Tweet
Eurasia Review
April 24 2012
Facing A New, Old Nuclear Threat: The Case Of Metsamor - OpEd
Written by: Galib Mammadov
April 24, 2012
Leaders from 51 countries gathered on March 27, 2012, for the Seoul
Nuclear Security Summit. Participants in the summit focused their
concerns on efforts by North Korea and Iran to develop atomic
programs. Such nuclear ambitions should invoke a global response as a
nuclear war could obliterate entire populations.
But world leaders also need to pay attention to existing nuclear
entities that also pose a potential threat. One such topic for concern
is the Metsamor nuclear plant in Armenia. Located 30 kilometers west
of Yerevan, the 35-year-old nuclear plant has aroused the concern of
experts. Based in an earthquake zone and rife with antiquated
equipment and other problems, Metsamor already undermines well-being
of entire nations on a daily basis.
Unexpected fatal surprises like the Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima
(2011) accidents caused problems not only for their host countries but
also for their entire respective regions. Chernobyl affected not only
Ukraine but all of Europe from East to West. Western European
countries like Finland, Sweden, and Germany did not escape Chernobyl's
cruel side effects. In 2007 the Finnish government stated that even
after 21 years fish and mushrooms in some regions of Finland are still
toxic as a result of radiation.
Are the South Caucasus region and surrounding areas facing their own
Chernobyl or Fukushima?
A European Union report, labels Metsamor's reactors (VVER 440 Model
V230 light water-cooled reactors) `the oldest and least reliable'
among 66 reactors built in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. An
April 11, 2011, National Geographic story, `Is Armenia's Nuclear Plant
is the World Most Dangerous?' focused on the plant's location. In
December 1988 some 25,000 Armenians died in a massive earthquake.
Regional Responses
The Armenian officials have argued that the International Atomic
Energy Agency supports the plant remaining in operation. This group
bases its argument on input from The Hungarian head of the 11-member
IAEA Operational Safety Review Team for Armenia, Gabor Vamos. He told
reporters: `There is no industrial activity that does not pose any
risk, but I think the results of our inspection show that this risk at
Metsamor is acceptable.' Director of the Greens Union of Armenia Hakob
Sanasarian called Vamos' statement biased and stated that `the nuclear
power plant is dangerous in terms of environment, seismic, and safety
risks.'
Neighboring countries have already demonstrated their concern. The
Head of the Administration of the Ministry of Industry and Energy of
Azerbaijan Rasim Mammadov told journalists in 2011: `Metsamor nuclear
plant is in poor condition, and there are no prospects for future
activities.' He also stated that Metsamor imposes threat to the whole
region.
Also in 2011, Turkey's Energy and Natural Resources Minister Taner
Yildiz addressed the importance of closing the aging nuclear plant in
Armenia. He said that the Turkish government is against all plants
that effective life is expired.
Georgian physicist Mikhail Kaviladze indicated that the risk of
failure of the plan was high because of its mountainous location,
which offered limited water supply in the event of needed emergency
cooling of the reactor.
In the course of the 2012 Seoul Nuclear Security Summit, Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliyev brought Metsamor concerns to the attention of
international community again by stating that `Metsamor does not meet
modern standards and is located in a seismic zone.' Armenian President
Serj Sargisian has referred to Azerbaijani claims about Metsamor's
potential dangers as `[typical] disinformation.'
International Community Response Needed
The world community needs to hold Armenian officials responsible for
the consequences of a possible nuclear accident because of its
possible disastrous impact on the entire broader region.
The United States and the European Union have already pushed the
Armenian government to close the plant and to find alternative sources
for Armenia's electricity demands. The EU addressed the importance of
closing this plant after its envoy called the plant as a danger to the
entire region. In 2006, while visiting Yerevan head of an EU
delegation, Austrian Foreign Minister Hans Winkler said that `the
Armenian nuclear power plant uses old technologies, which do not come
up to modern security standards.'
Armenia has rejected an EU offer of a 200-million-euro loan to shut
down the plant. Armenia has resisted requests to shut down Metsamor,
citing the lack of effective alternatives for the nation's electricity
supply. The plant provides 40 percent of Armenia's electricity.
If Armenia continues to ignore the concerns of its neighbors and of
the international community for its interestthen the United States and
EU should be prepared to impose sanctions, including the cutting of
humanitarian aid. European countries should be prepared to protest
Armenia's insistence on keeping Metsamor open notwithstanding the
threat it poses to the larger region.
Seoul summit participants will do well to consider Azerbaijani
President's reminder of threat posed by Armenia's Metsamor nuclear
plant.
Share on facebookShare on diggShare on twitterShare on emailMore
Sharing ServicesAbout the author:
Galib Mammadov
Galib Mammadov holds a Master's from Washington University in
International Affairs. His main focus of research are unresolved
conflicts in Caucasus region, and Europe's Energy security. His
articles have appeared in Foreign Policy Journal, and in Turkish
Weekly Journal. He may be reached: [email protected]
http://www.eurasiareview.com/24042012-facing-a-new-old-nuclear-threat-the-case-of-metsamor-oped/
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
April 24 2012
Facing A New, Old Nuclear Threat: The Case Of Metsamor - OpEd
Written by: Galib Mammadov
April 24, 2012
Leaders from 51 countries gathered on March 27, 2012, for the Seoul
Nuclear Security Summit. Participants in the summit focused their
concerns on efforts by North Korea and Iran to develop atomic
programs. Such nuclear ambitions should invoke a global response as a
nuclear war could obliterate entire populations.
