1980s In The Soviet Union

"I must say frankly that I was shaken by the events of the Congress’s first working day. Pressing a button decided the fate not only of the President but also of restructuring and democratization. Can this be normal? Comrade democrats, in the broadest sense of the word, you have scattered, the reformers have taken to the bushes. A dictatorship is coming-I say this in no uncertain terms. No one knows what kind of dictatorship it will be, what kind of dictator will come to power, or what kind of system will be established. I want to make the following announcement: I am resigning. Let this be my protest, if you will, against the coming of a dictatorship. I express deep gratitude to M. S. Gorbachev. I am his friend, and we share the same views. I have always supported the ideas of restructuring, the ideas of renewal and the ideas of democratization, and will support them to the end of my days. We have accomplished great things in the international arena, but I believe that this is my duty as a man, as a citizen, as a Communist. I cannot reconcile myself to the events that are taking place in our country, to the ordeals that await our people. Nevertheless, I believe that a dictatorship will not succeed, and that the future belongs to democracy and freedom."

"Let me also say this: The promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach – condemnation without discussion – can carry forward only a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door. In light of the Cultural Revolution’s horrors, Nixon’s meeting with Mao appeared inexcusable – and yet it surely helped set China on a path where millions of its citizens have been lifted from poverty and connected to open societies. Pope John Paul’s engagement with Poland created space not just for the Catholic Church, but for labor leaders like Lech Walesa. Ronald Reagan’s efforts on arms control and embrace of perestroika not only improved relations with the Soviet Union, but empowered dissidents throughout Eastern Europe. There’s no simple formula here. But we must try as best we can to balance isolation and engagement, pressure and incentives, so that human rights and dignity are advanced over time."

"In the 1950's, Khrushchev predicted: "We will bury you." But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind-too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor. And now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed. Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state control. Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"

"Let me cite one of the most eloquent contemporary passages on human freedom. It comes, not from the literature of America, but from this country, from one of the greatest writers of the 20th century, Boris Pasternak, in the novel Dr. Zhivago.' He writes: "I think that if the beast who sleeps in man could be held down by threats -- any kind of threat, whether of jail or of retribution after death -- then the highest emblem of humanity would be the lion tamer in the circus with his whip, not the prophet who sacrificed himself. But this is just the point -- what has for centuries raised man above the beast is not the cudgel, but an inward music -- the irresistible power of unarmed truth. The irresistible power of unarmed truth. Today the world looks expectantly to signs of change, steps toward greater freedom in the Soviet Union. We watch and we hope as we see positive changes taking place. There are some, I know, in your society who fear that change will bring only disruption and discontinuity, who fear to embrace the hope of the future -- sometimes it takes faith. It's like that scene in the cowboy movie Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, which some here in Moscow recently had a chance to see. The posse is closing in on the two outlaws, Butch and Sundance, who find themselves trapped on the edge of a cliff, with a sheer drop of hundreds of feet to the raging rapids below. Butch turns to Sundance and says their only hope is to jump into the river below, but Sundance refuses. He says he'd rather fight it out with the posse, even though they're hopelessly outnumbered. Butch says that's suicide and urges him to jump, but Sundance still refuses and finally admits, "I can't swim. Butch breaks up laughing and says, "You crazy fool, the fall will probably kill you. And, by the way, both Butch and Sundance made it, in case you didn't see the movie. I think what I've just been talking about is perestroika and what its goals are."

"But change would not mean rejection of the past. Like a tree growing strong through the seasons, rooted in the Earth and drawing life from the Sun, so, too, positive change must be rooted in traditional values -- in the land, in culture, in family and community -- and it must take its life from the eternal things, from the source of all life, which is faith. Such change will lead to new understandings, new opportunities, to a broader future in which the tradition is not supplanted but finds its full flowering. That is the future beckoning to your generation. At the same time, we should remember that reform that is not institutionalized will always be insecure. Such freedom will always be looking over its shoulder. A bird on a tether, no matter how long the rope, can always be pulled back. And that is why, in my conversation with General Secretary Gorbachev, I have spoken of how important it is to institutionalize change -- to put guarantees on reform. And we've been talking together about one sad reminder of a divided world: the Berlin Wall. It's time to remove the barriers that keep people apart."

