After Chernobyl: Citizens Initiatives in Munich

Transcription

1 After Chernobyl: Citizens Initiatives in Munich Astrid Mignon Kirchhof Humboldt University zu Berlin Introduction On 26 April 1986, the hitherto worst nuclear power plant accident in the world occurred in Ukraine. There was a rapid increase in energy release in the fuel assembly in reactor number four in Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant and the reactor core was subsequently destroyed. After attempts to put out the fire by throwing sand, clay, lead and boron on the reactor from military helicopters failed, it was only possible to extinguish the fire after ten days by cooling the reactor plant with nitrogen. 1 The shock wave blew the roof off the reactor, resulting in the massive release of radioactivity across large areas of Europe. The radioactive cloud reached Germany on 30 April 1986, with Bavaria particularly badly affected. 2 Although overall there was a relatively swift reaction to the disaster by politicians and the administration, people were inundated with a wave of contradictory news and recommendations. There was a huge gap between trustworthy information about the health hazards, possible options for action, and between official information and the media. As a result, private initiatives were founded to close this gap. Several women organized a vigil in the city center in Munich. They chose the second Sunday in May, when Mother s Day is traditionally celebrated in Germany, as the date for the vigil. In 1986, this was on 11 May. It was not a coincidence that Mother s Day was chosen as the date for this action. The initiative that was founded at the time called itself Mütter gegen Atomkraft [MgA, Mothers against Nuclear Power]. Membership was open to both women and men, although most members were female. The citizens initiative, David gegen Goliath [DAGG, David against Goliath], was founded around one month later in June The aim of both initiatives was a phasing out of the use of nuclear energy and the establishment of an ecological and socially acceptable energy and environmental policy. 3 1 The Federal Office for Radiation Protection (ed.), Tschernobyl 20 Jahre danach, Braunschweig 2006, p. 7 and 20 Jahre Chronik, in: Mütter Courage 2006, p Melanie Arndt, Tschernobyl. Auswirkungen des Reaktorunfalls auf die Bundesrepublik Deutschland und die DDR, Erfurt 2011, p. 53ff and The Federal Office for Radiation Protection (ed.), Tschernobyl 20 Jahre danach, Braunschweig 2006, p. 5ff. 3 Flyer by Mütter gegen Atomkraft eine spontan entstandene Organisation nach Tschernobyl, 1986, Bavarian State Archives Fl Slg and flyer by David gegen Goliath 1986, Bavarian State archives Fl Slg

2 Both citizens initiatives had chosen highly symbolic names. On the one hand, the female members of Mütter gegen Atomkraft wanted the term mothers to be understood as apolitical, as it was only meant to express responsibility for future generations. 4 On the other hand, the female members emphasized their role as mothers rather than any other identification category. Concern for the children s future was and is the main motive for personal involvement. By deciding to use the symbolically charged term mothers in the organization s name, the image of a woman who makes sacrifices for her children was also invoked. The name makes clear that her struggle for the right of her children to a future worth living in was a morally unassailable act on behalf of humanity. The association name, David gegen Goliath, was also symbolic. This group of activists described itself as an initiative of independent Bavarian citizens against nuclear power in its subheading. By using this name, the members wanted to create a link to the symbolism of the victorious battle between David, the future King of Israel, and the Philistine leader, Goliath. In historical accounts, David was able to triumph over the giant, Goliath, despite having a worse starting position due to being younger, hardly armed, and inexperienced. 5 Who was Goliath in this unequal battle? In the following text, I would like to explore this and other questions: The two citizens initiatives were founded within social parameters that had also made the widespread antinuclear power movement possible. Which parameters played a role and what course had the anti-nuclear movement taken until then? Were the citizens initiatives successful in establishing international links? The means used by the members of the citizens initiatives and how these means shaped their forms of action are also of interest. What motivated the activists? Which socio-structural groups supported the citizens initiatives in general and the interest groups presented in this text in particular? Social parameters: the anti-nuclear power movement Lifestyle habits, but also political and cultural orientation, had already changed in West Germany in the 1960s as a result of the economic boom and an extremely marked increase in consumption opportunities. Previous norms became more fluid and there was a greater willingness to criticize existing values. Gloomy predictions on the scarcity of resources, the rise in population, the growth of the cities, and the pollution of the environment determined 4 Mütter Courage 4 (1990), p Flyer DAGG David gegen Goliath: wer ist DAGG, was bedeutet DAGG, wie will DAGG seine Ziele erreichen, warum eine landesweite Unterschriftensammlung?, Bavarian State Archives, Fl Slg

