematic. For one thing, it is a form of despotism, however benign or
benevolent it might be, and violates the basic principle of the sovereignty andequality of all independent states under the Westphalian system. For anotherthing, the United States as the putative hegemon has been proven to be neither
all-powerful nor always benevolent and public-minded- for example, as aprincipal party to the Korean and Vietnam wars and as a third-party mediator in
the Israeli-Palestine dispute.
Another alternative to world government may be, as some liberals argue, a
global security community or a network of regional security communities. This
alternative sounds considerably more promising than hegemonic rule. In fact,
the European Union (EU) is already the most advanced form of security
community in world history. Could Asians build one, too? Might the ASEAN
Regional Forum (ARF) be either a prototype or a model of one? What factors
and circumstances facilitate or obstruct the formation of a viable security
community comparable to the EU outside Europe? These are surely importantquestions to be asked and probed by peace research scholars in Hiroshima andelsewhere.
What about the moral dimension of men's choice either to "remember" or"forget" the seductive power of the newest weapon, the dimension emphasizedin Perrin's discussion of how and why Tokugawa Japan gave up the gun? I do
have some reservations about Perrin's emphasis, as I have already mentioned,
but the gun and the nuke are certainly not the same: One kills at a blast a few
dozen persons-in fact, only one in the case of the matchlock of Tokugawa
vintage-while the other annihilates at a spark the entire population of a city, acountry or even the world. Could the difference make men "forget" the latter
more easily than the former, provided that peace is maintained between nuclear
powers? I submit that this, too, is a very important question for us to ponder.

−1−

Visit HPI's web site at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

Radiation Exposure Caused by Nuclear
China, and Its

Dr. Toshihiro Takatsuji and the writer collect soil samples.

Introduction
Human exposure to radiation has a 100-year history that began with theinvention of X-rays. The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki exposed
many people to radiation and contributed to public awareness of its serious
impact on human health. Since then, the United States, the Soviet Union, andChina have conducted a number of nuclear tests, and the accident at the
Chernobyl nuclear power plant created many more victims of radiation.
Though atmospheric nuclear testing is now banned, the major world powers
proceed with nuclear development programs. France carried out nuclear tests indefiance of the international community s desire for the total abolition of
nuclear weapons, and India and Pakistan now possess nuclear arms after
conducting their own series of tests. In the meantime, people s exposure toradiation has continued through a catalog of accidents, the criticality accident
in the village of Tokai in central Japan being a recent example.
The development of nuclear weapons and resulting nuclear accidents
constitute the most negative attributes of radiation. At the same time, radiation
has been of great benefit to humankind, in the form of X-rays, for example. It
is also used in university research for deciphering DNA, and in many otherconstructive ways. Radiation is used in industry, including in the inspection
and production of manufactured goods. These are just some of the ways inwhich radiation has been indispensable in improving our quality of life.
The Research Institute for Radiation Biology and Medicine (RIRBM) at
Hiroshima University has conducted studies on the effects of radiation
exposure on the health of atomic-bomb victims in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Our organization has recently been investigating how people in other parts of
the world have been exposed to radiation and the effect it has had on theirhealth. The objectives of our research are (1) to delve into the mechanism thattriggers radiation-induced illness through medical examination, in the hope ofprotecting the health of the victims, and (2) to clarify the relationship between
radiation dosage and the incidence of disease, with a view to assessing the riskof radiation-induced illness for people who handle radiation at work, and formembers of the public exposed to radiation through medical treatment.
Given that the effective use of radiation is already well established insome areas, doses people are exposed to in workplaces and other situations
should be kept to a minimum. This approach will help bring about strictly
observed standards. In Japan, radiation risks are incorporated into regulations,such as the Law Concerning the Prevention from Radiation Hazards due toRadioisotopes, which stipulates the maximum permissible levels of radiation
exposure.
RIRBM is studying radiation exposure and its effect on the health ofpeople living in Semipalatinsk, Kazakhstan, following nuclear tests there. As
mentioned earlier, the purpose of the study is to assess the risk posed byradiation. Most countries depend on studies of atomic-bomb victims in
Hiroshima and Nagasaki to draw up risk assessments. But some argue that thepotential risk to people in Semipalatinsk and other locations is different fromthat faced by atomic-bomb victims because they have been exposed for much
longer periods lasting from hours to several months. The exposure experienced
by people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki was instantaneous. Our study aims toclarify the difference.
This article will examine the effects of exposure to man-made radiation.
After all, humans are continuously exposed to naturally occurring radiation,such as that found in soil and the rays that descend on us from the cosmos.
There are places in the world where soil contains nearly 10 times the levels ofradiation found in soil in Japan. Locations at high altitudes receive moreradiation via cosmic rays. The effects of natural radiation are negligible. Someexperts even claim that life on Earth can continue unaffected by man-maderadiation up to 100 times stronger than its natural equivalent. Although neverproven, this theory has attracted a great deal of attention in research on lowdose/low-dose-rate exposure, and is recognized around the world as of vital
importance to radiological sciences. While biological experiments have beenlaunched on an international level, we hope our study on Semipalatinsk will
clarify the effects of this type of exposure on human physiology.