"I've come to Moscow with this human rights agenda because, as I suggested, it is our belief that this is a moment of hope. The new Soviet leaders appear to grasp the connection between certain freedoms and economic growth. The freedom to keep the fruits of one's own labor, for example, is a freedom that the present reforms seem to be enlarging. We hope that one freedom will lead to another and another; that the Soviet Government will understand that it is the individual who is always the source of economic creativity, the inquiring mind that produces a technical breakthrough, the imagination that conceives of new products and markets; and that in order for the individual to create, he must have a sense of just that -- his own individuality, his own self-worth. He must sense that others respect him and, yes, that his nation respects him -- respects him enough to grant him all his human rights. This, as I said, is our hope; yet whatever the future may bring, the commitment of the United States will nevertheless remain unshakable on human rights. On the fundamental dignity of the human person, there can be no relenting, for now we must work for more, always more."

"Probably never in past decades has the USSR Government been obliged to put forward such a difficult and extraordinarily crucial report on measures which, in essence, really determine how the people are to live in the future. It is precisely this circumstance that obliges me to address not only you, members of the USSR Supreme Soviet, but also all the citizens of our country. I am convinced that the extremely difficult tasks and problems which the government has set out in its report on the country’s economic situation and the concept for a transition to a regulated market economy will catch the attention of every Soviet person. For, in essence, the transformations which we are to implement will predetermine the lifestyle and destiny not only of the present generation, but of future generations too. The country has been consistently drawing closer to this decisive step-I shall put it bluntly–over the whole five years of perestroika. We have been advancing toward it through radical changes and profound, far from painless reinterpretation of all our views of socialism; through reevaluation of the essence of such concepts as democratization, ownership, the market enterprise; through a new understanding of the role and position of the individual in the system of economic management; and much else. We have come to decisions which very recently were uncharacteristic and uncustomary for our public opinion. Therefore, I assume it is understandable how complex, crucial, and intense the work carried out by the government over the past months has been."

"First, the market is a condition for a radical restructuring of the system of economic management which has come about; for the very fundamental changes in production relations and; in the final analysis, the formation of a qualitatively new cast for our entire economy. The moment has come when we must take a decisive step, since the old economic system has lost its viability and a new one must be created without delay. Second, such a fundamental restructuring of economic life, and on such a scale, is without direct analogy either in our own or in foreign practice. The specific conditions do not permit the transfer of anyone else’s experience to our social system on a one-for-one basis, although on the whole, everything which is useful and acceptable of that experience accumulated abroad has to be used. But to ensure complete success we need largely nontraditional and at times completely new solutions. Third, the complexity of the problems which we will inevitably come up against in the near future quite naturally provokes an enormous scattering of views on possible ways of overcoming them. All of this had to be taken into account in the course of preparing the concept. All central economic bodies were involved in its elaboration. The more important tenets were discussed at conferences with the leaders of enterprises of industry and agriculture; with workers in the system of material and technical provision, of financial bodies, banks; with economic scholars; and the heads of government of the union republics."

"In China, they started on limited economic reform first but it was beginning to succeed in producing more goods for the people—on a limited scale certainly, but it was beginning to succeed. You cannot get economic reform really going well and with a future unless you get political liberty. That was what they found. We have always known it. Here, I think it was perhaps the wiser way to start: to start with the political reform, the thorough discussion. After all, new ideas come out of discussion and free interplay of ideas and discussion between one and the other. The glasnost as it is called, has gone very far very quickly, far further, far faster than we thought and I think that plus the communication of the ideas will in the end lead to much greater prosperity. I think the point that I have to make again is that although the politicians at the top—led by Mr. Gorbachev—could bring about the glasnost, it requires the practical and willing cooperation of the people to enlarge their responsibility and their activity to bring success in economic reform. I believe that will come about. I believe that the changes—the glasnost—really have become permanent because they have gone so much further than anything we thought and they have given a so much better atmosphere and less tension—the fear seems to have gone—and so I believe that perestroika is now set upon its course and that it will go through to success."

