CHORNOBYL: life “before” and “after”

The Chornobyl disaster is an event whose true significance for our nation, and all of humanity, we are just beginning to comprehend. Twenty years is too short a time for society to realize, at least “in the first approximation,” how this disaster has changed our life. What is clear is that it has created enormous problems — not just of a purely technological nature but also a colossal array of socio-humanitarian issues that are accumulating with every passing year. Among them are the fate of the hundreds of thousands of people who have returned to the contaminated zone, the impact of this notorious zone on human awareness, the ability of high — and low-ranking bureaucrats to carry out their duties in a fitting manner, and the pressing need to describe in literature the immense world of our compatriots, the Ukrainians of Polissia, who were so brutally ravaged by the Chornobyl disaster.

Finally, have we really grasped the impact of this global disaster on Ukrainian national history?

These are many questions. Fully understanding that we will find ways to solve these problems only through the joint efforts of technological specialists, liberal arts scholars, and the best representatives of the national art world, The Day invited a high-profile team of experts on the whole range of Chornobyl problems to take part in a roundtable debate.

The participants included Lina KOSTENKO, the grande dame of contemporary Ukrainian literature and a regular participant in ethnographic expeditions to the “zone of alienation;” Prof. Valeriy SMOLIY, director of the Institute of the History of Ukraine; professor of history Stanislav KULCHYTSKY, deputy director of the same institute; Serhiy PARASHYN, chief of the Zone of Alienation, ex-manager of the Chornobyl Power Plant; Natalia BARANOVSKA, research associate at the Institute of the History of Ukraine; and Yuriy SAYENKO, head of a polling team that conducts surveys of post-Chornobyl Ukraine.

As the reader will see, the discussion was complex. But Chornobyl is not a topic of discussion that allows for “slicked-up” half-truths, which are usually the hallmark of an ambiguous social and personal ethical position.

CHORNOBYL AS THE DEATH THROES OF THE SOVIET REGIME

“Twenty years have passed since the Chornobyl tragedy. Do you think the consequences and the very essence of this phenomenon have left their imprint on the consciousness of Ukrainians?”

Stanislav KULCHYTSKY: “I would say this left its imprint on the consciousness of the entire world. As to what place Chornobyl occupies in the 20 th -century modern Ukrainian history (and I’d like to put Chornobyl in this very context because I deal with problems of modern history), all I can say is that this disaster is the natural finale of all the woes and tragedies that befell the Ukrainian people from 1914 onwards.”

“Indeed, in 1914 the Ukrainians suddenly found themselves ‘on the opposite sides of the barricades,’ on both sides of the front-line, when the war, like a terrible juggernaut, was crushing all living things on our land. That was Ukraine’s first tragedy in the 20 th century — World War One. Since that time, our national tragedies seemed to “increase exponentially”: the famine of 1921, the Holodomor of 1932-1933, history’s most shocking World War Two whose outcome was decided to a large extent by the battles that were fought on Ukrainian territory, then one more, postwar, manmade famine, and the deportations. Chornobyl was in fact the logical conclusion of all this. It will be recalled that 1986 signaled not so much the beginning of the liberalization of the regime that had existed in the USSR since 1917 as the death throes of that regime.”

“I think Rebecca Harms (a Green Party member of the European Parliament) was correct when she noted that ‘the collapse of the Soviet Union was also partly caused by the Chornobyl Power Plant accident.’ Although Ms. Harms is not an expert on Soviet history and her postulates are to some extent intuitive, we can agree that what she said was absolutely correct.

“One should also remember that the Chornobyl accident burned a staggering 100-billion-ruble hole in the USSR state budget. In his fascinating book, The Soviet Union: a History of Power in 1945-1991, the Moscow-based historian and archivist Rudolf Pikhoia quotes the important minutes of CPSU Politburo sessions in 1986, 1987, and later years, which were devoted to Chornobyl problems. These documents convincingly prove what I have said. In other words, we can conclude that Chornobyl (even from a purely financial angle) was one of the factors that forced Mikhail Gorbachev, who had tried to carry out some reforms in 1985-1987, to institute truly profound and qualitative social transformations and, above all, constitutional reform, which in fact meant none other than the separation of the Communist Party from the state. In other words, bureaucratic restructuring began to turn into a revolutionary upsurge. And the period of 1990-1991 is a revolution and the disintegration of the old system. This is the significance of Chornobyl.”

