Workshop6　

Atomic Bomb Survivors Forum

Yoshikazu Shibano (Coordinator)

Introduction
This workshop of the Atomic Bomb Survivors' Forum took the origins of the survivors' movement and how it has been passed on to later generations as its theme, and featured reports and discussions on these issues.

Report 1. The need for a worldwide atomic bomb survivors' association
Yoshie Funahashi

There has always been an atomic bomb survivors' forum at the Global Citizens' Assembly. This shows the considerable scale of what the survivors have to do in order to abolish nuclear weapons and just how much is expected of us.
During this and the second assembly, the words 'atomic bomb survivors' (hibakusha) were written in kanji. At the first meeting, they were written in the katakana phonetic syllabary. The assembly was attended by survivors from Nevada and Semipalatinsk, as well as those from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Rather than diminishing the visibility of the survivors from Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the starting point of atomic bomb survivors around the world, raising the issue using the katakana form of hibakusha enables the word to convey a universal meaning. It's not just a question of language - the work of eliminating nuclear weapons that the survivors' movement has to carry out is far from being an easy task. The ever increasing nuclear damage transcends national borders; halting this damage requires that there are no borders in the survivors' movement. Surely continuing the momentum that the forum has built up into the future, exchanging information on an international basis so that we do not become too set in our ways, and fitting an international perspective into our movement are basic requisites.
I am reminded of the statement of the 1977 international NGO symposium on atomic bomb survivors, which stated that we are all the survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that we are all hibakusha. After that, the Roman alphabet spelling of hibakusha became the commonly used term, rather than 'survivors' or 'victims'. Speakers at the meeting expressed their solidarity by saying that they had been exposed to atomic bombs at distances of several hundred or several thousand kilometers. And at the present time, as we approach the thirtieth anniversary of the 1977 symposium, we are in a nuclear situation in which anybody could be hibakusha at anytime. Writing hibakusha in katakana expresses the dangerous situation in which it is possible that the whole human race could become atomic bomb victims.
How should we hand down the survivors' movement and their testimonies to future generations? There are the issues of the movement itself and of the survivors' experiences. The issues have been raised at regular intervals over the years. Many efforts have been made to vitalize the movement and relay our experiences to younger generations, but what I want to emphasize is the solidarity of the movement. The survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki have a mission to act as the axis, bringing together the worldwide survivors' association. The creation of a worldwide survivors' association is needed in order to bring the movement's work to fruition, and make it go further than mere interaction. The idea of a worldwide association was put forward by Heiichi Fujii, the first secretary of Hidankyo, who described this as his 'final will'. Returning to Hiroshima two weeks after the bombing, he was not covered by the definition of survivors in the Hibakusha Aid Law. I heard in an interview with him that he experienced people saying to him "You're not a hibakusha", and that he struggled with all sorts of issues such as how to bond the Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors, how to use the financial subsidies, and how to sustain the alliances and movement. I really want people to know about this.

Report 2. The root of the mistakes is the notion that war damage is acceptable
Hirotami Yamada