Visit HPI's web site at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

Study on Radiation Exposure and Its Effect on Health in the Former
Soviet Union and Kazakhstan
Semipalatinsk is home to a vast nuclear testing ground-about the size of
the Japanese island of Shikoku-once used by the former Soviet Union. A totalof 459 test nuclear explosions were carried out there between 1949 and 1989.
Twenty-six of the tests were conducted aboveground, 87 in the air, and 346
underground. According to Russian reports, the total yield of these tests interms of TNT 1 was 18Mt-0.6Mt for aboveground tests, 6Mt for atmospherictests, and 11Mt for underground tests. The total is 1,100 times more powerfulthan the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, which had a yield of 15kt. Although thetests account for only 6% of all test nuclear explosions conducted in the former
Soviet Union, the effect of radiation exposure on local residents is very serious,as the testing site is situated near villages and cities.
Immediately after atmospheric testing, radioactive clouds generated
through nuclear fission flowed outside the test ground, contaminating the airand exposing nearby residents to radiation exposure. Compared with the direct
impact of radiation from the hypocenter, however, not much is known about
the effects of radioactive fallout 2 on people living long distances away.
After gaining independence from the Soviet Union, Kazakhstan disclosed
data on nuclear exposure in areas around the testing site. Questions surroundthe reliability of the data, however, as they were released under military
supervision.
Studies on the effects of radiation on health were conducted during theSoviet era, and then by Kazakhstan after independence. The Research Institutefor Radiation Medicine and Ecology in Semipalatinsk has conducted thesestudies. The area around the testing site reportedly has experienced an increase
in incidences of malignant tumors since the nuclear tests began. The total
number of cases is greater than regions of a comparable size that have not been
exposed, and the link between such tumors and radiation exposure remains
contentious. Radiation-induced malignant tumors have been observed invarious forms, such as leukemia and cancers of the thyroid, esophagus,
stomach, liver, intestines, lung, and breast. Other abnormalities, such as
chromosomal aberrations and physical malformations, have also been
confirmed and are thought to have been caused by radiation exposure. Otherrisks associated with radiation have been confirmed. All of the relevant data arebeing compared with the data on people exposed to radiation during the atomic
bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These studies will have to be verified bythird parties through medical examinations of the victims.
Testimony about Nuclear Tests by the Former Soviet Union
The following is based on an account given by Dr. Boris I. Gusev, who
was director of the Research Institute for Radiation Medicine and Ecology
when our study began.
On August 12, 1953, theSoviet Union detonated its firsthydrogen bomb 1,000 meters
aboveground. Its yield totaled
470kt of TNT, or the equivalentof 31 Hiroshima bombs. The
Soviet government took theunusual step of evacuating
residents for three days fromvillages where radioactive
fallout was expected. However,
the wind speed was twice as
fast as had been forecast, andfallout passed through thevillage of Karaul just two hours
after the explosion. This
unexpected development is (Fig. 1) External exposure to gamma-ray fallout from−2−each nuclear test as recorded outside the test site

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.3 No.3 March 2001

Tests by the Former Soviet Union andEffect on Health
Masaharu Hoshi
Professor at the International Radiation Information Center, ResearchInstitute for Radiation Biology and Medicine, Hiroshima University
Dr. Nobuo Takeichi examines the thyroid gland of a Semipalatinsk resident.

Post-test Conditions Around the Test Site
It is necessary to conduct environmental studies on the current status ofresidential areas surrounding the site to gauge how much radiation residents
will be exposed to in the future. In our 1995 field survey, we measured
environmental radiation in Dolon, Znamenka, Semipalatinsk, as well as Atomic
Lake, site of the nuclear explosions.
The level recorded on the shore of Atomic Lake was around 10μSv/h(one millionth of a sievert per hour). In Semipalatinsk and several villages, theenvironmental radiation dose rate was less than 0.1μSv/h. In Znamenka, 50km
from the hypocenter of Atomic Lake, the dose rate also stood at a natural levelof 0.07μSv/h. Given that the current level of natural radiation in Hiroshima isless than 0.1μSv/h, the figures indicate that people living in areas near the lake
are not at risk.
The Impact of Nuclear Tests by China
A survey has just been initiated on the impact of nuclear testing in China.
China reportedly conducted tests at the Lop Nor test site, though some suspectthey took place near Kazakhstan. Still, the precise location is unknown.
According to information made available only recently, China conducted 24
nuclear tests between 1964 and 1981. Of the total, 15 involved 100kt-classbombs, and eight used 1Mt-class bombs. No information is available on theremaining tests.
No information has been disclosed about the pollution and radiation
exposure in China caused by these tests, but the results of surveys conducted
inside Kazakhstan have been published in recent years. The area in question
lies near the country s border with China, about 450km southeast of
Semipalatinsk-a 170-kilometer belt that encompasses Bakter, Makanshi,
Ulzhar, and Taskesken. There are reports that the Jarkent area in the south was
also affected, but no details are available to verify that claim.
Kazakhstan officials who have conducted surveys on radiation exposureand related illnesses among residents of this area estimate the exposure dose at
0.3 - 0.4 Gy 4, and report that the incidence of related illnesses is twice as highas in non-exposed areas.
No overseas survey team has visited these areas, except for one led by

