Category Archives: History

Atomic Obsession: Nuclear Alarmism from Hiroshima to Al-Qaeda

Posted on by

The front flap of John Mueller’s book begins with, “Ever since the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, the prospect of nuclear annihilation has haunted the modern world. And since September 11, 2001 the view that nuclear terrorism is the most serious threat to security of the United State or, for that matter, of the world has been virtually universal.” The author then goes to great lengths to say the risks have been exaggerated… Chapter 5 begins with “Although nuclear weapons seem to have had at most a quite limited substantive impact on actual historical evens…they had a tremendous influence on our agonies and obsessions.” The antinuclear movement is mentioned as an example of the agonies and obsessions.

The author says in the Preface he wanted the book to be a remedy for insomnia and that the purpose is to put to rest “…excessive anxiety about nuclear weapons.”  Many others have created anxiety with warnings about al Qaeda acquiring nuclear bombs and the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran. There were similar warnings about China, India, and Pakistan, but no calamity has yet resulted by those nations joining the “nuclear club.”

Part 1 is about the effects of nuclear weapons. “Beyond doubt, nuclear weapons are the most effective devices ever fabricated for killing vast numbers of people…” However, Part 2 discusses why nuclear weapons have had an exaggerated role in international politics. The author repeatedly mentions the enormous financial and resource costs in development of massive arsenals in the United States, the former Soviet Union, and other countries that would have been better spent on other ventures.

Risks from radiation that would be released by a “dirty bomb” are exaggerated because “…ghoulish copy sells.”  The greatest risk would be caused by the panic by people who have been inculcated that even traces of radioactive materials are deadly. About 20 percent of the general population will develop cancer, and people in the area where a “dirty bomb” is exploded will have a barely measurable increase in risk. Chernobyl raised the risk of thyroid cancer, but the risk of other cancers was increased by less than one percentage point with no increase in birth defects. (I expect some readers will object to this statement and many others from the book.)

There is interesting information postulating that the Soviets never wanted to see World War III; the memories of the horrors and massive losses of World War II told them another world war was to be avoided. “Indeed, three central rules for Soviet leaders were ‘avoid adventures, do not yield to provocation, and know when to stop’.” They did know when to stop during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Khrushchev said there was not a single person among the Communist leaders who believed that the Soviets “…could defeat the United States, or that we were seriously preparing for a nuclear war with the United States. No one, as far as I know, had this absurd notion.” The United States demonstrated its manufacturing might to the Soviets during World War II by supplying them with hundreds of thousands of military vehicles, millions of boots, and “…over one-half pound of food for every Soviet soldier for every day of the war (much of it Spam).”

Some countries that had nuclear weapons decided to not keep them. South Africa dismantled theirs after deciding they were more trouble than they were worth. Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan sent the weapons in their countries back to Russia after the Soviet Union collapsed. The Ukraine in particular wanted no part of nuclear weapons with the memories of Chernobyl. Libya terminated its nuclear weapons development program when it noticed the ease with which Iraqi military was defeated.  

I bogged down because of the redundancies in the book, but became reenergized by Chapter 10 titled “Costs of the Proliferation Fixation,” and Iraq takes center stage. Economic sanctions imposed against Iraq over many years did little to weaken Saddam Hussein. However they did result in “…hundreds of thousands of deaths in the country, most of them children under the age of five…” Madeleine Albright, the Ambassador to the United Nations, was asked on a 60 Minute show whether it was worth it to have a million children die as the result of sanctions. Albright did not dispute the number and answered, “We think the price is worth it.” She later said she regretted her answer. The comments “…went completely unremarked upon by the country’s media. Osama bin Laden did use the sanctions as a centerpiece of his diatribes against Americans. Several hundred thousand Iraqis would then die in the war that began in 2003 with the premise that an invasion was justified because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. (See the blog posting titled “Which President Lied About Weapons of Mass Destruction?” for more information.)

The policy of punishing countries wanting to build nuclear weapons continues. Sanctions are in place against North Korea where millions of people are now underfed or starving. North Korea was called “the world’s first nuclear-armed, missile-wielding beggar.”  They have been able to “…hit the Pacific Ocean several times…” with their missiles. Their policy seems to be more extortion than aggression. Sanctions are increasing against Iran where citizens are also suffering.