"After the XX Congress, in an ultra-narrow circle of our closest friends and associates, we often discussed the problems of democratization of the country and society. We chose a simple – like a sledgehammer – method of propagating the "ideas" of late Lenin. A group of true, not imaginary reformers developed (of course, orally) the following plan: to strike with the authority of Lenin at Stalin, at Stalinism. And then, if successful, – to strike with Plekhanov and Social Democracy - at Lenin, and then – with liberalism and "moral socialism" – at revolutionarism in general... The Soviet totalitarian regime could be destroyed only through glasnost and totalitarian party discipline, while hiding behind the interests of improving socialism. [...] Looking back, I can proudly say that a clever, but very simple tactic – the mechanisms of totalitarianism against the system of totalitarianism – has worked."

"After I was elected chairman of the Supreme Soviet of Russia, I committed one very important tactical blunder. I trusted Gorbachev. It seemed to me that an alliance with Gorbachev might become very important in stabilizing the situation both in the republics and in the country as a whole. And many people urged me on. Our joint work on the 500-day program brought the interests of a renewed union of republics and the center even closer together. Gorbachev had admitted publicly that the Shatalin-Iavlinskii program looked very interesting and promising to him. It seemed to me that all we had to do was take one more step, and we could walk together onto the road which would lead us out of the crisis. But that didn’t happen. He suddenly changed his position drastically, and the 500-day program collapsed, burying any hopes with it for a way out of the impasse. Instead of breaking with Gorbachev and firmly divorcing myself from the president’s policies of half steps, half measures, and half reforms, I fell prey to the illusion that we could still reach an agreement. But, as it turned out, it was impossible to make an agreement with a president who is simultaneously the general secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist party and to whom the interests of the party caste and the party elite will always take precedence over any other interests. And so we lost four months. We didn’t get anywhere by supporting Moscow indirectly by our silence. On February 19, in a live broadcast on Central Television, I had enough courage to tell the viewers that I was dissociating myself from Gorbachev’s policies. It would have been impossible and immoral for me to continue to watch without a murmur while the current leadership dragged the country toward chaos and catastrophe by trying to preserve the rotten system."

"Regardless of the reasons given for his removal, we are dealing with a rightist, reactionary, anti-constitutional coup. Despite all the difficulties and severe trials being experienced by the people, the democratic process in the country is acquiring an increasingly broad sweep and an irreversible character. The peoples of Russia are becoming masters of their destiny. The uncontrolled powers of unconstitutional organs have been considerably limited, and this includes party organs."

"Without resolving the question of power there are no revolutions. Our present-day revolution is no exception. The transfer of a large part of incomes, rights, and social privileges from the top stories of the social pyramid to the lower is connected with the redistribution of power. This is a profoundly democratic action, but it is understandable that it can only be carried out by encroaching on the interests of those groups who occupy a privileged position today, primarily the apparatus of party, soviet, and economic management. The principle of the radical redistribution of power is “built into” the very concept of perestroika, and that is what makes it a social revolution. Fundamental transformations are required to lead our society onto a Leninist path of socialist development. But it would be premature to conclude from the fact that these changes are essential that they are already taking place, in other words, that the measures that are being implemented in society are of a revolutionary nature. To assert this would mean deceiving ourselves and others. From my viewpoint, the system of measures that are being implemented so far can be assessed only as a rather incomprehensive, contradictory reform based on many compromises, a reform whose pace and only slight efficiency are so far curbing society’s development. We have yet to attain genuinely revolutionary transformations. Or, to be more precise, they must be won in a hard sociopolitical struggle that will markedly change today’s balance of social forces."

"The perestroika of social relations is not being implemented in an empty space, but rather where the vitally important interests of different classes, strata, and groups of our society intersect. Each of them is seeking to protect its own interests, to achieve their implementation, and to prevent a threat to them. The professional demands made on leaders under the new conditions are naturally growing. Labor is becoming more complex, and the intellectual level it requires is increasing. This alone is enough for a proportion of leaders to take a conservative stance, to be in no hurry to make practical changes in production management methods. To these factors we must add insufficient thought and the inconsistencies and confusion that inevitably arise in connection with the first attempts to switch enterprises to new conditions of economic management. This is expanding still further the circle of leaders who are displeased by the course of perestroika. While supporting the fundamental concept of perestroika they believe that it is not being implemented, that many of the innovations that are actually being introduced are in fact only consolidating a leadership based on administration through command."