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.3 No.3 March 2001

RIRBM. Comparative verification will be necessary, but we have not yet
reached that stage.
Surveys Led by RIRBM, Hiroshima University, Funded by a Grant-inaid for Scientific Research from the Ministry of Education (now the
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology)
Since 1994, our institute has been measuring radiation exposure and its
effect on local people as a result of nuclear tests conducted in Semipalatinsk by
the former Soviet Union. Ours is the first full-scale survey to be conducted by ateam of foreign nationals. Starting with contaminated soil, we used bricks
retrieved from the affected area to measure physical external exposure doses.
We have also used ultrasonic equipment to examine blood samples taken frompeople exposed to radiation for possible chromosomal abnormalities, as well as
thyroid glands.
Our first task was to estimate how much radiation residents near the
Semipalatinsk test site had been exposed to, and then to compare our data withthat of previous surveys. We estimated external exposure doses by applying
thermoluminescence dosimetry to the bricks, which had been collected from
Dolon, Znamenka, and other nearby villages considered to have received
relatively high levels of fallout.
We found that bricks taken from an old church in Dolon recorded about
0.9Gy, which is very close to the figures reported in the past. To our surprise,
however, the bricks collected from one of the buildings in Semipalatinsk City
turned out to contain radiation levels of between 0.5Gy and 0.7Gy, or 100
times the reported figures. If internal exposure by fallout were taken into
account, the actual exposure levels would be even higher. The outcomes of ourstudy are consistent-taking into account a margin of error-with the results ofthe surveys conducted by the former Soviet Union and Kazakhstan. Thosestudies estimates of external exposure doses presented reliable values within acertain range of measurements.
To gauge radiation in soil, we measured the isotopes of Cesium137 andplutonium. As a whole, the levels of Cesium137 in the soil samples collectedfrom inside the test site and surrounding areas turned out to be the same orslightly lower than levels found in Japan. On the other hand, the plutonium
isotope levels were several to several hundred times higher than Japaneselevels (40 - 120Bq/m2). From these results, we need to study internal exposure
doses, or the actual dosage taken in by local people. We have begun to measureplutonium levels in bones taken from the deceased, only to obtain the same
results. Measurements taken so far of internal exposure have not revealed doses
high enough to harm human health.
We are also looking at chromosomal aberrations of lymphocytes in bloodtaken from victims. After examining the small nuclei, we discovered
abnormalities equivalent to a maximum exposure of 0.4Gy. These results are
not final, as we also need to look into other factors, such as the presence ofviruses, before we can decide that such aberrations were caused by radiation
exposure. In 1999, we started examining thyroid glands using ultrasonicdevices as well as hormone levels in the bloodstream. We have learned that
abnormalities are more prevalent in some areas exposed to radiation than inothers. The results will be announced later this year.
Other Forms of Assistance and Studies
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), an organization affiliatedto the Japanese Foreign Ministry, has launched a humanitarian aid program that
sends medical equipment to health-care institutions in Semipalatinsk andteaches local doctors how to use them. JICA has also conductedepidemiological studies in the area. Various organizations throughout Japan are
involved in similar programs, with Hiroshima University and Nagasaki
University providing the necessary human resources. The Science andTechnology Agency (now the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Scienceand Technology) plans to conduct an epidemiological study, and other−3−{

thought to have exposed 191 people to radiation from radioactive clouds that
had reached the village well before they were ready to evacuate.
Despite the conclusion in 1963 of the nuclear test-ban treaty-whichbanned atmospheric nuclear testing-by the Soviet Union, the United Statesand other nuclear powers, the Soviet Union detonated a 240kt-class hydrogenbomb, claiming it was a peaceful use of nuclear energy, on Jan. 15, 1965, atground-zero near the eastern border of the same test site. Apparently, many of
the workers sent to the site after the explosion to build a reservoir later died ofradiation exposure. The crater left by the explosion is now filled with water,
and is called Atomic Lake. When we conducted a study there 30 years later, in
1995, we found that environmental radiation levels in the area were 100 times
higher than normal. It is not hard to imagine how dangerous the nuclear
explosion, conducted for so-called peaceful purposes, really was.
The military took various measurements before, during and after the
nuclear explosion at Semipalatinsk. These were carried out not only within thetest site, which was cordoned off, but also in residential areas outside the site.
After the explosion, the military measured changing mid-air dosages overcertain periods of time, as well as soil contamination in areas reached byradioactive clouds. They also conducted secret assessments of external andinternal exposure among residents. The data released after the republic gained
independence contains information on residential areas that were exposed todoses of radiation as high as several sieverts 3. The data cover only a small
fraction of the 459 tests that were carried out. The disclosed contour map ofdoses (Fig. 1), for instance, includes just the five nuclear explosions carried out
in 1949, 1951, 1953, 1955 and 1956.

