November 6th

The old saying goes, you learn something new everyday.  Today, what I learned is that there is an International Day for Preventing the Exploitation of the Environment in War and Armed Conflict.  Yep, that’s right.  Started in 2001, no less, so that makes this year it’s tenth anniversary. 

Here’s a link to the United Nation’s webpage specific to the day

And what follows is a link to an interesting article by the Environmental Literacy Council.  This is their mission:"For more than a decade, the Environmental Literacy Council has been dedicated to helping teachers, students, policymakers, and the public find cross-disciplinary resources on the environment. An independent, 501(c)3 organization, the Council offers free background information on common environmental science concepts; vetted resources to broaden understanding; and curricular materials that don't tell teachers how to teach, but give them the tools to augment their own backgrounds - no matter what their current knowledge."

More food for thought for today.

Conflict Minerals in Congo

We had a fellow stop into the One Million Bones office last week with some questions and some thoughts on the conflicts in Sudan, Burma and Congo.  Like so many of us, he has a life he’s managing, and many issues vying for his attention.  At one point in our conversation he said, and I paraphrase, I’m not part of the problem over there so I’m not going to worry about it.  I have other things to worry about and what can I do any way?

So Isa asked, “Do you have a cell phone?  Or a laptop?”  And he said yes.

Everyone who has electronics equipment may very well be part of the problem because electronics manufacturers need the minerals that are found in Congo, especially. 

From the Raise Hope for Congo website:

“The conflict in eastern Congo is being fueled by a multi-million dollar trade in minerals that go into our electronic products. Over five million people have died as a result, and hundreds of thousands of women have been raped over the past decade. The armed groups perpetuating the violence generate hundreds of millions of dollars each year by trading in four main minerals, the 3Ts* and gold”

* Tin, Tantalum and Tungsten

This link will take you to Raise Hope for Congo’s page where you can see how your electronics manufacturer stacks up.  And if it doesn’t, you can find one that does a better job of securing conflict-free minerals for production.

Cell phones, laptops and all the other gadgets we use are a fact of life.  Wherever possible, if we make the choice to purchase electronics that are certified conflict free, we can make our own difference. 

The last thing for today is to take a moment, if you will, and sign onto Raise Hope for Congo’s request to Secretary of State Clinton for an international certification process for conflict free minerals from Congo.

This link will get you there

Consider for a moment how successful the world was in helping the people of Sierra Leone during the height of the blood diamond trade.  The people of Congo deserve no less. Take a minute to sign, and then let us know in the comments section.  Thanks!

From Conflict to Peacebuilding

Following is chapter 3 from the UNEP report, From Conflict to Peacebuilding: the role of natural resources and the environment.  The entire report can be found here (you'll have to download the pdf) but it is well worth the read. They start by looking at the role the environment and resources play in contributing to, exacerbating or financing conflict (chapter 2).  Then they look at the impacts of conflict on the environment (chapter 3), and finally they examine the role the environment and natural resources can play in making peace (chapter 4).

Chapter 3

 Impacts of conflict on natural resources and the environment

"Rationale

The environment has always been a silent casualty of conflict. To secure a strategic advantage, demoralize local populations or subdue resistance, water wells have been polluted, crops torched, forests cut down, soils poisoned, and animals killed. In some cases, such as the draining of the marshlands of the Euphrates-Tigris Delta by Saddam Hussein during the 1980s and 1990s, ecosystems have also been deliberately targeted to achieve political and military goals. During the Vietnam war, nearly 72 million litres47 of the dioxin-containing defoliant Agent Orange were sprayed over the country’s forests, resulting in entire areas being stripped of all vegetation. Some of these areas remain unsuitable for any form of agricultural use today. Recent examples of intentional environmental damage include the 1991 Gulf War, during which Kuwait’s oil wells were set on fire and millions of tonnes of crude oil were discharged into waterways. In this instance, the environment itself was used as a weapon of mass destruction.

While numerous other examples of natural resources being used as a weapon of war exist, the majority of the environmental damage that occurs in times of conflict is collateral, or related to the preparation and execution phases of wars and to the coping strategies of local populations. In this regard, impacts of conflict on the environment can be divided into three main pathways:

a) Direct impacts: are caused by the physical de- struction of ecosystems and wildlife or the release of polluting and hazardous substances into the natural environment during conflict.

b) Indirect impacts: result from the coping strategies used by local and displaced populations to survive the socio-economic disruption and loss of basic services caused by conflict. This often entails the liquidation of natural assets for immediate survival income, or the overuse of marginal areas, which can lead to long-term environmental damage.

c) Institutional impacts: Conflict causes a disruption of state institutions, initiatives, and mechanisms of policy coordination, which in turn creates space for poor management, lack of investment, illegality, and the collapse of positive environmental practices. At

the same time, financial resources are diverted away from investments in public infrastructure and essential services towards military objectives.

Direct impacts

Often presenting acute risks for human health and livelihoods, the direct impacts of conflict on the environment are the most visible and well understood. This type of impact is largely due to chemicals and debris generated by bomb damage to settlements, rural areas and infrastructure (case study 6). In some situations, natural resources such as oil wells, forests and water can also be targeted. The direct effects of war are not limited to the countries in which they are waged, as air and water pollution can be carried across borders, threatening the health of populations in neighbouring regions. Direct damage to the environment can also result from the movement of troops, landmines and other unexploded ordnance, weapons containing depleted uranium, and the production, testing, stockpiling and disposal of weapons.