Part III titled “The Atomic Terrorist” analyzes whether it is likely al Qaeda or some other terrorist group will be able to acquire and use nuclear weapons. The short answer is that it is quite unlikely. Terrorist wouldn’t be able to arm and use a stolen weapon because of all the safeguards all countries build into their weapons. It is also unlikely that a country would sell weapons to terrorists, since forensics after a blast would easily trace the weapon back to its source. No country would be willing to face the certain response to such an act.

The author gave me pause to be skeptical about the views presented in the book by writing that 85 foreign policy experts were polled on whether there would be a nuclear explosion in the world in the next ten years. They “…concluded on average that there was a 29 percent likelihood…” That doesn’t sound sufficiently unlikely to make me comfortable. The author disagrees. Referring back to his goal of curing insomnia by putting fears to rest, he closes the book by saying most states do not want nuclear weapons and they are out of reach of terrorists. “Sleep well.

There are positions taken by the author which disagree with other sources. He trivializes the effect of Soviet espionage against the U.S. during World War II. I’m guessing he never read about the results of the Venona project, which identified hundreds of Soviet agents in the U.S. government and military. Soviet agents were able to steal information and material that allowed the successful recreation of the Trinity nuclear device. He also writes that North Korea had to convince Stalin about their plans to invade the south. Other books report Stalin demanded the invasion as the North Koreans insisted their forces weren’t ready. All of this reinforces the thoughts of the brilliant person who said “History is interpretive.”

Common Ground, How to Stop the Partisan War That Is Destroying America

Posted on by

I was attracted to this book because I liked the concept of staunch Conservative Cal Thomas coauthoring a book with staunch Liberal Bob Beckel. However, the book misses the mark. There book predicts a less partisan election campaign in 2008 because Barrack Obama was a likely Democratic candidate, and he was viewed by the authors as a moderate. One passage is that “Senator Barrack Obama has already embraced the call for common ground (and an end to polarization) in his campaign for president…”.

I found it difficult to believe that two such astute political observers could misinterpret by such a wide margin. Mr. Obama was the most liberal Senator when he began his campaign. He followed the standard game plan of campaigning to gain votes from the hard left liberals in the primaries and then portrayed himself as moving to the middle in the Presidential campaign. I believe it is safe to say President Obama has not been the moderate unifier predicted by the authors

I believe the book has value for the analysis of recent political history that has led to radical polarization of the two political parties. The far right and left have both been encouraged by the news media’s thirst for stories of conflict. The book criticizes recent leaders of both parties for contributing to the polarization.

It is also pointed out that JFK was given a free ride on his sexual escapades while other politicians have been forced out for less. There is no holding back on what the book calls “bottom feeders,” and Ann Coulter and Michael Moore are named in that category. They are described as “…polarizers who make money by keeping politics inflamed …” MoveOn.org and Focus on the Family are named as organizations that thrive on polarization. “Polarizers could care less about unity. Indeed, finding common ground and consensus is their worst nightmare, especially for the bottom feeders.”

The authors lay a large portion of blame for the evolution of polarization on voters. Middle American stays home for the primaries while political activists select the candidates for the general election. Politicians are clever enough to try to appeal to their base to gain the nomination. It also doesn’t help that moderate voters are showing up in declining numbers in general elections. For some reason not well explained, the authors predict that polarization is coming to an end. That prediction is, for the present, widely off the mark.

The quotes that lead off the individual chapters are the part of the book I enjoyed the most, and the quote leading off Chapter 3 about the impact of voters is a good example. “Bad officials are elected by good citizens, who do not vote.”

Mr. Beckel and Mr. Thomas give arguments for their Liberal/Conservative positions in the preface to the book. One would think that my Libertarian leanings would make me more sympathetic to the Conservative argument. Not so. I agreed with many of Mr. Thomas’s statements, but give Mr. Beckel credit for what I thought was a better presentation.

One of my favorite descriptions of how partisan polarization is destructive is the McCain/Kennedy immigration bill that attempted to “thread the needle” and begin to solve a very difficult problem. The bill was gathering strong support from both parties, and the Bush White House announced support, “…but Harry Reid was not about to let it pass.” Reid could not allow Bush to get credit for a legislative victory. He used a parliamentary maneuver to delay the bill and talk radio eventually destroyed any hope of the legislation being passed.