Visit HPI's web site at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

Research Project on Nuclear Disarmament in the 21st Century

Missile Defense, Rogue-state Doctrine and Israel s Nuclear Weapons
The fifth, sixth and seventh meetings of the Research Project on
Nuclear Disarmament in the 21st Century were held on Oct. 20, Nov. 24
and Dec. 15, 2000, at the Hiroshima Peace Institute. The project leader
is Mitsuru Kurosawa, professor at the Osaka School of International
Public Policy, Osaka University. Each meeting featured presentations by
a guest speaker and a project member, followed by a discussion. Detailsof the meetings are given below.
The fifth meeting
Fumihiko Yoshida, an editorial writer at The Asahi Shimbun, gavea presentation titled Nuclear Strategy and Defensive Weapons.
Yoshida examined the impact on nuclear disarmament of so-called
defensive weapons such as the national missile defense (NMD) being
developed by the United States.
Yoshida began by listing defensive weapons used or studied by theUnited States: 1) the anti-ballistic missile (ABM) in the 1960s; 2) the
Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) advocated by the Reagan
administration; 3) the Global Protection Against Limited Strikes(GPALS) system favored by the administration of George Bush Snr.;and 4) NMD and theater missile defense (TMD), first proposed by the
Clinton administration.
Depending on one s point of view, these weapons strengthen
deterrence, replace deterrence, weaken deterrence or partly replace
deterrence.
Yoshida said some people saw the proliferation of missiles andweapons of mass destruction as a justification for the development of
NMD and TMD and believed they were an alternative deterrent tonuclear weapons. He added that many U.S. allies had voiced opposition
to the systems, which had also been condemned by other countries who
fear their deployment could trigger a nuclear arms race involving Russia,
China, India and Pakistan. He said defensive weapons and the nuclear
disarmament regime were incompatible, particularly given the threat of a
new arms race.
Kazumi Mizumoto gave a presentation titled Nuclear Policy and
Non-nuclear Policy in Japan. He explained the background topolicymaking, and highlighted future problems, including those related
to nuclear weapons and nuclear energy.
Japan, the target of two atomic bombs, itself begun developing an
atomic bomb during World War II, he said, adding that current Japanese
nuclear policy was based on four principles: 1) non-nuclear policy (thethree non-nuclear principles); 2) nuclear disarmament diplomacy; 3)dependence on the U.S. nuclear umbrella; and 4) the promotion of thepeaceful use of nuclear energy.
Given the contradiction between the three non-nuclear principles
and Japan s dependence on the U.S. nuclear umbrella, Mizumoto argued
that all four principles affect one another in several ways. The balance of
these four principles, however, has never been discussed on the politicalstage. He compared Japan with four-wheel drive car whose wheels areheading in four different directions and cannot be brought under control
by the driver. The vehicle, he said, was in need of urgent repairs.
The sixth meeting
Kazuyoshi Hishiki, a professor at Hiroshima Shudo University,
gave a presentation on the failure of the rogue-state doctrine from theviewpoint of the Clinton administration s nuclear and missile policy
toward North Korea. Hishiki, a former journalist, worked as a Kyodo
News correspondent in Seoul, New York and Washington, D.C. He waschief editor of the agency s foreign news section and deputy chief
editorial writer.
Hishiki said the Clinton administration s belief in the rogue-state
doctrine had begun with a supportive article in the 1994 March/April
issue of Foreign Affairs by Anthony Lake, then assistant to thepresident for national security affairs. In the article, Lake referred torogue states as backlash states. In June 2000, then U.S. Secretary ofState Madeleine Albright started referring to such regimes as states ofconcern.
The United States regards Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya and Cuba
as rogue states that constitute the biggest military threat to the Westsince the former Soviet Union. It aims to prevent them from expanding
their power within their respective regions. Washington regards North{
universities are engaged in their own studies and research. The ResearchInstitute for Radiation Medicine and Ecology in Semipalatinsk has a large
stock of data obtained over many years of surveys and medical examinations
that will continue to be of immense value in future studies.
On the international level, the United Nations has pointed out the need formore research and meetings to discuss the findings. On a national level, theUnited States spent three years carrying out medical examinations of thyroid
glands, comparing data from both exposed and non-exposed areas, and found astartlingly large number of abnormalities in the exposed areas. Germany,
Belgium and other European countries have also implemented such studies. As
these examples indicate, the international community is well aware that the
impact of radiation exposure on the residents of Semipalatinsk is far greaterthan that experienced by the people of Chernobyl, and that the health of local
people has been seriously affected.
NGOs are also involved. The Hiroshima-Semipalatinsk Project was
motivated by friendly ties formed between Hiroshima residents and Kazakh
athletes during the 1994 Asian Games. Project members have provided
ultrasonic devices for medical examinations, as well as medical supplies. They
have also promoted people-to-people exchanges by, for example, inviting highschool students from Semipalatinsk to study at local schools. Members ofjunior chambers of commerce in Hiroshima, Ihara and other places have also
gotten involved. In addition to Chernobyl, Cataloghouse Co., Ltd. is now
helping Semipalatinsk. As a resident of Hiroshima, a place that has sufferedradiation exposure, I hope such exchange programs, as well as our studies andresearch, will expand in the future.

Visit HPI's web site at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

Afterward
Reporting on radiation exposure in Semipalatinsk and other areas, and the
medical support being extended to the victims, serves only to strengthen mybelief that our studies and assistance must continue. Using the experiences ofHiroshima and Nagasaki, we hope to continue our activities with the help ofscientists and NGOs around the world.
Acknowledgements
RIRBM has obtained the cooperation of many colleagues in Japan andoverseas, including Dr. Nobuo Takeichi, Mr. Masayoshi Yamamoto, Dr. Kimio
Tanaka, Dr. Jun Takada, Dr. B. I. Gusev, Dr. S. Zhumadilov, Dr. A. K.
Sekerbaev, Dr. Toshihiro Takatsuji, and Dr. Isao Yoshikawa. We have also
received generous support from Takashi Hiraoka, honorary chairman of theHiroshima-Semipalatinsk Project, Suemitsu Shimozaki, Chieko Kobatake,
Hideo Yamada, an interpreter specializing in medical affairs, and many otherpeople too numerous to mention by name. I wish to express my heartfelt
gratitude to all of them for their valuable support and assistance.
Notes
１ Trinitrotoluene, a high explosive.
２ A radioactive substance produced by nuclear explosions.
３ A unit of radiation that is biologically effective.
４ A unit of radiation measured by absorbed energy per unit mass oftissue. 1 gray=1 Joule/kilogram.