"Under the conditions of antagonism of the interests of different social groups, an attempt to ease conflicts can in reality result in the emasculation of the main ideas of perestroika. And a one-sided orientation toward compromises, an excessive fear of offending the interests of a particular group will delay progress. Then the slow progress of perestroika will lead to acute dissatisfaction among working people, although it is being implemented precisely in their interests. The implementation of a thoughtful strategy for managing perestroika will make it possible to accelerate the progress of the revolution. After all, it is only the convinced, self- sacrificing participation of the broadest masses which can ensure its victory. Social revolution implemented through the efforts of the apparatchiks, revolution “from above” cannot work. It should be the business of those who are vitally interested in it: the progressive section of workers, kolkhoz members, and the intelligentsia. It is essential to sharply intensify their influence on the progress of perestroika. The theses show how much can be done if you alter the political power structure."

"Those who ran the American government did not want to learn that the Soviets had been honestly confused and panic-stricken about the enemy intruder."

"Roger, Korean Air 007...ah, we are experiencing..."

"Stand by. Stand by. Stand by. Stand by. Set."

"Five days after the Soviets shot down KAL 007, I went on nationwide television to urge that all of us in the civilized world make sure such an atrocity never happens again. And I pledged to you that night, we would cooperate with other countries to improve the safety of civil aviation, asking them to join us in not accepting the Soviet airline Aeroflot as a normal member of the international civil air community -- not, that is, until the Soviets satisfy the cries of humanity for justice."

"There were no circumstances that can justify the unprecedented attack on an unarmed commercial aircraft."

"I don't know anything - just that my mother is dead."

"Help me get my daughter back - I want my daughter back! Please, please help me!"

"I am heartbroken and have had nightmares because my best friend is dead. My Daddy and Mummy told me that some Russian men killed her and many, many other people, too. I asked Daddy why the Russians are so cruel. Yuen Wai-Sum was eight and was my best friend. Now we can never play together again. Why? You are the leader of the Russians, can you tell me why Russians have to kill her? I want to name offerings to Wai-Sum, to give her some fresh flowers and to pay respect to her spirit. May I? You are the leader. If you say yes, then it must be okay."

"Question I asked myself when I heard of his death is “Why Loc, of all people?” It seemed so unfair. Why not some multiple murderer on death row or some drunken bum? Worst of all, why did he die the way he did? I could understand and handle the death of a friend from diseases, but for him to be shot down on an airliner hurts me to the bottom of my soul."

"We have been struggling for years to know what happened to our loved ones. Now we face the agonizing recognition that their death was neither painless nor instant."

"The plane was over Soviet territory for about two hours, so it can hardly be assumed that this was an unplanned action. We should make it clear in our statements that this was a gross violation of international conventions. It is no use keeping quiet now, we must go on the offensive."

"There have been many books written about KAL 007 in the West, but the only living eyewitnesses to this tragedy are in the Soviet Union. The world is interested in the facts of what happened. But for me, what is most important is that ordinary Soviet citizens are opening their lips after so many years of silence. By talking, we become normal people."

"I am far from thinking that the blame for this tragedy lies entirely on us. The passengers on board KAL 007 had become the hostages of two great powers colliding with each other. They were condemned to die."

"I was just next to him, on the same altitude, 150 meters to 200 meters away. I saw two rows of windows and knew that this was a Boeing. I knew this was a civilian plane. But for me this meant nothing. It is easy to turn a civilian type of plane into one for military use."

"I would have landed him on our airfield, and I wanted it very much. Do you think I wanted to kill him? I would rather have shared a bottle with him."

"Until we know what final explanation [the Soviets] give and we have made a judgment on that explanation, it is premature to say what we are going to do about it."

"We have found new material on KAL 007. I know that sixty percent of the passengers were American. I am prepared to give you all the materials we have found. Perhaps one possibility is if some family members could come over and meet with me and discuss this. They could bring the materials back to you, including the black box."

"The sophisticated provocation masterminded by the US special services with the use of a South Korean plane is an example of extreme adventurism in politics."

"Within hours, story began circulating in Washington that the Soviets have been involved."

