This has been the tone of the indepth analyses. Japan’s devastation by earthquake and the tsunami have been submerged beneath the discussions over the Fukushima nuclear plant blowing up and reports of leakage and radiation. As one who is absolutely against a ‘nuclearised’ world, I am afraid that the questions about atomic energy will be relegated to only certain countries in order to keep them in their place.
Even the most powerful nations can go wrong, but before talking about how Japan was told about the possibility of such an outcome given its earthquake-prone history there should have been some introspection. California is prone to quakes and has two nuclear plants; two others were 'retired'. Surely, they have measures to handle an emergency as would Japan.
The US administration that is among the first to land with a thud of commentary will not, interestingly enough, desist from providing nuclear energy in small doses at high cost with a lot of hoopla.
The Shiv Sena is also using the Japan incident to oppose the proposed nuclear power plant at Jaitapur, which has a French connection. There is already opposition to it for our own reasons, primarily the taking over of tribal land. By clubbing it with another tragedy, not only will there be foreign expertise involved in its setting up, should it take place, but also to ‘keep an eye on it’ later. This would be damaging at many levels.
I say this to transpose it against the Union Carbide gas leak in Bhopal. Did the world get concerned about how it would affect all of mankind when industrialisation from outside forces without checks and balances has caused greater devastation?