−4−

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.3 No.3 March 2001

Korea, with its missile and nuclear-weapon development programs, as
the second biggest threat after Iraq.
The rogue-state doctrine arose from suspicion that North Korea wasdeveloping nuclear weapons, a situation that threatened to trigger amilitary confrontation. As a result, the United States partially retreatedfrom the doctrine and instead used a combination of sanctions, the threatof military action and diplomatic engagement in its relations with
Pyongyang. This approach culminated in the 1994 U.S.-North Korea
Framework Agreement.
Hishiki said the United States had used the test launch of a ballistic
missile by North Korea in 1998 to justify its pursuit of NMD, but addedthat the rogue-state doctrine s weaknesses were exposed during the interKorea summit in 2000 when North Korea said it accepted the continued
presence of U.S. troops in South Korea.
Osamu Yoshida, an associate professor at Hiroshima University andmember of the research project, gave a presentation on Indian nuclear
doctrine. He analyzed the nuclear doctrine (in the Draft Report of the
National Security Advisory Board on Indian Nuclear Doctrine),announced by India in August 1999. The report s preamble criticizes thepermanent extension of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in
1995. It says India s nuclear arsenal is designed to be a minimum
deterrent, that the country would not initiate a nuclear strike, and that its
national security objective is to achieve the goal of a world free of
nuclear weapons.
However, the report also contains ideas that could prompt an arms
race, by, for example, stating India s right to retaliate with nuclear
weapons and the need to continue research and development. Yoshida
cast doubts on the India s sincerity concerning nuclear disarmament. He
said India s nuclear doctrine represented the first political step toward
India s obtaining international recognition as a nuclear-weapon state.
The seventh meeting
Shuzo Kimura, a professor at Himeji Dokkyo University, gave apresentation on Israel s nuclear policy. Kimura said Israel was regarded
as a nuclear-weapon state, despite Israel s refusal to deny or confirm
whether it possesses nuclear weapons. He described in some detailIsrael s nuclear weapons program since it concluded a secret atomic
treaty with France in 1957, the year after the end of the Suez crisis.
Against the backdrop of nuclear development, Israel, he said, hadformed a specific approach toward security. Learning lessons from theNazi Holocaust, Israel, he explained, had vowed to try every possiblemeans to resist the enemy, and had opted for nuclear weapons to
avoid a repeat of the holocaust. Kimura said Israel s nuclear weapons
were designed to deter attacks from Arab states through unilateral, rather
than mutual deterrence. In addition, Israel uses every possible means toprevent neighboring countries from developing their own nuclear
capability, as evident in its attack on an Iraqi nuclear power plant in
1981.
The chances of incorporating Israel into the NPT regime as part of
the Middle East peace process are low, Kimura said, since Israel says it
will join the NPT only after a reliable nuclear-free zone is established in
the Middle East. He said the United States had applied double standards
in taking a tough stance against Iraq and North Korea (both of which aretrying to develop nuclear weapons) while staying silent about Israel s
nuclear ambitions.
Masamichi Kamiya, a visiting research fellow at HPI, gave an
overview of nuclear disarmament negotiations at the United Nations andtheir prospects. Because the United Nations was founded before theadvent of nuclear weapons, nuclear disarmament is not clearlyprescribed in the UN Charter. However, Kamiya said the organization
had, for most of its history, looked upon nuclear disarmament as one ofits most important aims. General Assembly Resolution 1, for instance,
calls for international controls of nuclear weapons.
Kamiya looked at nuclear disarmament efforts made by the UnitedStates and Russia. He also looked at the progress of special sessions of
the UN General Assembly on Disarmament since 1978, the efforts madeby UN regional centers for peace and disarmament in Africa, the AsiaPacific and in Latin America and the Caribbean, which were establishedin the 1980s. He covered multinational disarmament talks outside theUnited Nations through to the current UN Conference on Disarmament(CD) in Geneva. He also talked about Japan s efforts at the United
Nations to promote nuclear disarmament.
Kamiya said the United Nations should proclaim a Decade for
Disarmament and Human Security. He added that the United Nations
should make better use of its regional centers for peace anddisarmament, link nuclear disarmament with comprehensive
disarmament, and adhere to general and complete disarmament
under international control.

By Kazumi Mizumoto, associate professor at HPINGOs, Citizens Meet in Nagasaki;Unite with Call for Nuclear-free Future
The Nagasaki Global Citizens Assembly for the Elimination of
Nuclear Weapons was held at Nagasaki City Peace Hall, Nagasaki
Atomic Bomb Museum and other venues from Dec. 17 to 20. About 500
people from Japan and 17 other countries took part, and about 1,000
people, including registered participants, attended the opening assemblyon Dec. 18.
Ten workshops, which were the core events at the gathering, were
held Dec. 19 on the following topics: a) Forum for Hibakusha and Test
Victims; b) Forum for Youth; c) Forum for Women; d) Peace Education
and Peace Culture; e) Establishment of a Nuclear Weapons Convention;f) Refutation of Nuclear Deterrence; g) Laboratory and Subcritical
Testing; h) Nuclear-weapon-free Zones and Nuclear Umbrellas; i) Rolesof NGOs; j) Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) and the Nuclearization ofSpace.
In addition, citizens and NGOs conducted Your Own Programs,
which featured 15 events, such as symposiums and photographexhibitions, focusing on the importance of peace. Many people weredrawn to the Wartime Food Corner, which gave people theopportunity to recall their wartime experiences.

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.3 No.3 March 2001

This international gathering, the result of efforts by NGO
representatives, mainly leaders of Abolition 2000, and the municipal andprefectural governments of Nagasaki, provided a useful illustration ofcooperation between citizens and local governments.
The closing assembly adopted the Nagasaki Appeal. The document
calls for an international conference to negotiate a treaty to eliminate
nuclear weapons. Second, it calls for the establishment of a Northeast
Asia nuclear weapons-free zone, and third, for the cessation of all
missile defense programs in cooperation with like-minded U.S. citizens.
Fourth, the appeal urges all governments to inform the public of thedamage caused by nuclear activities. Finally, it appeals to nations to dotheir utmost to implement incremental and parallel measures that would
bring about the early abolition of nuclear weapons.
Some of those present wondered whether Hiroshima would be able
to host a similar event. The people of the Hiroshima await the city
government s response with interest.