The book declares that the designation of Red and Blue states is a myth, because Middle America is in basic agreement on most issues regardless of the section of the country. “To characterize an entire state as Republican or Democrat base on the popular vote to one candidate is absurd.” Ohio was given a red state designation because 50.5 percent voted for George Bush over John Kerry. The red state label has stuck despite the fact Ohio has several Democrats in their congressional delegation. In the quest to “color” states, Ohio should be called a blue state.

The book does give at least a partial answer to the puzzling question as to why blacks are dominantly Democrats despite years of “Jim Crow” laws advocated by that party in the past. “The dramatic shift occurred in 1960 when an overwhelming number of black voters—many loyal to the Republicans since Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation a century earlier—moved their allegiance to the Democrats…President Lyndon Johnson sealed that allegiance by signing the Voting Rights Act, the Fair Housing Act, and the 1965 Civil Rights Act.” (Legislation opposed by many Southern Democrats.)

Another interesting cultural observation is that blue-collar workers who voted dominantly Democrat saw their sons go to Vietnam while sons of white-collar workers went to college under draft deferments. Growing opposition to that war has led to the Democrats being the party considered to be soft on commitment to national defense.

President Carter advocated reorganizing and streamlining the government, but the large Democratic margins in the House and Senate resisted along with increased lobbying by Liberal special interest groups. All Carter accomplished was flooding Washington D.C. with lobbyists, and the flood hasn’t diminished. Challenges to Carter and then to Ford by their own parties resulted in the political extremists becoming more dominant and moderates becoming more irrelevant. Winston Churchill said, “Some men change their parties for the sake of principles; others their principles for the sake of their party.” An unknown author offered the opinion, “Why pay money to have your family tree traced; go into politics and your opponents will do it for you.”

There is an interesting reminder of the Clinton’s taking up health care as their first priority. The famous “Harry and Louise” commercials showing a couple talking about how the proposed bill would hurt them was instrumental in killing it.

The book was worth reading to find the passage about George McGovern opening an inn after he lost the 1980 election. He said in a Wall Street Journal interview, “…if he had known how difficult it was to run a business, he might have voted differently while in Congress.”

However, the book reminds me in the closing pages how wrong the authors viewed Obama. “Senator Barrack Obama’s message in his presidential campaign is closer, so far, to a common ground message than that of any other candidate in either party.” Cal Thomas does give a warning. “I like Obama’s language, but I want to make sure it isn’t a cover for liberal policies…”

Coming Apart, The State of White America 1960-2010

Posted on by

Charles Murray has written this book to describe the formation of American classes that represent a remarkable societal change during the last fifty years. I found the book to be difficult to read despite the fact that I was interested in the overall subject. I sometimes wished for more analysis and less raw data.

The author writes that November 22, 1963 “…became the symbolic first day of what would be known as the Sixties and the cultural transformation…” That was the day after the ashen-faced Walter Cronkite announced that President Kennedy had been assassinated.

The discussion of the early sixties is very interesting. There were limited choices in television stations, and you either saw a movie in the theatre or never saw it (absent DVDs and TiVo). People drove cars made in America, and there were few places where you could go out to a meal with ethnic food. Movies and television were carefully watched to eliminate any hints of racy themes or profanity. Marriage was nearly universal, and divorces were rare. A federal court had declared that the book Fanny Hill couldn’t be sent through the mail despite the fact it was well-written. The court wrote that “…filth, even if wrapped in the finest packaging, is still filth.” The North and South were both segregated, although laws allowing segregation in the North were gone. Most women were expected to stay in the home, and those who wanted to work did so as secretaries or teachers. There were few illegal drugs. Twenty percent of the country fell below the poverty line, but, the statistic I found most startling, was that 95 percent of Americans called themselves working or middle class. That means that most poor people did not believe they were “lower class.”

The author writes “This book is about an evolution in American society that has taken place since November 21, 1963, leading to the formation of classes that are different in kind and in their degree of separation from anything that the nation has ever know. I will argue that the divergence into these separate classes, if it continues, will end what has made America America.”  He often refers to the “American Project” in which he describes that people left free to live their lives as they see fit was the basis for what made the nation such a powerful force in the world. He fears that “…America is coming apart at the seams—not seams of race and ethnicity, but of class”

Part 1 is titled “The Formation of a New Upper Class.” He defines the “Narrow Elite” as those who wield political and economic power. They are the owners and top executives of companies, news media, lawyers and physicians, college executives, and city officials. The children in the families of the new upper class have so many activities outside of school that they don’t have time to be children. The new upper class has become separated from the rest of society, and has become dominantly liberal. The people from the upper class neighborhoods of the four largest cities voted 64% strict liberal and 3% leaning liberal 2002 to 2008.

