Significance of environment in international relations

A series of major environmental catastrophes around the world helped to focus public attention on the problems with the environment. The Minamata disaster highlighted the problem in Japan.

We remember the Bhopal incident which caused over 2000 deaths - there are thousands who are still suffering from the after-effects of Bhopal. Chernobyl occurred around the same time.

A series of major environmental catastrophes around the world helped to focus public attention on the problems with the environment. The Minamata disaster highlighted the problem in Japan. We remember the Bhopal incident which caused over 2000 deaths - there are thousands who are still suffering from the after-effects of Bhopal. Chernobyl occurred around the same time.

Windfarms: An environment friendly sustainable power generating solution

Vast areas of Ukraine became permanently uninhabitable following this accident. The Exxon Valdez accident caused irreparable damage to the pristine environment of Alaska. The Amoco Cadiz spill caused huge damage to the coastlines of France and Spain.

The blatant dumping of large quantities of toxic waste in Nigeria in the 80s, previously the much publicized toxic fog in London which caused innumerable deaths and illnesses, the destruction of the forests and lakes in Northern Europe by acid rain, the wholesale depletion of fish stocks around the world, both due to over-fishing and also the pollution of the oceans, all contributed to arousing popular awareness. The collapse of the North Atlantic cod fishery is well documented and led to the famous “Cod Wars”.

With the general recognition by a substantial proportion of the population of developed countries of the growing threat to the environment, we witnessed two interesting developments. It must be emphasised that these developments occurred mainly in the developed West, in countries such as the United States, the Northern European countries, Australia and New Zealand.

One was the rapid growth and increasing political impact of active non-governmental organisations, essentially focusing on the conservation and rehabilitation of the environment. Some were pragmatic and issue-focused in their orientation, others emphasized the need for strong global legal regimes. In time, some of these groups became International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs).

The second interesting phenomenon was the gradual infiltration of the political spectrum by environmental issues. Again, you find this phenomenon occurring in the developed West in the first instance. In the developing world, the environment at that stage, was not a major issue, politically speaking, mainly because there were other more pressing needs to be addressed, such as adequate food, adequate shelter, potable water, over-population, etc.

Global issues

It is a fact of life that once the developed world becomes seized of an issue, it is only a short time before it becomes an issue for the entire world, whether it is human rights, disarmament, or the environment.

There were good reasons for this heightened concern for the environment in developed countries. The increase in headline-grabbing accidents was important. Furthermore, the depletion of the ozone layer was affecting fair-skinned people of European stock more than the rest of the world.

Skin cancer became a major health issue in Australia and in the United States. Naturally, the need to repair the depleted ozone layer became a priority for these countries. Global warming was beginning to impact on fisheries, agriculture and weather patterns in the developed North.

Unusual winters, extraordinarily hot and dry summers and hurricanes in the Caribbean were beginning to affect people’s health and their vacations. The conservation of biological diversity, although it attracted the attention of some activists in the developed North, didn’t seem to attract the same focus, because it was more of a problem for developing countries.

Conference

A key initiative for addressing these problems was taken in the context of the United Nations in the late 80’s when the UN agreed to convene a conference of Heads of States in Rio in 1992. Originally, the draft Resolution that proposed this conference dealt only with environmental issues.

Subsequently, due to the efforts of developing countries, it was amended to include development as well. The Rio Conference was billed as a Summit on the environment and development. In the debates that preceded the Rio Conference, a number of critical compacts were negotiated - one was the Rio Declaration and the other was Agenda 21.

At this point, we also note the emergence of another factor in this process, which was the entry of the developing countries into centre stage. As the discussion of the environment progressed, it was soon recognised that no solution to an environmental problem could be sustained unless developing countries also participated in the process of searching for solutions and implementing them.

It was necessary for developing countries also to be committed to achieving the same goals. For example, whatever that was done in the developed North to reduce emissions levels in order to address climate change and global warming would have little or no impact, unless the fast-industrializing countries of the developing world were also brought into the equation.

Similarly, ozone depletion and the issue of skin cancer could not be addressed properly, unless developing countries also were party to the regulatory framework. This was a major challenge.

Reflecting the urgency of the situation, developing countries were financially assisted to participate in the negotiations that preceded Rio.

The conflict that arose from this obvious discordance in goals, could be solved only in one way. The developing countries needed modern technology, which was available, but costly, to adopt a development model that was different from the one that was adopted by the developed countries a century earlier and which devastated the environment.

If this did not happen, the developing world could have continued to use environmentally-harmful technologies, borrowed from the West, so that their own aspirations to development and more creature comforts could be satisfied in the first instance.

Developing countries which were allowed a grace period, were to be provided with modern ozone-friendly technologies as they reached for comforts such as air-conditioning, aerosols, etc.

For this, resources would be made available from a facility that would be funded essentially from the industrialized countries, and the World Bank. In return, the developing world made a commitment to adopt only ozone-friendly technologies in the future.