The organized and systematic survivors' movement started 50 years ago. Survivors' associations were launched in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and Hidankyo was formed in August 1956. No more progress could be made just by saying that such a terrible thing must never happen again, or that there must never again be any atomic bomb victims - concrete efforts had to be made. The basic demands of the survivors were drawn up and formulated in 1984, in order to explain that the only way to prevent any more atomic bomb victims is to abolish nuclear weapons, and to make the Japanese government compensate for the damage caused by the atomic bombings. While there was little difference of opinion about the concept of abolishing nuclear weapons, the notion of 'compensation' was not so easily accepted. Local governments in Nagasaki prefecture were canvassed for support, but only the cities of Goto and Iki agreed to offer any. It was not possible to gain the support of Nagasaki prefecture and Nagasaki City as they were hesitant about the demand to the government for compensation. The national and local government were forced to deal with the survivors' claim that the nation was responsible for starting the war and should compensate them to prove that never again would Japan open hostilities.
In the 'Son Jin-doo verdict' of March 1978, Japan's Supreme Court ruled that, "Tracing back the past, [the atomic bomb damage] was the result of the nation's actions," and added that "The government, which was the main proponent of the war, should take the responsibility of providing relief." An international symposium that sought to look into the truth behind the atomic bomb damage was held in 1977. The government started to feel threatened that they would be overpowered by the flourishing survivors' movement. It was at this point that the Minister of Health and Welfare's Informal Panel on Basic Policies for the Survivor's Problem held consultative meetings in 1979, and released its Basic Principles in December 1980. The thrust of this document was that the survivors should, of course, put up with their hardships, saying, "On the whole, in an emergency situation like a war, when the country's very existence is at stake, all the citizens have to share and accept [the damage]." The Supreme Court had issued a similar written judgment in 1968: "The citizens had to share and accept [the damage]." This was because of Supreme Court judge Jiro Tanaka's inclusion in the informal panel. However, the major difference between the two judgments is that the Supreme Court used the past tense when it said that that war damage "had to be accepted", while the panel's verdict starts with the phrase "On the whole", suggesting that this is common knowledge. We have to be careful about this point. We are already witnessing signs of this. The war contingency legislation includes legislation to define the nation's response to foreign military attack and the Law concerning the Measures for Protection of the Civilian Population in Armed Attack Situations contains details of compensation for medics and transport workers who are killed during an attack, as well as provisions for damage to trucks etc. However, there will be absolutely no compensation for ordinary members of the public who are killed or have their houses destroyed.
Is there any point at all in submitting a resolution that calls for the abolition of nuclear weapons to the UN every year, while stipulating that the damage caused by these weapons is something that can be endured? The basic flaw in nuclear policy and the policy towards survivors is this theory that war damage is acceptable. We and all the young people have to spread the message that every Japanese citizen is exposed to this acceptance theory. Spreading the message will enable Japan to be a nation that can truly call for the abolition of nuclear weapons, give it the strength to change the world's nuclear situation. I think that this is the duty of those of us who have a sovereign right to speak on the issue.

Report 3. The second generation victims issue - a common theme for child survivors across the world
Chizuko Obama

My parents, sister (one year old at the time) and brother (exposed to radiation while in the womb) were all survivors, but while the others obtained atomic bomb survivor's certificates my father never applied for one right to his death. He approached the hypocenter when he went to look for his sisters who had been sent to work at the weapons factory in Matsuyama. He was continually in and out of hospital after that. I heard him describe the scene at the time, saying "the area was a mountain of corpses." But he never spoke about why he didn't apply for a survivor's certificate. My mother died of leukemia at the age of 76. I have heard that many people didn't apply for the certificate and concealed the fact that they were survivors for a long time because they were worried about the effect it may occur to such as marriage. I hear that as they grow older, they are contracting various illnesses, and to the medical costs these incur. Since their children have grown up, they decide to apply for certificates but there are no longer any people who can testify to the circumstances at the time of the bombing, and they are struggling to become certified.
I first really felt that I was a second generation survivor when my cousin, whose parents had also survived the bomb, died of leukemia at the age of 20. The second generation survivors are currently allowed to have a free medical once a year, but there are no other measures for us. But there are still people like my cousin who are dying from or struggling with leukemia and cancer.
I spent a lot of time outside of Nagasaki when I was young, and didn't really feel the exposure to the bombing. But one day when I returned to Nagasaki, I learnt about the second generation survivors' consultation center from an article in one of the city's publications. The center is run by the Nagasaki City Second Generation Survivors' Association, who has held it every two weeks since March 2001. Survivors take this opportunity to talk about their worries for their children, and whether or not it is possible to arrange the same medical measures that the first generation survivors receive. These second generation survivors say they are contracting cancers and are genuinely struggling with medical costs and their daily lives, as well as worrying about their future. The Nagasaki Prefecture Second Generation Survivors' Association arranged a meeting for those second generation survivors in the prefecture who have telephoned the center. This led to the creation of an organization consisting of individual second generation survivors, the membership of which steadily increased. I was hesitant to announce that I was a second generation survivor at first, but in February 2004, I took up the position of chief representative of the newly formed Children of Atomic Bomb Victims.
I worked as a carer for survivors for eight years starting in 1996. Despite being victims, these people are also exposed to a lot of prejudice and cruel comments. And while their own health is also obviously a cause for concern, the fact is that they have to worry about the effect it is having on their children and grandchildren, despite the deterioration of their own health. One survivor, who lives on her own, has a daughter who is constantly ill and in and out of hospital, and is struggling because she cannot go to work. She is worried that the disease is a result of her own exposure to radiation, and compellingly claims that she has to worry about her future health more than her current lifestyle, and that there are no measures to address the problems of second generation survivors. The survivors are growing older, and with effects of the radiation said to cause both acute and late-onset cancers, the survivors' misery continues until the day they die.
In order to pass down the experiences of the survivors, we are carrying out a study of the 'remains of the war and the bomb'. As well as asking the survivors about the situation at ground level when the bomb was dropped, by asking them what sort of thoughts they have had to live with the issue won't just end up as being something that happened a long time ago, and we can gain the real feeling that it is an ongoing problem.
We are currently demanding the government to recognize the second generation survivors. We are also making a petition, 'The Petition to Demand Amendments to the Hibakusha Aid Law', which demands compensation and amendments to the Hibakusha Aid Law, so that it explicitly covers second generation survivors. The results of five years' research into the effects of radiation were completed this September, and a report containing an analysis of these results is due to be published in March 2007. We intend to use these actions to clarify the effects that the second generation is continuing to suffer from, and demand the total abolition of nuclear weapons.
There are people all over the world who have been exposed to radiation in areas around test sites, during the mining and refining of uranium, at nuclear power plants or due to accidents at nuclear power stations, or because of depleted uranium missiles. The issue of second and third generation survivors is a common theme that the children of victims throughout the world are having to face up to.