The new upper class is almost exclusively college educated. The lower end of wages for the top percent of taxpayers was in the $200,000 into the early 1990s, but that number had escalated to $441,000 by 2010. The people of this class are effectively segregated from the rest of the country. They tend to be isolated into what the author describes as “Super Zips,” or zip codes where the very wealthy are congregated. Some of these people have been called overeducated elitist snobs, or OES. They make decisions affecting the lives of everyone else, but increasingly don’t know much about how everybody else lives.

Blacks and Latinos constitute only 3 percent of the Super Zip population, but there is a higher percentage of Asians than what would be expected for their share of the population. On the issue of race, the author predicts that whites will be the minority by midcentury or sooner.

The book analyzes neighborhoods called Belmont (upper class) and Fishtown (working class) to discuss what has happened to marriage, industriousness, honesty, and religiosity. Most people of Belmont (just about 90%) are married, the family is intact, the unemployment rate is low, and few have become criminals. In Fishtown the marriage rate has dropped to below 60%, over 20% of the children live in a single parent home, unemployment is more than the national average, and criminal convictions have increased markedly. The only graph that looks similar for the two towns is the one that shows how many “nonbelievers” there are (about 20% in both towns). Self-reported happiness has declined to about 40% in Belmont and a disturbing 20% in Fishtown.

Despite the fact that the subtitle of the book is “The State of White America 1960-2010,” the author reveals that “Expanding the data to all Americans makes hardly any difference at all.” “Coming Apart” may have told the story of white America, but its message is about all of America. It is predicted that we are on the path to no longer being a “super power,”, and unless things change everything that has made the country exceptional will disappear. This is happening because we are handing over the meeting of human needs “…to bureaucracies—the bluntest, clumsiest of all tools for giving people the kind of help they need.”  We seem to want to mimic Europe where “The purpose of life is to while away the time between birth and death as pleasantly as possible.” He observes that the more we pass laws and regulations, the closer we move to the European welfare state, and the American Project will be dead.

One of the harshest statements the author makes is how the members of the new upper class won’t use derogatory labels for anyone, including criminals. “When you get down to it, it is not acceptable in the new upper class to use derogatory labels for anyone, with three exceptions: people with differing political views, fundamentalist Christians, and rural working-class whites.”

The book does leave hope that a new awakening will overtake the country. This could be based on the “…most lovable of exceptional American qualities: our tradition of insisting that we are part of the middle class even if we aren’t, and of interacting with our fellow citizens as if we were all middle class.” That will require that the American new upper class “…must once again fall in love with what makes America different.”

Night of the Silver Stars: The Battle of Lang Vei

Posted on by

This book by William R. Phillips is an account of battle which began February 6, 1968 at a U.S. Special Forces Camp in Vietnam. This “review” is a departure from what is usually posted, because it is based partly on the book, partly on historical information, and partly on information presented at a recent military reunion by one of the men who was in the battle.

The battle was part of the Khe Sahn campaign by the North Vietnamese. That campaign began with an attack on a Laotian outpost called Ban Huoei Sane manned by 700 Laotian soldiers. Tanks were used in that attack, and the surprised Laotians retreated toward Lang Vei after three hours of battle. The North Vietnamese soldiers and tanks followed to attack Lang Vei where there was a small contingent of U.S. Special Forces and a large number of Laotian and South Vietnamese soldiers. Reinforcements were requested from the Marines at nearby Khe Sahn, but that base refused to believe the reports and send reinforcements. They were skeptical that the report was some sort of ploy to set up an ambush for reinforcements. They did provide artillery support and there was air support.

Three of the North Vietnamese tanks attacking Lang Vei were destroyed by the camp’s one 106mm recoilless rifle operated by Sergeant First Class James W. Holt. However, other tanks quickly penetrated the camp and destroyed several bunkers with their guns. Light anti-tank weapons (LAWs) either malfunctioned or failed to knock out the tanks. One of my favorite comments in the book was by a soldier who observed that the tanks must be “medium tanks,” because the “light anti-tank weapons” (which refers to the portability and not the strength of the weapon) were ineffective.