3 public opinion. The prevailing optimistic atmosphere in politics and society thus came to an end. The warnings and scenarios met with a receptive audience. Citizens initiatives and new social movements increasingly defined the contemporary concept of political ecology. There had already been local anti-nuclear protests since the 1950s. 6 Resistance against nuclear energy became a mass movement and spread nationwide with opposition against the nuclear power plant in Würgassen in North Rhine-Westphalia and particularly in 1975 in Wyhl in Baden Württemberg. The squatting of the building site at Wyhl inspired similar actions in other locations. More radical political groups from the cities also became involved. These groups had initially kept a low profile and expressed criticism of the bourgeois initiatives, but now joined the movement. As early as December 1977, a reduction of 50% in the nuclear program for 1985 was announced and greater emphasis was placed on energy savings and the development of non-nuclear energy technologies. However, the conflict was not defused as the police cracked down much harder during protests at the nuclear power plants in Brokdorf and Grohnde, for example, than they had in Wyhl. The plans for the nuclear disposal park in Gorleben in the late 1970s focused the attention of the protest on the aspect of nuclear waste, to which hardly any attention had previously been paid. The search for alternative permanent disposal sites led to waves of protests in every new location. During Easter weekend on 30 and 31 March 1986, the anti-nuclear power movement reached a record with 100,000 opponents of nuclear power at the mass demonstration in Wackersdorf in Bavaria. The Chernobyl disaster took place in this context. 7 Just as the Würgassen and Whyl examples and indeed the rest of the antinuclear movement, the two initiatives David gegen Goliath and Mütter gegen Atomkraft also formed networks, establishing contact to other groups from an early stage. However, easier networking between groups only became possible with the internet. Both initiatives currently maintain links to nationwide campaign networks. The female members of Mütter gegen Atomkraft have said that they have established contacts with organizations in some neighboring states such as France, Austria, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic. However, neither of the two groups have contacts to initiatives that are active on the European or international levels. 8 6 At this time, protests occurred on the local level. For example, the protests were against plans to set up a nuclear power plant or a nuclear waste depot close to the protestors homes. 7 Melanie Arndt, Tschernobyl. Auswirkungen des Reaktorunfalls auf die Bundesrepublik Deutschland und die DDR, Erfurt 2011, p. 18ff and URL: in September Letter from Cornelia Stadler to the author in spring 2011 and URL: in September

4 Forms of action used by the citizens initiatives The changing concepts of society held by many people served as a point of reference for new forms of political action and lifestyles, particularly in the alternative milieu. The resistance by these groups was expressed in subversive and imaginative non-conformity. The actions organized by Mütter gegen Atomkraft and the members of David gegen Goliath, which served both to achieve their political goals and as PR, included founding new district groups, holding information and discussion events, organizing demonstrations, vigils and trips to nuclear power plants as well as advertising campaigns. In addition, the groups wrote scientific reports, produced alternative energy concepts, and provided support for children and their families from the disaster zone around Chernobyl. Variety in the forms of action was the order of the day and the actions themselves were both creative and diverse. For example, the activists from Mütter gegen Atomkraft demonstrated wearing radiation protection suits, formed a diaper protest chain, and invited guests to a harvest festival featuring apples painted in grey and vegetables printed with figures in Becquerel in order to draw attention to the radiation level in the region. 9 Willingness to get involved was the most important resource in a movement based on voluntary work. Involvement was thus the central category in the citizens initiatives. In their information sheets, the initiatives repeatedly called on the public to get involved in the action group in question and thus to be active in environmental issues. David gegen Goliath suggested actions to show the wide range of ways that one could become involved: Set up DAGG support points in your neighborhood, organize information stands, advertise DAGG on the radio, take out small ads, write for the newspapers, question political candidates, collect donations, put up DAGG posters. 10 The motives The historian Melanie Arndt states that fear of nuclear power was the most important motivation for getting involved in the anti-nuclear power movement. She writes that fear, as a result and expression of uncertainty, plays a special role because it cannot be regulated or supressed. 11 In their chronicle to mark the twentieth anniversary of Chernobyl, Mütter gegen 9 20 Jahre Chronik, in: Mütter Courage 2006, pp and Ernte Dank flyers, 1986, Bavarian State Archives, Fl Slg Aktionsvorschläge flyer, 1986, Bavarian State Archives, Fl Slg Melanie Arndt, Verunsicherung vor und nach der Katastrophe. Von der Anti-AKW-Bewegung zum Engagement für die Tschernobyl-Kinder, in: Zeithistorische Forschungen/Studies in Contemporary History, online edition, 7 (2010) H. 2, part 2. URL: in September