Report 4. Not just as survivors, but as citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Ichiro Yuasa

The Hiroshima Alliance for Nuclear Weapons Abolition (HANWA), a group seeking the abolition of nuclear weapons, was founded in March 2001. The catalyst was an effort to make citizens voices heard at the Tokyo Forum by forming an alliance between Nagasaki and people in the Tokyo metropolitan region.
A regular organization that held debates on a level above the difficult question of thoughts and creed was set up in Hiroshima. While it is important to relay the voice of Hiroshima on an international basis, our stance seeks to achieve dialogue between the people of Tokyo, Nagasaki and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, because changing the view of the Japanese government that is important. We are looking at what citizens have to do, what they are capable of doing, how we should build up the organization to take on these tasks and, with the participation of survivors, how to pass on the movement to the next generation.
A clear promise about the abolition of nuclear weapons was reached at the 2000 NPT Review Conference, but the path towards this goal has not become apparent. However, the fact is that thanks to the very existence of the survivors, the power of the movement, our ceaseless struggle, the fruit of our efforts is the reality that these weapons have never again been used in war. The people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are not aware of this, they do not think about their way of living in their daily lives. They are not aware of the historical and social significance of something that is so very close to them. We work in the hope that more and more of the people of Hiroshima Prefecture will start to see this is as a personal problem. One of the main keywords here is 'diversity'. The question of whether or not we can become an organization that values each and every person's perception of the problems and speak about Hiroshima and Nagasaki in our own words as we act. I myself came to Kure in 1975, hoping to become involved with the Seto Sea's environment. In a broad sense, I was thinking about scientific and technical issues. Taking a solitary walk around the Peace Memorial Park and the A-Bomb Dome had an immense meaning for the rest of my life. The city itself is a place that testifies to the exposure experience, a place where the citizens have lived with their history and suffering; it was here that I thought about the meaning of living in Hiroshima.
The citizens of Hiroshima and Nagasaki should all go overseas. Foreigners have no idea about the facts. When I attended the Malaysia Peace Conference, I discovered that most of the participants had never seen images of the bombings. But the names of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are known throughout the world. We'll try to get the citizens to speak to people overseas in their own words more and more. Examining the problem overseas might lead to the arrival of a different situation.
I would like to tell you about some of the things we have been working on recently. With the [coercive raising and singing of] Japanese flag and national anthem, and the suicide of headmasters, the prefecture's education committee is unable to arrange a meeting for all the schools to listen to survivors' experiences on August 6th, but we are planning a symposium.
We have set up a working group in order to continue to tell children in public education about the experiences of survivors. We also have a working group on depleted uranium missiles, and plan to form working groups on making Northeast Asia a nuclear-free zone, peace education, and the reprocessing issue (the possession of substances that are the raw materials of nuclear weapons). It's not just the problem of the education committee; I think that maybe the teachers themselves have lost their will to pass on the experiences of survivors. We have been conducting an experiment in which people stand where the bomb was dropped and listen to the experiences of survivors.

