It wasn't until late last year that I became interested in the Lop Nor region of the Xinjiang province, probably about the time when I wrote the article about our proud new addition to the area: the world's largest fertilizer plant. Since that time I've slowly been researching the history and development of the region - mostly out of personal curiosity - and making notes from what I see on Google Earth. I wasn't planning on writing about it any time soon except yesterday I ran across a Times Online article which was absolutely fascinating. I wanted to share a few of the facts from this article as well as some other numbers I've run across myself just as a reminder to everybody, including myself, the horrible costs of living in a nuclear world.
Facts
- From 1964 to 1996 China tested 46 nuclear devices in Xinjiang's Lop Nor region (sometimes spelled "Lop Nur").
- Of these tests, 23 were in the atmosphere, 22 were underground, and one explosion failed.
- The price of the first bomb was roughly equal to a third of the entire state budget for the year 1957
- As part of the nuclear experiments, a full-scale Beijing subway station was constructed as well as many buildings and roads which can still be seen from satellite images today.
- China's three biggest tests generated 4 million times more radioactivity than the Chernobyl disaster.
- Takada, a Japanese physicist, has calculated that over 1.48 million people have been exposed to contamination over the 32 years that these tests were conducted not including the estimated 190,000 people who have died.
Perspective
- Before the NPT, the US tested over 1,000 nuclear devices.
- Nuclear accidents in the US, which weren't uncommon (ex: Castle Bravo), as well as mass radiation exposure forced lawmakers to pass the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) in 1990 to help pay the medical bills of those who had worked at or lived near the nuclear test sites.
- China built nuclear weapons because of the US and the USSR. The USSR built weapons because of the US. The US built nuclear weapons during WWII because they were afraid Germany might get the upper hand. It's all just a bunch of dominos.
Opinion
It's a shame that all of this has to happen, not to mention the trillions, not billions, of dollars that have been spent in development, transport and waste disposal. Soon China is going to have to own up and pass something similar to the RECA, some form of compensation for the workers and people who lived near the test sites, especially because most of those affected happen to be minorities.
Read the article below. It's crazy. What are your thoughts?
Sources:
TimesOnline: Revole Stirs among China's Nuclear Ghosts
NTI.org: Lop Nor Nuclear Weapons Test Base
19 Comments:
My gosh, I was astounded by this, and appreciated the reminder the US is not clean handed either.
Bravo on using the U.S. as a standard of comparison... I've wondered about Lop Nur as well, but it will be a post for another time. I am so excited that I can read this without dealing with the firewall!
Re: Uyghur divorce, it is a lot more common than we both think (but still much less than America). There's a huge divide between cultural practices of urban and rural populations to consider.
@TTWC - I'm with you...shocked by the numbers. To think that all of it is just a race to one-up-manship.
@Saku Uzala - Ahh! I'm free! Probably won't last long (especially after this post), but I'm glad you were able to comment.
You seem to have a better grasp of the Uyghur stuff than I do (you and Porfiriy)...you ought to do a short post on divorce among the Uyghurs. I'd be interested to read it and I'd definitely link to it.
Incredibly insightful, my friend!
This is a very interesting article about Lop Nor. Though I haven't been to Lop Nor, I have always wanted to take that route.
I recently found this website and really enjoy it. I am sure I will be back again soon!
Losang, glad to see you here. Never run across your Tibet website before, but I'm hoping to make it down south in the next year so I'll be stopping by in the near future.
but its a deadly game of dominoes!
Hek
The entire nuclear issue is disturbing. Britain had a first strike response set during the cold war if Hong Kong was invaded by the PRC. Given the history of Hong Kong, I don't find this surprising.
I've often read about American fears relating to China's nuclear arsenal. If you read about it, both its size and state of readiness, it's less worrisome that the USA or USSR.
Hi,Steve, I think your opinion is very funny. Do you think UK would protect HK with nuclear weapons? If so, UK would throw the bomb to HK?