−5−

By Masamichi Kamiya, visiting research fellow at HPIVisit HPI's web site at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

Research Project on the Legitimacy and Rationality of New-interventionism
HPI Project Discusses the Definition of New-interventionism
As of January 2001, the Hiroshima Peace Institute had held
six monthly meetings of members of its Research Project on the
Legitimacy and Rationality of New-interventionism, launchedlast July. The project has been studying international society s
engagement in domestic conflicts and humanitarian crises since
the end of the Cold War. Specialists have been invited fromoutside to discuss problematic areas and regional issues thatproject members alone would have been unable to cover insufficient depth. While researching and analyzing case studies,
the project team had some interesting discussions and has madesignificant progress.
This year we have placed emphasis on defining the term
new-interventionism. We also discussed how different
governments seek to legitimize humanitarian intervention, but
this article will focus on discussions surrounding newinterventionism.
New-interventionism is difficult to define. After all, what is
new, and what types of actions constitute intervention?
This research project chose not to use the term humanitarian
intervention, since it aims to study international society s
involvement through several different processes of conflict
resolution; from the prevention of conflicts to post-conflict
peace building. The extent to which those processes are
humanitarian depends, in turn, on how we define intervention.
Since the timing and nature of humanitarian interventions, or
those that are conducted for apparently humanitarian reasons, areaffected by political considerations, more study is needed into
specific interventions to determine whether they can be called
truly humanitarian.
Project members had a great deal to say about the use of theword new to distinguish between new types of intervention
and past interventions in areas of conflict.
Domestic humanitarian crises are seen increasingly as
threats to peace that override traditional ideas about noninterference in another country s internal affairs. Whenever there
is a conflict between national sovereignty and humanitarianism,
those doing the intervening require a clear political mandate andstrict standards governing their actions.
Therefore, multilateral intervention, ideally by the United
Nations, is seen as preferable to unilateral action. It is also
important to allocate political responsibility for maintaining
peace once an intervention has ended.
The question of neutrality often arose in discussions abouthumanitarian intervention in conflicts. The International
Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), for example, is known tomaintain strict neutrality during its aid operations. By doing so,
ICRC can conduct its genuinely humanitarian activities with theblessing of both sides in any conflict. The organization also
maintains secrecy about its role and shuns the limelight to win

Visit HPI's web site at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

the continuing trust of all parties involved in the conflict.
Although some who wish to see the ICRC do more to
resolve conflicts find the organization s stoicism hard to accept,
the fact is that this is the only way neutrality can be maintained.
Mediators, by contrast, have no neutrality in the strict sense
because they are required to submit mediation plans and makevalue judgments.
It is ironic that humanitarian aid can often get caught up in a
prolonged conflict. Political judgments always affectinterventions in conflicts and their resolution. A common belief
in the universality of humanitarianism and human rights would,of course, lend much legitimacy to humanitarian interventions,but international opinion remains divided on this point.
The project turned its attention to the political responsibilityof mediators for post-conflict peace building. In East Timor, theUN Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET) has
attempted to restore public order, reconstruct society and theeconomy, and establish a new system of governance. East Timor
provides a valuable lesson in how international society should
contribute in the process of restoration and, ultimately,
independence.
Although the East Timorese opted for independence in theirreferendum, doubts exist over the desirability of independence
given the seriousness of the country s economic and social
situations. Nevertheless, international society must respect thedemocratic will of the people and provide as much aid andassistance as possible. This still leaves the question of to what
extent international society should get involved in supporting
East Timor in its quest for self-governance. While UNTAET isoffering continued support for the Timorization of East Timor s
administration, it faces difficult choices in deciding how far it
should be involved in social affairs, such as education, where
resources are so scarce that local projects alone will not succeed.
Finally, question of perpetuity depends on whether
American engagement in conflicts will change with the electionof a new administration in Washington. New-intervention ism
suggests a concrete philosophy and set of procedures that
constitute a permanent norm. Since the Gulf War, actions by theUnited States have largely determined the outcome of manycases of humanitarian intervention. Observers predict that theadministration of George W. Bush will adopt a more passive
approach toward conflicts abroad than that of Bill Clinton. It
remains to be seen whether the election of a new U.S.
administration heralds a change in the nature of internationalsociety s involvement in conflicts, or whether a new universal
criteria for such engagement- namely new-interventionismwill emerge that survives changes in administrations.

By Nobumasa Akiyama, research associate at HPI−6−

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.3 No.3 March 2001

HPI Research Forum
East Timor Must Overcome Obstacles Before Becoming Truly Independent
The Hiroshima Peace Institute held a forum on Dec. 4, 2000, at its
conference room. Takeshi Kamiyama, who was sent by the JapaneseForeign Ministry to East Timor as head of the Environmental Protection
Unit-part of the Governance and Public Administration Component of
the UN Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET)-spoke
about the current situation in East Timor and its prospects.
Although East Timor has political independence from Indonesia,
confrontations between pro-independence and pro-integration groups
remain unsolved. Reconciling the factions, and uniting all East Timorese
to rebuild their country will be no easy task.
Moreover, many obstacles remain in the way of real independence,
including delays in building an economic infrastructure. Given suchdifficulties, the help of NGOs and international organizations such as
UNTAET is of even greater importance.
In his speech, Kamiyama spoke from the viewpoint of someone
involved in supporting nation-building, and touched on some of theinternal problems they face.
He first pointed out problems in Timorization and post
UNTAET governance in East Timor. Currently, UNTAET is in chargeof all levels of administration, from central to local, and the hand-over of

power from international staff to local people is under way. He said theprocess of devolution had been made more difficult by East Timor s
shortage of qualified people and severe economic problems.
Low wages have driven many talented people overseas. The United
Nations offers salaries far higher than the local average, so it must deal
with the problem of how to foster a society that functions despite suchwage differentials. Deciding what is to be done with employees hired
locally, and establishing an organization that continues to hire talented
people, are just two of the issues the United Nations will have to address
before it withdraws if East Timorese society is to develop and remain
stable, Kamiyama said.
He added that East Timor needed to reconstruct its economic andpolitical relationship with Indonesia. Closer economic interchange withIndonesia is essential for the East Timorese economy. Despite gaining
political independence, East Timor has many issues to solve before it
can be called truly independent, he said.