Report 5. The thoughts and hopes of the survivors as my own aspirations
Hitomi Shirabe

The 'peace guides' were established in 2004, by the Nagasaki Foundation for the Promotion of Peace in an attempt to pass on the survivors' experience to the next generation. There are currently 90 registered guides, aged between 19 and 86, 26 of whom are survivors. Their average age is 56. The guides have to complete a 16-lesson course and acquire the requisite guiding skills.
Four years ago, when I was showing a friend around the Nagasaki Atomic Bomb Museum, I was shocked to find that I could give no further explanation to the details written on the museum exhibits, or answer my friend's questions. This was made me decide to become a peace guide. Born and raised in Nagasaki, I underwent peace tuition every August as an elementary school student, and thought that I had experienced the bomb at first hand. But after that, I didn't really think about it any further. It made me realize that I had no real awareness of peace, something I thought was naturally a part of me.
The main work of the peace guides is to show people around the Nagasaki Atomic Bomb Museum, where we give an explanatory tour lasting about one hour. Each guide take the tour around 20 times a year. In the six months from April to September this year, 7,632 people were shown around, at an average rate of 42 per day. The guides for the monument tour, which has to be booked in advance, will take those who want to go on a two-hour walk around the relics of the atomic bombing. Over the same period, 4,262 people, an average of 23 each day, went on this tour.
I have also attended a few events on my own. Held annually on August 8th to 9th, the Youth Forum is attended by delegations of youngsters sent by local governments across the nation and young people from Nagasaki, in an attempt to provide learning and interaction about the truth of the bombings and respect for peace. This year's event was the 14th, and it was attended by 395 people from 26 organizations. The youngest peace guide, who is a 19-year-old university student, and myself held a peace lesson that people could participate in, in which we showed slides and provided commentary on the themes of 'the horror of the atom bomb' and 'nuclear weapons now and in the future'. The explanation involved difficult terms like 'initial radiation', 'residual radiation' and 'hydrogen bombs', and I was worried that the elementary school students might not understand. But the children's interest were actually stimulated by hearing unfamiliar terms, and they asked lots of questions.
The Nagasaki Peace 8/10 Summit 2006, organized by a committee composed of university and high school students and held for the ninth time this year, was an event intended to launch new efforts on the peace issue held on August 10th, the day after the anniversary of the bombing of Nagasaki. This year, both survivors and peace guides attended for the first time, and an exchange of opinions about how to pass on the experiences of survivors was held, and I also attended as one of the peace guides. Some of the students from Nagasaki University commented that peace education had forced them into a state of denial, that one-sidedly making the abolition of nuclear weapons the final goal could lead to the obstruction of individual freedom of thought, and that they didn't feel any need to pass on the survivors' experiences. Students seriously involved in peace activities in Hiroshima said that students' views on peace vary, and that they were unsure about how to continue their activities, allowing the audience to gain an honest view of their thoughts.
Sixty-one years have passed since the atomic bombing, the present Nagasaki city is covered with buildings and the hills that the survivors climbed over to escape the burning town are once again covered in trees. Most of the relics of the bombing that showed the terrible situation of that time have disappeared, and perhaps the generations that do not know war are unable to gain a real sense of the atomic bombing. The tragedy of war around the world is broadcasted on the news, but people can't make the connection to the fact that the same thing happened here in 1945. Are the regular peace lessons conducted here every August a passive affair, or is it a day for the eager exchange of opinions and thought? I think that the very fact that peace education is still given every year is important.
Many schools from outside Nagasaki Prefecture visit us each year to undergo peace education as a part of their school trip. A look at the trend in the number of tourists visiting Nagasaki and the number visiting the Atomic Bomb Museum shows, with the exception of 2005, a decline. The number of school children visiting is also declining. One reason may be the falling birthrate, but the trend for school trips to be more leisure-oriented is certainly another reason. The other day, a report on the television claimed that peace education was not enough to halt the declining number of school trips to Hiroshima, and described attempts to gain more visitors by including other features such as chances to eat some of Hiroshima's famous dishes. While I have reservations about making peace education part of a tourist package, I want visitors to come for whatever reason. I think that we should emphasize that people will be able to hear about the bombing and war experiences if they visit us. With the spread of the Internet, we live in an era in which information and knowledge can be gained without actually going anywhere, but I think that in the case of peace education, it is vital that people visit the place where it actually happened, and come into contact with what was left.
My generation is still able to hear the accounts of our grandparents, our parents and other people around us, but the chances for out children are decreasing. They show little interest because it isn't something they experienced, and I am in a situation in which I cannot find a chance to pass on these stories to them. This role is currently filled by the survivors, who tell the children about the horrors of the atomic bomb in the form of classes about their experiences. Perhaps we, the generation who are their parents, should lean once more about the truth of the bomb, think about the importance of passing it on, and create a base for doing so. In order to do so it is important that we have a place where people can learn when they feel interest in the subject and share information, so that even few more people gain a better awareness of peace. And in order to encourage a wide perspective and always retain a sense that is in line with the modern times, I think we need a place where people from all generations can exchange their opinions.
Last year, just after having started as a peace guide, I was depressed for a while because I had doubts about someone like me who was born after the war giving explanations in line with the manual, and worried that I wouldn't be able to get across the significance of the historic remains and documents. But survivors helped me by saying that they didn't want to see the people who were trying to pass on the experiences being put off by whether or not they had experienced the bomb themselves, that I should weave in to the story elements that would get across the terror of it to children, that having doubts will in fact help to improve the activities in the future and overcoming these will make me a broader person. These words are a support to me now as I do my peace guide work. Recently, I think that I am too busy learning that I am just talking to people without any purpose, and worry that I am not getting across the message. When I am guiding, I don't just talk about the horrors of the bomb, but tell people about the importance of the Japanese knowing about it as the citizens of the only country that had been attacked by the atomic bomb, and the continued menace of nuclear weapons. I try to speak in a way so that each age group will understand, and use photographs and the testimonies of survivors to make up for the parts that cannot be explained by words alone. I ask children questions and chat while I am guiding so that it doesn't sound as though I am just making a speech.
I'm not yet sure what is the 'correct' way to pass on the history of the bombings, but I try to talk about the thoughts and aspirations of the survivors as if they were my own, and hope to find a way to create a fresh passing on of their experiences.