"The recollections bring back some unpleasant feelings. Those events left scars and added some gray hairs to my head. I will always be convinced that I gave the right order. Sometimes, in strategic operations, we had to sacrifice battalions to save the army."

"Cold War international tensions rose to a peak in 1983, with the deployment of Cruise and Pershing missiles in Western Europe exciting Soviet concern and anger, and the Soviets fearing attack under the cover of Able Archer, a NATO military exercise held from 2 to 11 November. Reagan going aloft in his command plane during the exercise worried the Soviets. Moreover, the unrepentant Soviet shooting down on 1 September 1983, over Soviet airspace, of Korean Airlines flight 007, suspected of espionage, increased tension. Two hundred and sixty-nine people, including an American congressman, were on the plane."

"The destruction of the airliner and its immediate aftermath reaffirmed the Soviet Union's and the United States' essential distrust of each other and ended any hope of an immediate solution to the expanding nuclear arms race. Late November 1983 saw the failure of the European peace campaign as the West German parliament voted to accept 108 medium-range Pershing II missiles for deployment and the Reagan administration immediately began shipping missile components. The Soviets, as expected, broke off the strategic arms reduction negotiations in Geneva, accusing Washington of "wrecking" the talks and describing the Germans as "nuclear maniacs.""

"The target is destroyed."

"What civilian? [It] has flown over Kamchatka! It [came] from the ocean without identification. I am giving the order to attack if it crosses the State border."

"In a statement posted on his official website, Zelensky said: “Chernobyl is a unique place on the planet where nature revives after a global man-made disaster, where there is a real “ghost town”. We have to show this place to the world: scientists, ecologists, historians, tourists.” While much of the area has been open to tourists since 2011, the president’s words are likely to boost what some have described as “dark tourism” in the region. That said, Zelensky is keen to develop the region for the better and give it more of a mainstream appeal. During a visit to Chernobyl on Wednesday, the president pledged to transform the “exclusion zone” into “one of the growth points of a new Ukraine.” He added: “First of all, we will create a “green corridor” for tourists.”"

"Among the scientists here, there's deep concern about long-term genetic damage to future generations. In an effort to find answers, Dallas, Chesser and Baker use the fields and abandoned villages around Chernobyl to collect and study radioactive mice. "There's certainly enough radiation here to contaminate those mice and cause genetic effects that we're seeing," observed Dallas. "There's no doubt about that. We just like to know how much it takes before it's a hazard to humans." They run tests on the mice at a nearby makeshift lab, set up in what was once a kindergarten classroom."

"The reason such information is needed is nowhere more obvious than at Chernobyl itself, where another nuclear accident could occur. Danger is increasing in what's left of Reactor 4 -- commonly called "the sarcophagus." The concrete tomb encasing the reactor hasn't held up. And some believe it's a threat to the world. Forty tons of radioactive dust have accumulated inside. And there's a pressed slab of uranium and concrete that some believe could lead to a chain reaction, causing a more powerful explosion than the original one. It's a terrifying possibility. The original explosion spewed radiation throughout Europe, and spread to parts of the rest of the world. Human error, compounded by a faulty technical design, led to the accident. Exposure to massive amounts of radiation immediately killed 32 plant workers and firefighters. Thou-sands more died later from effects of the accident. The Ukrainian government now says hundreds of thousands of people suffer from Chernobyl-related illnesses."

"Ten years later, the radiation remains. It's there in the soil; in the animals; in the people. Few know that better than three American scientists -- toxicologist Cham Dallas and geneticist Ron Chesser, both from the University of Georgia, and Texas Tech geneticist Robert Baker -- who are researching the accident's genetic effects in the shadow of Chernobyl's burned-out Reactor 4. It is research with ramifications beyond the contaminated 30-kilometer zone around Chernobyl. "We live in a society where Chernobyl may not simply remain here," said Dallas. "We may have a Chernobyl in America some day. Either from a nuclear reactor accident, or more likely, from use of a terrorist's nuclear weapon." It is research with relevance for people worldwide. "We are going to need this information. What are the consequences of long-term exposure to radionucleides inside the body? We're going to need to know," Dallas explained."