The command bunker was the only position that held until the morning of February 7. South Vietnamese soldiers in the bunker responded to an order to surrender and were killed when they exited via the stairway. Wikipedia lists that there were a total of 316 camp defenders killed, 75 wounded, and 253 captured.

The title of the book reflects the extraordinary number of Silver Stars awarded for valor in combat. There were twenty-four Americans at the battle, and there was one posthumous Medal of Honor awarded to Sgt. Eugene Ashley, Jr., one Distinguished Service Cross, nineteen Silver Stars, and three Bronze Stars awarded. One reference lists that all of the Americans were either killed (3), wounded (11), or listed as missing or captured (10). Wikipedia gives different numbers, but I am inclined to believe this reference.

The book is full of details about weapons, vehicles, and tactics. Phillips gives an engaging account of the battle, what went well, and what went wrong. Despite all that went wrong a few U.S. Special Forces personnel were eventually able to fight their way out and escape from the camp to be evacuated by Marine helicopters.

I will briefly summarize the personal experience of Paul Longgrear who was an American officer at the battle, although I know I won’t do his account justice. He was one of the men trapped in the command bunker. The NVA attempted unsuccessfully to collapse the bunker with the weight of their tanks and began dropping fragmentation and tear gas (CS) grenades into vents. The tear gas caused the occupants to press their faces into corners of the bunker in a desperate attempt to find some kind of fresh air. They finally decided to make a break, obviously knowing what had happened to the South Vietnamese who had attempted to surrender. Lt. Longgrear ordered that no one was to stop for anyone else if they went down. They had practically no ammunition, but charged up the stairwell and into the open while firing what few rounds they had remaining.

Lt. Longgrear fired his weapon until it jammed, and then began running. His ankle gave out, and he did a complete flip. He was left by the other escaping soldiers as he had ordered. He said he was challenged by God as he lay in a heap “What are you going to do NOW?” He ran to the top of a rise where he was seen by the other soldiers who had thought the reason he went down so dramatically was that he had been hit. He made it out of the compound and was evacuated. He was awarded a Silver Star for his actions in the battle.

Killing for Coal, America’s Deadliest Labor War

Posted on by

This book by Thomas G. Andrews begins with a description of the United Mine Worker strike in Colorado in 1913  that lasted several months. Violence could finally no longer be contained, and on April 20, 1914 open warfare broke out between the Colorado state militia and “…hundreds of striking coal miners of more than a dozen nationalities.” The canvas tents at Ludlow where the miners and their families were living caught fire, and two women and eleven children were asphyxiated in their cellar hideout. The book does not speculate on which side fired the first shot, but both sides blamed the other. There were many killed by the time the “Ten Days War” ended when President Woodrow Wilson sent in federal troops. The author says that a key premise of current politics continues to be that fairness and justice for working people must be achieved “…through intervention of national unions, the Democratic Party, and the federal government.”

I highly recommend the book. It is well and fairly written, and has fascinating history about the history of Colorado, the land, the environment, the people, and the conflicts between coal miners and mine owners.

The origin of opening the coal mines of Colorado is traced to William Jackson Palmer who had his apprenticeship studying the coal mining industries of England, and he was appalled at some of the working conditions he observed in those mines. “Mine work seemed to turn boys into drones, women into men, and manly laborers into ‘an inferior class of beings’.” Palmer didn’t immediate building a coal mining empire. He organized a Union light cavalry unit to fight in the Civil War. He was a brevet general by the end of the war and thus was the highest ranking Quaker on either side of the conflict. The end of the war freed Palmer to begin building an empire seeking to extract coal, or “buried sunshine” and begin powering the transformation of Colorado. Industry (mostly blast furnaces and smelters), trains, and homes were fueled. Farming prospered because there was energy to pump irritation water out of the Ogallala aquifer. Of course the air smelled of smoke from the burned coal. A Denver Post cartoon celebrated the end of a strike in 1899 and “…depicted the welcome return of inky black billows to the urban skyline above a caption that said…Prosperity.”  Beneath “…the glitter of gold and silver (of Colorado mining) lay the grime of coal.”