But world leaders also need to pay attention to existing nuclear
entities that also pose a potential threat. One such topic for concern
is the Metsamor nuclear plant in Armenia. Located 30 kilometers west
of Yerevan, the 35-year-old nuclear plant has aroused the concern of
experts. Based in an earthquake zone and rife with antiquated
equipment and other problems, Metsamor already undermines well-being
of entire nations on a daily basis.
Unexpected fatal surprises like the Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima
(2011) accidents caused problems not only for their host countries but
also for their entire respective regions. Chernobyl affected not only
Ukraine but all of Europe from East to West. Western European
countries like Finland, Sweden, and Germany did not escape Chernobyl's
cruel side effects. In 2007 the Finnish government stated that even
after 21 years fish and mushrooms in some regions of Finland are still
toxic as a result of radiation.
Are the South Caucasus region and surrounding areas facing their own
Chernobyl or Fukushima?
A European Union report, labels Metsamor's reactors (VVER 440 Model
V230 light water-cooled reactors) `the oldest and least reliable'
among 66 reactors built in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. An
April 11, 2011, National Geographic story, `Is Armenia's Nuclear Plant
is the World Most Dangerous?' focused on the plant's location. In
December 1988 some 25,000 Armenians died in a massive earthquake.
Regional Responses
The Armenian officials have argued that the International Atomic
Energy Agency supports the plant remaining in operation. This group
bases its argument on input from The Hungarian head of the 11-member
IAEA Operational Safety Review Team for Armenia, Gabor Vamos. He told
reporters: `There is no industrial activity that does not pose any
risk, but I think the results of our inspection show that this risk at
Metsamor is acceptable.' Director of the Greens Union of Armenia Hakob
Sanasarian called Vamos' statement biased and stated that `the nuclear
power plant is dangerous in terms of environment, seismic, and safety
risks.'
Neighboring countries have already demonstrated their concern. The
Head of the Administration of the Ministry of Industry and Energy of
Azerbaijan Rasim Mammadov told journalists in 2011: `Metsamor nuclear
plant is in poor condition, and there are no prospects for future
activities.' He also stated that Metsamor imposes threat to the whole
region.
Also in 2011, Turkey's Energy and Natural Resources Minister Taner
Yildiz addressed the importance of closing the aging nuclear plant in
Armenia. He said that the Turkish government is against all plants
that effective life is expired.
Georgian physicist Mikhail Kaviladze indicated that the risk of
failure of the plan was high because of its mountainous location,
which offered limited water supply in the event of needed emergency
cooling of the reactor.
In the course of the 2012 Seoul Nuclear Security Summit, Azerbaijani
President Ilham Aliyev brought Metsamor concerns to the attention of
international community again by stating that `Metsamor does not meet
modern standards and is located in a seismic zone.' Armenian President
Serj Sargisian has referred to Azerbaijani claims about Metsamor's
potential dangers as `[typical] disinformation.'
International Community Response Needed
The world community needs to hold Armenian officials responsible for
the consequences of a possible nuclear accident because of its
possible disastrous impact on the entire broader region.
The United States and the European Union have already pushed the
Armenian government to close the plant and to find alternative sources
for Armenia's electricity demands. The EU addressed the importance of
closing this plant after its envoy called the plant as a danger to the
entire region. In 2006, while visiting Yerevan head of an EU
delegation, Austrian Foreign Minister Hans Winkler said that `the
Armenian nuclear power plant uses old technologies, which do not come
up to modern security standards.'
Armenia has rejected an EU offer of a 200-million-euro loan to shut
down the plant. Armenia has resisted requests to shut down Metsamor,
citing the lack of effective alternatives for the nation's electricity
supply. The plant provides 40 percent of Armenia's electricity.
If Armenia continues to ignore the concerns of its neighbors and of
the international community for its interestthen the United States and
EU should be prepared to impose sanctions, including the cutting of
humanitarian aid. European countries should be prepared to protest
Armenia's insistence on keeping Metsamor open notwithstanding the
threat it poses to the larger region.
Seoul summit participants will do well to consider Azerbaijani
President's reminder of threat posed by Armenia's Metsamor nuclear
plant.
Share on facebookShare on diggShare on twitterShare on emailMore
Sharing ServicesAbout the author:
Galib Mammadov
Galib Mammadov holds a Master's from Washington University in
International Affairs. His main focus of research are unresolved
conflicts in Caucasus region, and Europe's Energy security. His
articles have appeared in Foreign Policy Journal, and in Turkish
Weekly Journal. He may be reached: [email protected]
http://www.eurasiareview.com/24042012-facing-a-new-old-nuclear-threat-the-case-of-metsamor-oped/
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress