During the Cold War, the Marshall Islands served as a nuclear testing ground; sixty seven nuclear bombs were detonated by the United States government (17). On the 1st of March 1954 a hydrogen bomb, called Bravo was dropped on the Bikini Atoll (11). The bomb was dropped regardless of weather forecasts that predicted winds which would blow the radioactive fallout over much of the surrounding islands and the island’s inhabitants. The consequences that followed the explosion left the indigenous population of the Marshall Islands with a permanently uninhabitable homeland and people who were infected in perpetuity.
This review analyses Barbara Rose Johnston and Holly M. Barker’s 2008 book ‘Consequential Damages of Nuclear War: The Rongelap Report’ …show more content…
The ethnography is centred on the 2001 report called The Rongelap Report: Hardships and Consequential damages from Radioactive contamination, denied use, exile, and human subject experimentation experienced by the people of Rongelap, Rongerik and Ailinginae Atolls. This report was generated for the Nuclear Claims Tribunal of the Republic of the Marshall Islands. Johnston and Barker report on the impact of nuclear testing on the population of the Marshall Islands. The ethnography documented the physical, medical, emotional, spiritual, cultural and economic impact of the nuclear bomb. There was also a strong focus on the extremely unethical practices of the United States government. The authors reinforce the culpability of the US both in inflicting the damage on the Marshallese people and in failing to provide appropriate reparation for these actions and their …show more content…
The authors focus on both the individual experiences as well as the collective cultural damage. The authors’ use of an academic tone throughout the ethnography helps to achieve their purpose and created an ethnography which was used to better the lives of the people. The ethnography also has a scientific perspective as the methodology is clearly described and the suggestions for action are explicit (51-53). The authors’ detached tone helps to remove emotional language that would appear as bias, potentially discrediting the significance of the key findings. The authors do, however, still successfully publish an ethnographic account that conjures a heart wrenching feeling of empathy and a sense of injustice for the people. This helps the reader to understand why the reparations by the US government were insufficient and why more were needed to begin to heal the damage inflicted on the
This review analyses Barbara Rose Johnston and Holly M. Barker’s 2008 book ‘Consequential Damages of Nuclear War: The Rongelap Report’ …show more content…
The ethnography is centred on the 2001 report called The Rongelap Report: Hardships and Consequential damages from Radioactive contamination, denied use, exile, and human subject experimentation experienced by the people of Rongelap, Rongerik and Ailinginae Atolls. This report was generated for the Nuclear Claims Tribunal of the Republic of the Marshall Islands. Johnston and Barker report on the impact of nuclear testing on the population of the Marshall Islands. The ethnography documented the physical, medical, emotional, spiritual, cultural and economic impact of the nuclear bomb. There was also a strong focus on the extremely unethical practices of the United States government. The authors reinforce the culpability of the US both in inflicting the damage on the Marshallese people and in failing to provide appropriate reparation for these actions and their …show more content…
The authors focus on both the individual experiences as well as the collective cultural damage. The authors’ use of an academic tone throughout the ethnography helps to achieve their purpose and created an ethnography which was used to better the lives of the people. The ethnography also has a scientific perspective as the methodology is clearly described and the suggestions for action are explicit (51-53). The authors’ detached tone helps to remove emotional language that would appear as bias, potentially discrediting the significance of the key findings. The authors do, however, still successfully publish an ethnographic account that conjures a heart wrenching feeling of empathy and a sense of injustice for the people. This helps the reader to understand why the reparations by the US government were insufficient and why more were needed to begin to heal the damage inflicted on the