5 Atomkraft describe the fear that they felt, above all for their children s health, and the feeling of powerlessness that became a political force. 12 In the meantime, several research projects have shown that women were more concerned about the events than men were. 13 There were various reasons for this: On the one hand, the investigations were carried out on ideal-typical people (male, healthy, adult, and not pregnant) and many women were conscious that not everyone was equal in terms of the risks. In their socially determined role as the people responsible for housework and raising children, women experienced the emergence of completely new and unfamiliar demands in daily nutrition and housework in a particularly intense way. They had more questions than answers. How dangerous is it to be outdoors and what exposures are there in different meals? How can one explain to children that it is not possible to play outdoors even if the weather is nice without frightening them? Many women felt that they were exposed to an invisible threat without having been involved in its technical development. 14 However, the feeling of fear was also mixed with anger and a desire to fight. Cornelia Stadler, who has been involved in Mütter gegen Atomkraft since the beginning, describes the first weeks following the nuclear accident in retrospect as follows: There are so many reasons to feel angry. That our politicians are still acting as if things weren t so bad. Their non-stop talk that it couldn t happen here anyway. 15 This quotation articulates criticism of large-scale technology and growing skepticism toward economic and technical progress scenarios. At the same time, it also expresses anger about political and state incompetence and false information. Unlike the nature conservation movement of the 1950s, the new citizens initiatives no longer accepted the state as a neutral entity focused on the common good. Many citizens initiatives were convinced that state action was solely determined by the wish to safeguard hegemony. As I explained at the start, the impression of asymmetry between the state and the movement is also conveyed in the name, David gegen Goliath. The members are conducting an apparently hopeless battle against an overwhelming giant, that is, the state. However, the environmentalists demands in terms of content were not aimed at less state, 12 For example, see Corinna Toledo-Wagner, Ohnmacht wird zur politischen Triebfeder, in: Mütter Courage 2006, p , here: p Melanie Arndt, Verunsicherung vor und nach der Katastrophe. Von der Anti-AKW-Bewegung zum Engagement für die Tschernobyl-Kinder, in: Zeithistorische Forschungen/Studies in Contemporary History, online edition, 7 (2010) H. 2, footnote 20. URL: in September Ulrike Röhr/Dagmar Vinz, Frauen gegen Atomenergie - die Auswirkungen von Tschernobyl auf das umweltund energiepolitische Engagement von Frauen, in: Luz Mez/Lars Gerhold/Gerhard de Haan (ed.), Atomkraft als Risiko. Analysen und Konsequenzen nach Tschernobyl, Frankfurt am Main 2010, pp Cornelia Stadler, Trockenmilchpulver war auch keine Lösung, in Mütter Courage 2006, p

