{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027577937649880094, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013988808952837729, 'mean_word_length': 4.903301886792453, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Human rights and the casualties of nuclear testing

The philosopher Günther Anders once noted how August 8, 1945 saw the International Military Tribunal of Nuremberg codify the concept of “crime against humanity” for the first time, while simultaneously “the last irradiated victims of Hiroshima, after having fallen to their knees while running away through the debris of their city, collapsed and died. On August 8, 1945, the inhabitants of Nagasaki still had a last 24 hours to walk, to rest, work, eat, sleep, laugh, cry and to love without suspecting anything.” In other words, Anders suggested, just as the concept of a crime against humanity was being created to judge the defeated of the Second World War, just such a crime was taking place and a further one was about to happen. Likewise, when the Convention for the Prevention and the Repression of the Crime of Genocide was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 9, 1948, a question was being raised in relation to nuclear weapons and human rights, as the United States had already “deported” the inhabitants of the atolls of Bikini and Enewetak in 1946, in order to carry out nuclear tests on their ancestral grounds. The classic juridical texts reflecting on the massacres of the Second World War did not include the question of nuclear weapons, perhaps in part because the criminalization of nuclear weapons would have had embarrassing implications for those states already engaging in an unrestrained arms race. Nevertheless, voices soon rose to denounce what they saw as the “crimes” of the use and the possession of nuclear weapons. For over 20 years, on the anniversaries of the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the famous French naturalist Theodore Monod took part in demonstrations in front of the doors of the headquarters French “force de frappe” at Taverny, near Paris. To emphasize his position, each year he displayed the same sign, which bore the sentence: “La préparation d’un crime est déjà un crime [the preparation of a crime is already a crime].” Questioned on the meaning of this sentence, he explained: “From a legal point of view, if one can provide evidence that suggests you were an accomplice to an assassination, you should feel uneasy. The manufacture of nuclear weapons and the nuclear tests carried out by France in the Pacific, with no heed for the health of native populations, constitutes strong evidence of a crime.” Journal of Genocide Research (2007), 9(3), September, 443–459