Browne, Pete. "U.N. Report Calls for More Environmental Protection in Wartime." The New York Times. The New York Times, 20 Nov. 2009. Web. 11 Dec. 2009.
This article reports a statement made by the United Nations Environment Program and the Environmental Law Institute. It details the rather pathetic lack of wartime environmental measures and asks nations to observe certain environmental standards during times of internal warfare. Exploitation of aquifers, national forests and habitats of endangered species is much more common during times of warfare, in which the side with the most resources is more likely to win. If these measures are put into effect, some of the most severe environmental damage that can occur could be prevented. The article does express a certain doubt that nations will follow this recommendation. Even for those that agree to observe this statement, many a promise are forgotten during times of warfare; the effectiveness of this statement is yet to be determined.
This article demonstrates the lowly position that the environment holds in the world's list of priorities. The fact that the environment serves as a source of wartime resources rather than a source of biodiversity or natural value is nothing short of abominable, yet not surprising. The human race is nothing if not resourceful, unfortunately at the expense of other species and the planet in general. From the point of view of a warring nation, an aquifer does seem like the perfect free source of water and exploiting it would come second to providing water for troops. From an environmental standpoint, however, the use of protected natural resources for war represents yet again the constant side-stepping people do around environmental regulations. Also, while a nice gesture, the UN has little power with which to enforce this measure. Its noted hesitance to get involved in warfare hinders the UN's power in this area. The volatility of the internal environment of a warring nation also prevents the enactment of such environmental measures; even those that promise to abide by this statement could rescind during desperate times. As far as environmental implications, I believe that in order to truly care about the environment, we must place it first. While war determines a nation's fate in the short term, ultimately the state of the earth determines whether a nation exists at all. As a population, we need to stop being short-sighted and look to the future. It is the environmental impact of warfare and other events that prevents true advances from being made as it reverses the effects of other measures. Protecting the environment cannot be a part-time occupation, as this article implies is the common view, but a wholly embraced movement.
No comments:
Post a Comment