An Ozone Secretariat would monitor implementation and assist wherever possible. This bargain worked. We know that the ozone hole that had begun to appear over the Antarctica in the 90s has begun to close-up. In fact, it could be said that this is the most successful international environmental convention out of the many that have been concluded.

Convention

In this context, Minister Champika Ranawaka has a very critical responsibility, guiding the Conference of the Parties and continuing the good work that began over 17 years ago and ensuring that the ozone layer is replenished to the full.

It was originally estimated that the ozone layer would take till the year 2050 to be repaired if the provisions of the Vienna Convention and its Montreal Protocol were fully complied with. However, now we believe that this goal would be achieved much earlier, because the compliance rate under the Convention is extremely good. In fact, Sri Lanka is one of its model compliers.

The emergence of the environment as an international issue had a number of implications. First and foremost, the apparent unity of purpose amongst developed countries collapsed, especially with regard to the Climate Change Convention. The Europeans, on the one hand, having adopted a global approach, were insistent on a solution through emissions limits.

The United States of America, on the other, after having signed the Climate Change Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, refused to ratify. Australia also refused to join the Kyoto Protocol for 17 years. Their basic argument was that a solution through emissions limits was economically unviable and could not be sustained.

Climate change

Contrary to the understanding reached in 1992, they also insisted on commitments from developing countries on emissions levels. It was also continued to argue that climate change due to human activity was not scientifically proven. Australia changed its position just last year, but the United States is still to come on board.

However, it is anticipated that the new administration of Barak Obama will adopt a more enlightened approach to this issue. And almost on every issue, except the Ozone Convention, the developed world did not seem to have a consolidated position, thus making negotiations difficult.

The developing countries, which in 1992, were not considered to be major contributors to environmental degradation and climate change, have to everybody’s surprise, assumed a prominent role. China and India combined, now produce approximately 40 percent of the world’s product and are rapidly increasing their GHG emissions levels.

China may soon overtake the United States as the key emitter of GHGs. Although on a per-capita basis, it still lags, trailing far behind.

The future poses a serious challenge. We need to be conscious of a number of factors in addressing the huge environmental issues that confront us. Climate change and global warming, sea-level rise, pollution of the oceans, devastation of fish-stocks, glacier-melt, desertification, loss of biological diversity, rapid loss of forest cover, etc.

Due to the fact that developing countries did not develop to the same extent as the industrialized world, has given them an advantage with regard to environmental issues. Many tropical countries still possess vast forests.

They are also the main repository of the globe’s biological diversity. There is a link between these assets possessed by developing countries and the key to addressing global environmental issues.

The perennial questions of ensuring Third World development in an environmentally-sustainable manner has become critical. If the world is to progress, which means that the developing countries also progress while the developed world maintains an acceptable standard of living, there will have to be a re-alignment of resources and an adjustment in attitudes.

Already there is a UN-sponsored dialogue with regard to tropical rain forests. It must be remembered that these forests are a resource which the developing world possesses. If the developing world is not to utilize these resources for its own developmental purposes, then a mechanism must be developed to provide appropriate compensation, and the compensation must come from those responsible for ravaging the environment in the first instance.

Solar power is increasingly becoming a viable source of energy. In the case of countries like Sri Lanka, there is huge waste and over-utilisation of energy. Sri Lanka is rapidly becoming a vehicle-oriented country.

This is demonstrated by the fact that our roads are almost always clogged with vehicles, resulting in a huge waste of precious fuel. Perhaps, it energy is costed in a proper manner, this over-utilization of hydro-carbon-based energy might be reduced.

The European Union has imposed strict rules with regard to allowable catch-levels in European seas. Unfortunately, we find national fleets moving out of Europe and into waters elsewhere.

They are the fleets that are responsible for ravaging fish-stocks in the waters belonging to the Third World. A world-wide regime on fishing will have wider political and economic implications.

Traditional knowledge gleaned from communities may also need to be protected better. A celebrated court case in India focused on the patenting of the active agent in *Neem *seeds, which we know as *Kohomba.*Basmati rice has also been genetically modified and patented in the US. It is called “Texmati”. We need to consider possible ways of protecting traditional knowledge in developing countries effectively.

Principles

The World Bank also has through its International Finance Corporation (IFC), propounded the Equator Principles. The Equator Principles seek to ensure that when the IFC financing is provided for project development, such projects comply with certain basic standards. IFC endorsement of a project is also a sign for the private sector to join-in with financing.

The fact that the IFC has propounded these standards has ensured private sector compliance with them when it comes to large developmental projects. World Bank assistance is preceded by environmental impact assessments.

Many large companies have subscribed to the Equator Principles, the Citigroup which until recently had assets totaling over $ 95 Billion was one of the first major banks to subscribe to the Equator Principles.

The challenge of dealing with the deterioration of the environment is enormous. There are many hopeful signs emerging from governments, as well as from the private sector. But, if we are to leave the environment, that we take for granted, to the next generation, we have to try much harder! Let us not forget that as Arahat Mahinda said 2300 years ago, *”We are only the trustees of this world - which we must leave behind to others who come after us”.