THE CHORNOBYL SYNDROME: MYTHS AND REALITIES

“Was Chornobyl the last of the disasters to befall Ukraine since 1914, or did we enter a phase of totally different hardships in 1986?”

Valeriy SMOLIY: “It is difficult to say something categorical and unambiguous. Apparently, this is the very logic of our history: even now Ukrainians are burdened with the consequences of all the manmade famines, repressions, and deportations. But I will confess that my chief worry now is different. Look, when do we tend to address the problems of Chornobyl? — on the fifth, tenth, and now the twentieth anniversary of the tragedy, when public attention is naturally on the rise. But I can predict that after April 26 this problem will again drift out of focus. This is what worries me the most.”

“Perhaps this ‘selective memory’ explains why our history is so tragic?”

Valery SMOLIY: “Of course. And, whether or not we want it, Chornobyl is now an integral part of our lives and our consciousness because the people who were born in the year of the tragedy are now 20 years old — they are adults, and they have grown up with the ‘Chornobyl syndrome’ in their hearts. Serhiy Parashyn (I am sure he will support me) and I would like to radically change the vision of the entire set of Chornobyl-related problems. I can remember holding a scholarly conference 15 years ago, in 1991, right in Chornobyl. Why did we do that? To put across to people a very simple and crucial truth: life continues!”

“You mentioned the ‘Chornobyl syndrome.’ What is it?”

Valery SMOLIY: “It is the panicky fear of Chornobyl. It is a deeply rooted, subconscious fear, frequently unmotivated, no matter what the actual level of radiation is and to what extent water, air, and food are really contaminated. This syndrome is typical of Ukrainians living in various regions — in the center, the west, and the north. People grow up with this syndrome, and it is likely to remain forever.”

Lina KOSTENKO: “For your information, there are also people who do not have this syndrome, this unmotivated fear. Those who work in our expedition are free of it. They just don’t have it. These people work without fear.”

Valery SMOLIY: “I don’t doubt it, but the question is different. It is the question of social awareness.”

Natalia BARANOVSKA: “I would like to talk not so much about the Chornobyl syndrome as about another important phenomenon. It seems to me that now (not only in Ukraine but all over the world) society is divided into those who came to grips with the Chornobyl problems, who felt the tragedy affect them and their children, and those who didn’t. These people are absolutely indifferent to all the Chornobyl problems. They don’t want to hear about this pain. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people like that both here and abroad.

“Now about the syndrome and fear: in 1999 I came to Chornobyl to work in the archives. I was put up in the very same dormitory room in which Lina Kostenko had stayed for a week before me. It just dawned on me that she had had no fear at all. And I will confess that I was really afraid, very much afraid, when I went there the first time. When the road turns and you see this terrible, black silhouette of Chornobyl, your heart suddenly begins to thump. Then, as time went by, I realized how many people had gone through this zone and worked there for so long. I hadn’t.”

“How does the Chornobyl syndrome characterize our society, if you take into account the socio-humanitarian aspects of the problem?”

Serhiy PARASHYN: “I will say bluntly: I just did not come across anything resembling the ‘Chornobyl syndrome’ in my work (both when I was the Chornobyl power plant manager and now). Professionals are too busy to succumb to this syndrome: first of all they do their job; they do it well and reliably in Chornobyl.

But when these professionals go outside the zone, they encounter the Chornobyl syndrome, first of all, in everyday life. Everybody must subconsciously have his own ‘image’ of radiation, but when the course of events throws a person out of his normal routine (a sudden squall of panicky rumors or a trip to the mysterious zone), then this ‘image’ jumps out and focuses on you.