Palmer stated that he intended to pay workers enough to have some left for saving and investing. He also gave them the opportunities for stock options and profit sharing. Coal barons who followed were less interested in the welfare of the miners.

The descriptions of the broad diversity of the nationalities of the coal miners, or colliers, who were lured to Colorado from far reaches of the world by the promise of well-paying jobs, is an interesting component of the book. Agents developed credit systems for destitute people who wanted to immigrate and the transportation lines profited as the number of immigrants swelled. The harsh conditions made me wonder why someone would travel across the planet to work in the mines. One mine inspector wrote that “…it seems that death lurks…” Electrification brought exposed wires, cages carrying the workers to the depths sometimes smashed, and power drills created clouds of choking dust. These hazards were added to the risk of death from explosion, cave in, carbon monoxide and other toxins in addition to  the physical problems from working deep underground in heat with poor lighting and performing back-breaking labor. George Orwell once wrote, “Watching coal-miners work you realize momentarily what different universes different people inhabit.” There were 1,708 Colorado mine deaths between 1884 and 1912.

There are some descriptions of the mines that are on the light-hearted side. The mines were often inhabited by large numbers of mice, and the men welcomed and fed and even named them. The men found the playful and harmless creatures a welcome distraction from the long hours working under dangerous conditions. The mice were also the miners “canaries,” since they were very susceptible to very small amounts of carbon monoxide and were vibrations that warned of a roof cracking overhead. The miners watched the mice closely and responded if one keeled over or scurried away. Mules were a different story. The animals were bred to be either quite large or small, to match the height of the mines. However, almost all of the mules contributed to earning the description “stubborn as a mule.”

The men were paid by the tons of coal they mined and not for “dead work” involving activities such as building supporting timbers. They would gamble with their lives by skimping on erecting support structures to maximize the time they could be mining coal. The toiling men and animals depleted oxygen by breathing heavily from their labors, and made them, among other symptoms, indifferent, because of the low oxygen content of the mine air. There were atmospheric conditions the miners called “stinkdamp” (hydrogen sulfide), “blackdamp” (carbon monoxide mixed with other noxious vapors), “afterdamp” (heavy concentrations of carbon monoxide), and “firedamp” (methane).

The latter part of the book describes how the union grew stronger as the resentment for the working conditions and pay of the miners increased. The story is told with significant human interest insights. As an example, it is told how an African American working with an Italian immigrant enjoyed pointing out that at the end of the shift they were both black. But there was little if any humor in the dealings of the companies with the union, and labor relations worsened steadily. The union made seven demands when they went on strike in 1912. The first demand was that the union be recognized. The other six demanded better pay, better working conditions, and ending the “company town” practice. Colorado Governor Ammons initially chose not to intervene. He was warned of the volatility in the Ludlow camp, and relented to send state militiamen after there had been several gun battles.

Ammons summoned three Union officials and three key company executives to his office for a marathon negotiation to settle the strike. The company officials announced they were ready to agree to all of the union demands with the exception of recognizing the union. The union men held fast to that being the most important demand. They said “…that only through a union could they educate green men, settle grievances, and uphold the miners’ self-determined laws of safety and mutualism.” The meeting therefore failed to reach an agreement, and outrageous behavior continued on both sides while the people of Colorado worried about a “coal famine.”

President Wilson responded to the escalating violence by sending in federal troops, and the strike zone was declared “silent.” The costly fifteen-month struggle was ended by a unanimous vote by the miners.

My favorite line in the book is in the Acknowledgments, where the author describes the struggles at researching the complex history and writing the book. He writes, “History isn’t Rocket Science—it’s harder.”

Wormwood Forest, A Natural History of Chernobyl

Posted on by

This book by Mary Mycio was given to me by a friend who told me I would love it. He was right. It describes the explosion at the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant in 1986 that scattered 20-40 tons of radioactive materials across large areas of the Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia. The area is designated the “Zone of Alienation,” and 350,000 people were evacuated and resettled. There are over four million people still living in areas that are contaminated with at least one curie of cesium per square kilometer. The book has detailed information about the levels of contamination of the Zone and the effects on the animals, plants, insects, and fungus. Many sections are difficult to read because of the amount of technical information. However, I’m glad I read it.