By Nobumasa Akiyama, research associate at HPI

Optimism, Pessimism Mix
Symposium on Korea and Search for Peace in Northeast Asia
The International Symposium on Korea and the Search for Peace inNortheast Asia (KPNA) was held Dec. 6 and 7 at Kyoto International
Conference Hall. The event was organized by Ritsumeikan University
and chaired by former UN Undersecretary General for Humanitarian
Affairs, Yasushi Akashi. Thirty-five specialists from 11 countries
discussed recent developments on the Korean Peninsula and the futureof North-South relations.
In a keynote speech, Stephen W. Bosworth, U.S. Ambassador toSouth Korea, said the United States, Japan and South Korea should
continue to engage the North while maintaining a deterrent to reduce any
threat from the communist state. He said normalization of diplomatic
ties between North Korean and the United States depended on thesatisfactory resolution of Pyongyang s development of missiles andweapons of mass destruction.
Discussions followed during sessions titled Geopolitical Overview-Trends and Developments,
Economic Issues,
Security Issues,

Major Powers,
Multilateral Organizations/NGOs and Future
Framework and Policy Initiatives. Many of the participants wereparticularly interested in weapons of mass destruction, missile
proliferation and the impact the possible introduction of the U.S.
national missile defense (NMD) system would have on security inNortheast Asia. Many voiced concern over the slow progress being
made by the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization(KEDO), and discussed the possibility of creating a new framework for
KEDO s dealings with North Korea. I was struck most by the levelheaded attitude shown by participants from the Korean Peninsula toward
the positive diplomatic moves recently made by North Korea.
Multilateral cooperation in the economic and security fields, particularly
between Japan, the United States and South Korea, is needed to increase
North Korea s involvement in international society.

By Nobumasa Akiyama, research associate at HPI

Presentations of the Research Project on the Legitimacy and Rationality of New-interventionism(November 2000〜January 2001)
4th meeting on Nov. 24, 2000
Food Situation in Africa-Food Assistance Under Circumstances of Political
Intervention by Former Suzerain Power by Hiroyuki Matsumura, director,
World Food Program Office in Japan
Subregional Conflict Resolution by the Economic Community of West
African States (ECOWAS): Intervention for Regime Security by Takehiko
Ochiai, lecturer, Keiai University
5th meeting on Dec. 22, 2000
A Study of the Japanese Government s Measures to Address the Situation in
Kosovo and East Timor by Kenji Kanasugi , senior assistant for policy
coordination, Foreign Policy Bureau, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.3 No.3 March 2001

What is New about New-interventionism?: Legitimacy and Rationality of theNATO Bombing of Yugoslavia by Hideaki Shinoda , research associate,
Institute for Peace Science, Hiroshima University
6th meeting on Jan. 25, 2001
The Media s Influence on International Politics - the Cases of Bosnia andKosovo by Shuichi Habu, deputy international editor, international news
department, The Yomiuri Shimbun
Friction between Humanitarianism and National Interests in Refugee Relief
Activities: The Case of Italy s Missione Arcobaleno by Nobumasa Akiyama,
research associate, Hiroshima Peace Institute−7−