“In my view, this is a purely psychological and partly social (but not medical) phenomenon: subconscious fear in fact often provokes all kinds of serious ailments. But please believe my 20-year experience: true professionals do not die.

“Another thing: the radiation to which the power plant’s personnel is now exposed is 10 percent of the permissible level. This permissible dose is two and a half times lower than the one that existed 20 years ago. This cannot be compared to the doses to which the nuclear plant personnel were exposed a few decades ago. But even then people lived, worked, and were happy.

So the point is really not radiation. For example, I believe that small doses of radiation are beneficial to health, while large doses are, of course, a totally different matter. I am convinced that if we succeed in vanquishing this subconscious fear, the ‘Chornobyl syndrome’ will vanish. This is an important task for the government. I think the problem is that our administrative bodies have been working intuitively for many years, relying on the average person’s perception of Chornobyl rather than on experts.”

REHABILITATION OF MAN

“What is the most important problem that is stopping us from overcoming the consequences of the disaster?”

Yuriy SAYENKO: “The sociological surveys that we have been conducting since 1994 show that the public’s fear of another Chornobyl accident is on the wane, as is the fear of having one’s health impaired as a result of the disaster. All over Ukraine the percentage of those with this fear has dropped from 70 to 35%.

“In my opinion, the main problem is different. The point is that, although the purely technological effects of the accident have been successfully reduced to a minimum (I can say this definitely now), the social effects are rising catastrophically. This is causing great alarm. Frankly speaking, I am surprised that the international and Ukrainian communities very often assess this accident by Soviet standards: they focus on the technical aspect, i.e., on machines and funds rather than on people. In the Soviet era there were also upbeat reports about the number of factories, etc., built but nothing was said about people.

We talk very little about what has changed in our society after the disaster, and the truth is that society is degrading. Economic, social, and cultural life in the zone has ground to a halt, and only now are we beginning to discuss its revival. So the eradication of the accident’s social consequences, i.e., the rehabilitation of man as a social being, is in its infancy.

“Another important aspect that we cannot possibly ignore is that victims’ consciousness has lost the category of the future. Too many of these people believe that neither they nor their children have a future. Incidentally, in a way this echoes the national mood. What does our society usually do? We tackle problems of the past, and Chornobyl is, of course, a colossal problem from the past. But a healthy society should live for the sake of its future.”

OPTIMISTIC TRAGEDY

“Should the state create an atmosphere of optimism?”

Lina KOSTENKO: “Optimism is a more difficult thing. I still want to say that, although I am soon going to be called a ‘populist’ (which is not true), I still derive joy from having met the people of Chornobyl — this was a great fortune for me. And do you know where I found the future of my nation there? — in cemeteries: dead villages but living cemeteries. A few scenes from the village of Lopachychi have left their imprint on my mind: a day of remembrance, a graveyard, ravens perched on a pine tree. Young people with children (many, many children) are standing by the graves of their relatives; the children telling me in beautiful Ukrainian how they love their homeland, while their parents have lost it.

“When people have to abandon their birthplace, they begin to understand the concept of a fatherland. Indeed, this is an incredible land. Even if you are a born pessimist (I am a pessimist because tragic Ukrainian history causes me permanent pain, and, moreover, I swore off writing historical novels in verse, especially after Berestechko), you feel altogether differently in Chornobyl. You see genuine optimism there. The documentary material that I wrote about the zone (and in it) is really dear to me. You see, suppose you are writing a tragic thing, but then somebody smiles — this is what I call a shocking transformation.”

“Still, what does society have to do with the notorious Zone of Alienation? What could the authorities suggest to the people who have experienced the tragedy of resettlement?”

Natalia BARANOVSKA: “I would like to see the unique materials of Lina Kostenko’s expedition at least recorded, duly kept and, still better, published.”