The first nuclear test of UK was in 1952 (in Australia) while China's first test was in 1964. UK developed nuclear weapons because UK is a small country and has less strategic depth. So UK thought the nuclear weapons could keep UK safe and keep UK being a important country in the world.
Why China wanted to develop nuclear weapons?
Because US(MacArthur) threatened to use nuclear weapons to China during Korean war.
Anonymous, MacArthur's threat (which I can't verify) would have been made during the Korean War, under the umbrella of the Cold War. Even during this "internal" conflict there were much bigger players in this fight - namely the US and the USSR.
Mao was also keen to quickly develop some nukes because Beijing's relationship with Moscow had taken a turn for the worse. Fears of the U.S. in the east and the USSR in the northwest (especially their claims to parts of Xinjiang here - particularly the Ili Valley) was quite a motivation.
@ Anon: That's not opinion, but fact. It was UK Military Doctrine that an invasion of Hong Kong by PRC forces would result in a nuclear strike on the mainland. A deterrent, as Hong Kong could be easily taken by the PLA.
Deng Xiaoping's comment to Margaret Thatcher in their 1982 meeting was (paraphrased), "We (China) can take Hong Kong any time we want." A nuclear strike option was the only deterrent available to the UK.
@Josh: Apologies, this is off topic.
@Steve: No problem. Very interesting stuff I wasn't aware of before.
@Josh: During Korean war, one side was "UN", another side was NK, China (and SU). At that time, SU had its own nuclear weapons. Please do some reasearch why Truman fired MacArthur?
@Steve: UK even gave up India and other places, but wanted to protect HK? Funny. Why Mao didnot take over HK? Because western countries blocked China, but HK was a great channel to import sth China wanted. (you may know China and UK established agency diplomatic relations in 1954.) That's one of important reasons that HK developed very fast after the 2nd world war.
As for UK, the focal point was in Europe or NA, not far east. Even China took over HK, UK could do nothing. You may know HMS Amethyst incident.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Amethyst_(F116)
@anon: The Amethyst incident has little to do with the discussion.
The British wanted to keep Hong Kong. During the treaty and hand-over discussion they were willing to return the New Territories to China, and keep Kowloon and Hong Kong Island. This was unacceptable to China.
The colony was their last remaining outpost, and, economically and strategically important. A nuclear deterrent to keep it is not only fact, but completely believable.
And, without Hong Kong as part of the UK, where would washed-up Brits go for a second chance? hehe.
I agree with you that UK never wanted to return HK to China. Thatcher just wanted to return New Territories. Deng disagreed. But the talk happened in 1980s not 1952.
Believe me, if you said "UK developed nuclear weapons because of China." to Chinese, they will laugh you.
I think the real answer was SU and East European countries.
@Anon - I'm sorry I don't have the time to research why MacArthur was fired, but I do know that blaming MacArthur for China's foray into nuclear arms is an over-simplification. Much more was at play.
Forgive me if my Korean War history isn't solid, but I think this whole discussion serves to further prove my point that this is just a ridiculous game of dangerous dominoes within the international community. I am not justifying the US role in all of this - I believe I made that clear in the above article - I think everybody is shooting themselves in the foot by spending all this money and risking all these lives. 190,000 people dying just because of nuclear testing? That's unnecessary and sad.
@Josh, I agree with you. Nuclear weapons are bad things for human and should be eliminated.
By the way I do not understand why US treat Israel and Iran so differently？Israel can have, but Iran cannot. If Israel didnot have NW, Iran has no excuse to develope NW.
Sorry Anon...you're asking the wrong guy! My knowledge of US policy in Israel and Iraq is terrible. Right now I'm doing my best just trying to keep up with this region of the world.
I appreciate all your comments, by the way. Wouldn't mind if you added a name, though, even if it is a pseudonym. Just makes the conversation more "personal" when I don't have to type "Dear Mr. Anonymous...", you know?
Post a Comment
Comment Guidelines:
*Comments that do not abide by these guidelines will be deleted*