6 but on the contrary at official regulations. The initiatives often cultivated a rebellious antistate image while preserving links to the authorities and government. 16 The support groups of the citizens initiatives Research on social movements has repeatedly looked at the socio-structural mobilization basis of social movements. The structural strains theory assumes that a new generation had gradually been formed, which was predestined to claim the right to self-development, particularly due to its academic qualifications in the social sciences. This potential was expressed in demands for participation in the political system, but also in the claim to the right to self-determination for minorities. According to this point of view, the majority of those involved in the movement reveals considerable similarities. They were predominantly younger people who had an above-average level of education and represented a postmaterialist value system such as communication, health, meaning and self-realization due to their socialization the participants were essentially made up of people born in the decade between 1945 and 1955 and the post-war generations socialized in the 1960s and 1970s. 17 The professions mainly taken up by this cohort are in the tertiary education sector and professional human services areas, hence in the social, communications and human science fields, so that above all employees in the social services area, social workers, the clergy, doctors, the artistic professions and journalists and social sciences intelligence are found. 18 The Munich-based lawyer Bernhard Fricke has been president of the initiative, David gegen Goliath, since its foundation. This opponent of nuclear power attracted representatives of various social groups to the initiative and thus achieved a broad public impact. The list of supporters and members reads like a Who s Who of the socio-academic establishment. There are church representatives as well as politicians, primarily from the Social Democratic Party and the Greens, writers, intellectuals, academics (including natural scientists), artists and political cabaret artists. Many of them came from Bavaria, but some were well-known beyond its borders. In complete contrast to Mütter gegen Atomkraft, women are under- 16 Jens Ivo Engels, Naturpolitik in der Bundesrepublik. Ideenwelt und politische Verhaltensstile in Naturschutz und Umweltbewegung, Paderborn 2006, p. 377ff. 17 Joachim Raschke: Soziale Bewegungen. Ein historisch-systematischer Grundriß, Frankfurt am Main 1985, p Karl Werner Brand/Detlef Büsser/Dieter Rucht: Aufbruch in eine andere Gesellschaft, Frankfurt am Main 1986, p

7 represented in this initiative. There were only 14 women among the 68 people who joined the initiative in June Mütter gegen Atomkraft does not have only one president, but has had a frequently changing board made up of several members since its foundation. The board members also worked in a very wide range of fields in politics, universities and society. They included teachers, artists, professors and journalists. Among the people whose backgrounds I have checked, the majority also worked in professions based in the social sciences. Despite their academic education, the female members were repeatedly accused of incompetence. 20 It can be hypothesized that this was based on sexist evaluations made by the population resulting from the term mothers in the name of the organization and the almost entirely female membership. The statements on the support provided by people working in the social sciences can be confirmed with regard to the two citizens initiatives analyzed in this text. However, there were and are citizens initiatives that do not fit this profile. For example, the Bürgerinitiative Schöneberger Südgelände, which is active in Berlin, is based on support from the natural sciences. As a result, the approach described above must be corrected to state that the wider the movement spread, the more unlikely a homogenous support profile became. 21 Chernobyl became a symbol of a solidarity movement stretching beyond the borders of Europe and a symbol of civil society involvement by many small and larger groups. The two initiatives from the Munich area were founded within the wider framework of the German anti-nuclear power movement, which had become considerably more politicized since the 1970s and meant that Chernobyl met with a receptive audience. Even though many supporters of the movement came from the social sciences, communications and humanities, a homogenous support profile became increasingly unlikely the wider the movement spread. Apart from the feelings of fear of further nuclear accidents, anger also motivated the activists. This anger was primarily directed against a state that was regarded as safeguarding its hegemony and therefore acting against the interests of its citizens. The naming of the 19 Für unsere Zukunft gegen Wackersdorf. Liste der Initiative unabhängiger bayerischer Bürgerinnen und Bürger gegen Kernkraft flyer, Bavarian State Archives Fl Slg For example, see 20 Jahre Chronik, in: Mütter Courage 2006, p Astrid Mignon Kirchhof, Structural strains und die Analyse der Umweltbewegung seit den 1960er Jahren. Ein Vergleich externer Mobilitätsbedingungen in Ost- und Westberlin in: Mittag, Jürgen/Stadtland, Helke (ed.), Theoretische Ansätze und Konzepte der Sozialen Bewegungsforschung in den Geschichtswissenschaften, Bochum. pp (Forthcoming). 7

8 initiative as Mütter gegen Atomkraft was thus a clear accusation against a state that put the lives of children at risk. The declaration of war against the state, which was also expressed in the naming of the initiative, David gegen Goliath, was a great change from the traditional nature conservation movement. The forms of action were also new. Diversity and creativity were called for and the involvement of the movement s members was the most important resource. 8