Visit HPI's web site at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm

DIARY

November 1, 2000 〜February 28, 2001
◆Nov.6
Nobumasa Akiyama and Masamichi Kamiya participate in a roundtable meetingon disarmament issues at the Japan Institute of International Affairs.
Akiyama participates in a workshop on preventive diplomacy organized by Prof.
Yukio Kawamura of Waseda University, at Waseda University.
◆Nov. 12
Kazumi Mizumoto gives a presentation, The Violence of Nuclear Weapons―
From the Viewpoint of Hiroshima and International Politics, at a session titled
Violence of Nuclear Weapons and Peace Education at the semiannual conference of
the Peace Studies Associations of Japan (Nihon Heiwa Gakkai), at Aichi University.
◆Nov. 14
Mizumoto attends a study group meeting, Exploring Japan s Proactive Peaceand Security Strategies: The Case of the Nuclear Umbrella, organized by the National
Institute for Research Advancement (NIRA) in Tokyo.
◆Nov. 17-20
Kamiya attends the Worldwide Gathering of NGOs: Nagasaki Global Citizens
Assembly for the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons, organized by the Global Citizens
Assembly for the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons in Nagasaki, in Nagasaki. Kamiya
served as a panelist and gave a presentation at a workshop on laboratory and subcritical testing.
◆Nov. 18-19
Mizumoto attends the semiannual conference of the National Defense Agency,
held at the National Institute for Defense Studies in Tokyo.
◆Nov. 24
HPI s project team on the Legitimacy and Rationality of New-interventionism
holds its fourth meeting.
HPI s project team on Disarmament in the 21st Century holds its sixth meeting.
◆Nov. 28
Mizumoto attends the 26th Forum on New Thinking on Security Issues, held atand organized by the Tokyo Foundation. The forum included a lecture analyzing theArmitage Report by Koichi Isobe of the Japan Defense Agency.
◆Dec. 2
Mizumoto attends a symposium titled The Day Japan Is Involved in a War,organized by the Hiroshima Bar Association and sponsored by Hiroshima city and theHiroshima Medical Association, at Hiroshima YMCA Hall.
◆Dec. 6-7
Mizumoto, Akiyama and Kamiya attend the Third International Symposium on
Korea and the Search for Peace in Northeast Asia, organized by Ritsumeikan
University, at Kyoto International Conference Hall.
◆Dec. 8
Mizumoto attends a study group meeting, Exploring Japan s Proactive Peaceand Security Strategies: The Case of the Nuclear Umbrella, organized by NIRA in
Tokyo.
Akiyama attends a symposium titled Human Development and Human Securityin Northeast Asia, sponsored by the Tokyo office of the UN Development Program,
held at the United Nations University.
◆Dec. 10
Mizumoto gives a presentation at a session titled Toward a Nuclear-free AsiaPacific Region at an international symposium, Nuclear Development and theEconomic, Social and Cultural Influence, sponsored by and held at the International
Peace Research Institute of Meiji Gakuin University in Tokyo.
◆Dec. 12
Akiyama attends a workshop on Central Asia sponsored by the Sasakawa Peace
Foundation in Tokyo.
◆Dec. 15
HPI s project team on Disarmament in the 21st Century holds its seventh meeting.
◆Dec. 16
Mizumoto delivers a lecture on the current situation concerning nuclear weapons
during the third training course of the Hiroshima Peace Volunteer Project, sponsored by
the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum.
◆Dec. 19
Akiyama attends a workshop on disarmament organized by the Center for Global
Communications at the International University of Japan, at the Institute forInternational Policy Studies in Tokyo.
◆Dec. 22
HPI s project team on the Legitimacy and Rationality of New-interventionism
holds its fifth meeting.
◆Dec. 27
Mizumoto attends the 27th Forum on New Thinking on Security Issues, held atand organized by the Tokyo Foundation. The forum featured a lecture by Yoichi
Funabashi titled Japan s Lost Decade―What Was Lost in Those 10 Years?
◆Jan. 8-19, 2001
Kamiya acts as an advisor at the second preparatory committee for a UN
conference on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons, held at the United
Nations in New York.
◆Jan. 12
Akiyama participates in a workshop on preventive diplomacy organized by Prof.
Hideaki Shiroyama of Tokyo University, held at the International House of Japan,
Tokyo.
◆Jan. 18
Akiyama delivers a lecture on the politics and administration of Japan at a generalorientation for participants in a training program run by the Hiroshima International
Conference Center.
◆Jan. 25
HPI s project team on the Legitimacy and Rationality of New-interventionism
holds its sixth meeting.
Akiyama attends an international conference titled Partners in Humanitarian
Crises, sponsored by the European Commission and the United Nations University.
◆Jan. 26
HPI s project team on Disarmament in the 21st Century holds its eighth meeting.
◆Jan. 29
Akiyama participates in a workshop on the Caspian Basin, organized by the
Research Institute for Peace and Security.
◆Feb. 13
HPI s project team on Disarmament in the 21st Century holds its ninth meeting.
◆Feb. 14
Akiyama participates in a workshop on the Caspian Basin, organized by the
Research Institute for Peace and Security.
◆Feb. 15-24
Akiyama visits East Timor to conduct research for the Research Project on the
Legitimacy and Rationality of New-interventionism.
◆Feb. 19-22
Mizumoto makes a keynote speech at the second symposium on Sino-Japan
preventive diplomacy, co-sponsored by the Japan Center for Preventive Diplomacy, theChina Institute of Contemporary International Relations and HPI, in Beijing.
◆Feb. 27
HPI s project team on the Legitimacy and Rationality of New-interventionism
holds its seventh meeting.

−Visitors to HPI−
◆Nov. 16
Tsutomu Ishiguri, director of the United Nations Regional Center for Peace andDisarmament in Asia and the Pacific◆Nov. 17
Dr. Kamarulnizam Abdullah, lecturer and head of the Strategic and Security
Studies Unit (UPSK) at the faculty of social sciences and humanities, University
Kebangsaan (National) Malaysia (UKM)◆Dec. 12
Dr. Brian R. Tomlinson, professor of economic history at the University ofStrathclyde in Scotland◆Jan. 17, 2001
Frank Umbach, senior research fellow at the Research Institute of the German
Council on Foreign Relations
Dr. Christopher Hughes, senior research fellow at the Centre for the Study of
Globalization and Regionalisation, Economic and Social Research Council, Warwick
University, England◆Feb. 8Ms. Khin Ma Ma Myo, visiting research fellow at the Japan Institute ofInternational Affairs, and tutor in the department of international relations at Yangon
University in Myanmar◆Feb. 26
Dr. Makoto Katsumata, director of the International Peace Research Institute,
Meiji Gakuin University
Hideki Uemura, research associate at the International Peace Research Institute,
Meiji Gakuin University

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS
●Issued by Hiroshima Peace Institute, Hiroshima City University
Hiroshima Mitsui Bldg. 12 th Floor 2-7-10 Otemachi, Naka-ku, Hiroshima 730-0051 JAPAN●Printed by Sanko Ltd.

Visit HPI's web site at http://serv.peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp/English/index.htm−8−Vol.3, No3 March 26, 2001
Copyright 2001 HPI All rights reserved
TEL ＋81-82-544-7570 FAX ＋81-82-544-7573
E-mail:office-peace@peace.hiroshima-cu.ac.jp

HIROSHIMA RESEARCH NEWS, Vol.3 No.3 March 2001