The book begins with a quote from Revelation to explain the title. The quote is about a star called Wormwood that falls on the earth “…and the third part of the waters become wormwood; and many men died of the waters because they were made bitter.” Chornobyl is the Ukrainian name for the wormwood plant and Chernobyl is “…the Russianized version…”   The wormwood herb and other plants have thrived since the reactor disaster. There have been effects, such as pine trees that have grown into distorted shapes called “pine bushes.”

It was believed people would never be able to enter many areas contaminated by the disaster, but the author joined the fad of “atomic tourism” by obtaining permits to tour the Zone wearing her camouflage protective clothing and dosimeter. She writes she was shocked to discover the area “…has become Europe’s largest wildlife sanctuary, a flourishing—at times unearthly—wilderness teeming with large animals…” There are large herds of wild boars, healthy populations of wolves and lynx because of the proliferation of their prey, wild horses, and a large variety of birds. The author observes that “…very little is known about the radioactive animals of Chernobyl. What is known is that there are many, many more of them than before the disaster.

The book is undoubtedly controversial in many aspects. For example the author writes although plutonium is a heavy metal and therefore toxic, the myth that it is the “…deadliest substance known to man…” is not accurate. There are other toxins such as arsenic that win that distinction. I expect the effects on people and the various species described in the book will reinforce the opinions of those who oppose nuclear power and the general absence of longer term devastating effects will reinforce the opinions of those who are proponents. One of the author’s tour guides observed that there has not been mutant animals in the zone. He admitted when pressed that “Because with wild animals, mutants die.” Toads and frogs often develop malformations when exposed to toxins, but those are seen more often in the United States than in the Zone.

There were hundreds of children exposed to radioactive iodine who developed thyroid cancer. However, “… perhaps one of the greatest mysteries is the disaster’s impact on people.” “Samosels,” or squatters, originally hid to prevent being evacuated from the Zone. They are dying at the expected ages despite being exposed to twice the maximum dose “allowed.” “Moreover, it seems impossible to tease the health effects of radiation out of the tangle of poverty, alcoholism, smoking, poor diet, and other factors that plague public health in the the places in the former Soviet Union that were unaffected by Chernobyl and that made life expectancy—especially among men—the lowest in Europe.” It is also observed the Samosels inhale “…too little plutonium to influence their dose.”

The “involuntary park” (a term coined by science fiction writer Bruce Sterling) appears to be proving wildlife will thrive after being made radioactive by cesium, iodine, strontium, and plutonium where there is little human activity. Touring the Zone converted the author from “…adamant opponent of nuclear energy to ambivalent support—at least for giving a window of time for reducing our dependence on fossil fuels…” She describes how she believed life would be mutated if it managed to survive the holocaust, but Chernobyl showed her a different view. The ghost towns are a “…tragic testimony to the devastating effects of technology gone awry. But life in the Wormwood Forest was not only persevering, it was flourishing.”  Of course there were and are numerous media ventures to “…exploit Chernobyl’s inherent spookiness.”

There are interesting bits of historical background about the areas impacted by the disaster. For example, it is mentioned that Stalin’s forced collectivization created an artificial famine in the Ukraine that starved ten million people to death in 1932-1933. There are also bits that were fun to read. One example is that the ugly blob that formed after the reactor meltdown cooled is called the “elephant foot.” The authorities wanted to take a sample, so a machine gun was fired at the blob until a chip came off.

One of my favorite passages in the book was a discussion of the author attending a third grade class trip to the New York Hall of Science. There was a terrarium with a sign: “The Impact of Radiation on Rats.” There was nothing in the terrarium except plants, and author decided the radiation had made the rats invisible. Another passage tells a joke about a “babushka” selling apples labeled “Chernobyl.” A passerby notes that no one will buy apples from there and is told people will certainly buy them for their husband, wife, and mother-in-law.

I was interested in the author’s willingness to expose herself to the radiation levels during her tours. She writes she did not wear a cumulative dosimeter. She calculated an estimated exposure of a few hundred millirems, which isn’t much, but she judged her exposure to be “enough.”

Anyone interested in taking a tour of the Zone of Alienation around Chernobyl should read this book. Approval for a visit is obtained by sending a fax to Chernobylinterinform.

I’m going to let the author have the final say with words written in her closing. “If a nuclear disaster really is …in your metaphoric backyard…it seems best not to think about it too much. Not, at least, until many years have passed, and the bountiful evidence of nature’s nearly miraculous resilience and recovery makes the thinking more bearable.”