Lina KOSTENKO: “And who said that they are not being published? Four volumes of eyewitness testimonies from the villagers of Mashyve (on the Belarusian border) have already been published, and volume five is forthcoming. Mashyve is the zone’s extreme northern point. I would like to share some impressions with you. This is a relatively undamaged village with many unbroken windows. There is a signboard on the highway next to the village, on which somebody, maybe a resettler, drew an arrow and wrote. ‘We have gone.’ And a snake is crawling across this arrow.”

Natalia BARANOVSKA: “There once was a well-known book series entitled A History of Soviet Ukraine’s Cities and Villages. I got the idea to publish a similar series entitled A History of the Cities and Villages of the Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant’s Zone of Alienation.”

THE ZONE AS A REAL “UKRAINA INCOGNITA”

Lina KOSTENKO: “I fully support this idea. Another thing, Ms. Ivshyna: you have beautiful books, first of all, Ukraina Incognita. Yet there is another terrible and tragic Ukraina Incognita — the Chornobyl Power Plant’s Zone of Alienation. Those who know the zone’s history and current state also know that it has its own stalkers (do you remember Andrei Tarkovsky’s film? Now that is reality! But some people walked out of the screenings because they were just bored.)

“For some reason almost everybody thinks that the zone is 30 kilometers around the power plant, and that’s it. That’s not quite true. There are endless villages and hamlets outside of the zone. Let me give you just one example: Poliske in northern Kyiv oblast. The contamination level there is no lower than in Prypyat, but who knows this? I still remember those terrible burned-down villages that you see when you are leaving the zone (by the way, there are almost no police checkpoints there).

“One more picture: in peacetime, in the heart of a peaceful state, near Ovruch, there are three checkpoints where documents are closely scrutinized. Then comes the turn-off to the dead villages. I ask the soldiers, ‘Why are you guys checking so strictly? This is no longer the Chornobyl zone.’ They say in reply, ‘You know, there are villages near Ovruch, where the radiation is higher than in the zone.’ Incidentally, I’d like to ask you, Mr. Parashyn, if radiation is really that high in Chornobyl.”

“DEPORTATION OF A PROBLEM”

Serhiy PARASHYN: “The point is not radiation. The point is neglect.”

Lina KOSTENKO: “How could it have been neglected to such a degree? This is a typical Soviet-era approach that I could call ‘deporting a problem.’ This is the same pattern and approach that they used to ‘deport’ the Polissian Ukrainians, the native inhabitants of Chornobyl and its environs, they deported an entire ethnos.”

Valeriy SMOLIY: “Ms. Kostenko, then what do you suggest? Do you think they should not have been resettled?”

Serhiy PARASHYN: “Of course they should have been, but...”

Lina KOSTENKO: “It is government officials who should have thought about this ‘but.’ At the time of the explosion at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in the US in 1979, I was living for a few months very close to the station, but I didn’t even know that they were in trouble.”

“Chornobyl clearly signaled the collapse of the Soviet system, it spotlighted the strong and weak points of the USSR. What does the accident clean-up policy in independent Ukraine indicate?”

Serhiy PARASHYN: “It shows that we have not yet solved a host of problems. These are: technological problems (the plant was shut down but not decommissioned), related problems of funding, as well as medical and social aspects. Ms. Kostenko has described a stunning picture of the abandoned villages. But the main problem is that there is no good manager.”

Lina KOSTENKO: “I’d like to get back to the problem of resettlement. No doubt, people needed to be resettled, but not the way the Polissian residents were: they were just taken and dumped God knows where, even Kirovohrad oblast, which had its own well-known problems.”

Stanislav KULCHYTSKY: “In addition, we still cannot drop the old habit of tackling acute problems on the very eve of jubilees and then forgetting about them for 5 or 10 years. What is badly needed here is public-outreach efforts, and here much depends on Den/The Day because your books are well read and respected.”

“In other words, there are ‘memory gaps.’ So how do Chornobyl and our perception of this tragedy look in this context?”

Stanislav KULCHYTSKY: “Chornobyl is not just history, it is our present-day life. Whether or not we understand and wish it, there will be reminders of it even in 400 years. We must be aware of this.”