"Only about 150 elderly people still live in the 19-mile radius exclusion zone, in defiance of authorities. Officials say it will only be safe for humans to live there again in 24,000 years, according to AFP, although with the right paperwork tourists can visit for short periods. “There’s no hunting or fishing there so wildlife is booming,” Ivanchuk told CNN. “Animals that left the area years ago are starting to come back like eagles, wolves and moose. Lynx were recently spotted there for the first time in more than 50 years.” But Olena Burdo, a junior researcher at the radiobiology and radioecolo-gy department of the Kyiv Institute for Nuclear Research, did not welcome the government move. More scientific research and funds for radiobiological study was needed, she told CNN, adding: “But we don’t need so many tourists.”"

"Once at the centre of a 1,000-square-mile exclusion zone, Chernobyl has seen a sharp rise in visitors since an HBO mini-series about the tragedy aired earlier this year. And according to President Volodymyr Zelensky, it is now time for a different narrative surrounding the site. “We must give this territory of Ukraine a new life,” Zelensky said as he signed a decree on Wednesday. “Until now, Chernobyl was a negative part of Ukraine’s brand. It’s time to change it.” On April 26 1986, a reactor at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant exploded, forcing a region-wide evacuation and sending radioactive fallout billowing across Europe. While the explosion itself caused around 31 deaths, mil-lions of people were exposed to dangerous radiation levels. The final death toll as a result of long-term radiation exposure is much disputed. Although the UN predicted up to 9,000 related cancer deaths back in 2005, Greenpeace later estimated up to 200,000 fatalities, taking further health problems connected to the disaster into account. For more than two decades, authorities maintained the exclusion zone around the reactor, including the city of Pripyat, once home to 50,000 people."

"Building an arch in proximity to a nuclear leak has its fair share of challenges. Before construction of the NSC began, workers helped decontaminate the area by removing the top layer of soil along with any potential radioactive material that might have been left behind. After that they poured a layer of concrete over a large area and erected a wall closest to the sarcophagus. During peak construction times, there are around 1,200 employees at the site from over 27 nations. To ensure they are safe from radiation exposure, the millisievert (mSv), or the average accumulated back-ground radiation exposure dose, is closely monitored. The average dental X-ray exposes someone to about 0.014 mSv. A worker in the New Safe Confinement arch is exposed to 0.0075 mSv’s per hour. A new, state-of-the-art changing facility with a capacity for 1,430 workers was built onsite and offers medical and radiation protection facilities. There also is an ambulance on duty, in case of emergencies. In addition, the Chernobyl Shelter Fund provides training facilities, radiation monitoring and medical equipment as well as a medical screening program for the workers, according to the EBRD. All work on site is carried out under the strictest health and safety regulations by a specially trained workforce, according to Bouygues and Vinci. So far there has not been a single case of exposure beyond permissible limits, according to the EBRD."

"Vince Novak, the director of nuclear safety for EBRD, called the Chernobyl disaster “the worst accident that ever happened in nuclear history.” “It’s more than just a shed,” Novak continued. “It is also a workshop. It has to provide an environment in which people will be able to carry out the waste management activities for a period of probably 100 years.”"

"Next to a crumbling nuclear reactor destroyed in an explosion 30 years ago, an unprecedented project in the history of modern engineering is being built. When it’s completed, the New Safe Confinement, or NSC, will be the largest movable object built on land, according to the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, or EBRD. When an explosion tore through Chernobyl’s No. 4 reactor on April 26, 1986, near Pripyat, Ukraine, more than 30 people died and countless others have died from radiation symptoms since, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency and the World Health Organization. The Ukraine government evacuated some 135,000 people from the area and the 19-mile exclusion zone around the plant will re-main uninhabitable for decades."

"The consequence of radiation exposure in fetuses is mostly based on observations rather than based on scientific research. Ethical issues prohibit researching on the fetus. Therefore, most of the data on the impact of radiation on the fetus derives from observations of patients who suffered Japan’s Hiroshima bombing and the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster. Based on the observations made from the victims of the high level of radiation exposure, the consequences of radiation exposure can categorize into four broad groups, including pregnancy loss, malformation, developmental delay or retardation, and carcinogenesis. Pregnancy loss most often happens when radiation exposure happens during early gestation (less than two weeks)."

"Mankind has never experienced a misfortune of this magnitude, with consequences so grave and so hard to eliminate."