Questions from the audience and comments from the panelists: Towards a vertical and horizontal alliance

The questions from the floor covered a number of subjects. Some of the activities introduced included Project 50, an attempt to pass on atom bomb experiences being carried out in Tokyo. One person reported that they had become convinced that people overseas understand about the issue if are told of it, and another, speaking about the potential of Hidankyo described how the group's name carries a lot of weight at the UN headquarters. The need for interaction with second generation survivors and peace guides, and the need for exchanges of opinion were pointed out in response to the reports of Chizuko Obama and Hitomi Cho. It was also pointed out that unless the importance of diverse ways of thought and mutual learning and freedom of expression are properly respected, a profound perception cannot be reached. On the subject of peace education, it was suggested that the differing attitudes of the children visiting the Atomic Bomb Museum may depend on whether or not their teachers have made them fully aware of the purpose of their visits; since this is a reflection of the teachers' sense of purpose, perhaps approaching the teachers is important. There was a comment that the situation in Hiroshima, which has lost a place to conduct public education about the experience of the atomic bombing, should be regarded as a crisis for the next generation. Concerns were also raised about the difference in the level of interest between Nagasaki and [the neighboring city of] Sasebo, and the low level of the public's attention to the recent fire at the former US Army ammunition depot in Maebatake, and the radiation leaks caused by discharges from nuclear submarines. In the light of remarks that Cabinet members and senior ruling party politicians have made about accepting the possession of nuclear weapons, it was suggested that the testimony by survivors alone is not enough, and that the movement must broaden its scope. It was emphasized that the movement must not solely consist of survivors, and should include an alliance with other people. Another point raised was that while it is important to convey the experiences of survivors, there is a danger that the movement may run out of steam, and they need to be organically tied in with current topical issues like the nuclear problem. The importance of a perspective in which the truth about the atomic bomb experiences is explained to the nuclear nations, placed in the context of world history, and linked with what was going on in the world at the time of the bombings was also raised. Concerning the roots of the problem and the passing on of experiences, it was suggested that since the public's basic understanding of the atomic bomb (what atoms are, what nuclear weapons are etc.) is weak, efforts should be made to give them basic knowledge.
After this wide range of questions, opinions and suggestions was completed, the speakers each gave a brief summery of their views. The main points were: 1) the public education situation is not promising, but there is no need to become overly pessimistic, there is a need to realize that there are grounds for hope (like the Central Asia Nuclear-free Zone); 2) the experiences should be passed on vertically from generation to generation, and horizontally by simultaneously spreading them from Nagasaki and Hiroshima to the rest of the nation and the rest of the world; support is needed for first and second generation survivors, and it maybe in this that the secret of succession lies.
The forum had been prepared with the keywords of the movement's roots and the passing on of survivors experiences, but it also appeared as though the awareness of the vertical and horizontal spread of the movement was affirmed during the debate. In which case, the way that the problem is framed should not be limited to the question of succession. Perhaps the word 'alliance' would be more suitable, an alliance that includes both vertical and horizontal directions (intergenerational alliances, survivors and other people, alliances between survivors etc.). This is what I finally felt as a coordinator.