Indirect impacts

By disrupting normal socio-economic patterns, wars force populations to adopt coping strategies, and often lead to in- ternal displacement or migration to neighbouring countries. In the refugee camps that are established to provide basic shelter, food and protection, natural resources are critical assets, providing land, water, construction materials, and renewable energy. Damage to natural resources not only undermines the delivery of humanitarian aid, but can also cause conflict with host communities.

Conversely, vulnerable populations that do not flee must find alternative strategies to survive the breakdown of governance, social services and economic opportunities. Despite the long-term consequences, converting natural resources into capital is often a key coping mechanism and lifeline (case study 7).

Once conflict has diminished the resettlement of refugees and the restoration of economic activities can put intense pressure on natural resources. The indirect environmental impacts of war-time survival strategies and post-conflict reconstruction can be more persistent and widespread than the direct impacts of war.

Institutional impacts

Weak governance institutions and expressions of authority, accountability and transparency are frequently eroded by conflict. When tensions intensify and the rule of law breaks down, the resulting institutional vacuum can lead to a culture of impunity and corruption as public officials begin to ignore governance norms and structures, focusing instead on their personal interests. This collapse of governance structures contributes di-

rectly to widespread institutional failures in all sectors, allowing opportunistic entrepreneurs to establish un- controlled systems of resource exploitation. Conflict also tends to confuse property rights, undercut positive environmental practices, and compromise dispute re- solution mechanisms. At the same time, public finances are often diverted for military purposes, resulting in the decay of, or lack of investment in, water, waste and energy services, with corresponding health and environmental contamination risks (case study 8)."

Let us know what you think about this month's advocacy focus on the environment.  We'd love to hear from you!

Refugees and the Environment

The discussion of pollution as an environmental concern in the context of war and conflict has been difficult to pin down.  We’ll have more on that before the end of the month, but in the meantime, this is information on planning for environmental concerns before, during and after the displacement of people due to a crisis.

From the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees • Environmental Guidelines           

(You can find the entire report HERE)

OVERVIEW: Environmental issues associated with refugees and returnees are normally the consequence of high concentrations of people which often build up at a distinct location over a short period of time. In the absence of appropriate mitigating measures, the surrounding environment can quickly become degraded, which can leave a lasting impact. This, in turn, has the potential for other impacts on refugees as well as local populations. Some of the main impacts experienced in recent years are described below.

SPECIFIC CONCERNS

Natural Resources Deterioration: Degradation of renewable natural resources such as forests, soils and water resources dominates the environmental problems associated with refugees and, to a lesser degree, returnees. Depletion of these resources is often accompanied by their biological impoverishment. Contamination of surface and ground water can occur when sanitary measures are inadequate, or through improper application of agro-chemicals, leak- age of vehicle fuel, and the like. In the case of settlement schemes, poor land-use practices may further exacerbate land degradation.

Irreversible Impacts on Natural Resources: Particularly serious are impacts on areas of high environmental value that may be related to the area’s bio- logical diversity, its function as a haven for endangered species or for the ecosystem services these provide. Some of these areas may be of national or even glob- al importance. Damage to these natural assets – such as watersheds – can be irreversible, and thus deserve special efforts to ensure their integrity is maintained.

Impacts on Health: Impoverishment of natural resources can directly undermine the health of an already weakened group of people. Shortage of fuelwood, for example, may result in food not being properly cooked. In overcrowded refugee camps, disease transmission is also accelerated, while inadequate sanitation facilities can result in pollu- tion of ground water reserves. Dust aroused by the movement of – often significant – herds of livestock as well as vehicles, and smoke created from burning low- quality fuelwood heighten the incidence of respiratory diseases. Most of these problems tend to affect disproportionately the most vulnerable groups, i.e. the elderly or the younger members of a community.

Impacts on Social Conditions: The effects of environmental degradation, particularly those related to fuelwood gathering, are particularly felt by women and children. Women must spend long hours seeking and carrying wood, activities which put them at increased risk of fatigue and exposure them to assault.  Time spent on such activities also detracts from child-care and family and social functions, while children engaged in similar activities may have less time available for attending school.

Social Impacts on Local Populations: Host communities may suffer similar social impacts as those felt by refugees. Competition between locals and refugees for scarce resources (fuelwood, animal fodder, water) can easily result in conflict and resentment. In some cases, a refugee influx has even led to the break- down of traditional and sustainable local systems of natural resource management – structures that are often difficult to repair.

Economic Impacts: An influx of refugees is often felt in the local markets. While some sections of local population may benefit, the local poor are usually affected adversely as the demand for certain products and services drive prices higher and higher. Deforestation, land degradation and water resource depletion all carry with them an economic cost for the local population. So does the reduced availability of fuel, housing materials, medicines, and wild game derived from nearby forests. The consequences of environmental degradation in the vicinity of refugee camps may be felt at considerable distances from the camps: soil erosion, for example, can result in local gulleys, a radical decline in soil fertility and sedimentation of local and distant rivers, ponds and reservoirs.

Videos for Friday

These just came across my email and I wanted to share.  They're produced by www.iactivism.org, a group that does remarkable work raising awareness about the continuing crisis in Darfur.  Take a minute, it's absolutely worth it.

This is Guisma's story, episode 1 and 2. They promise episode 3 is on the way.

Watch the videos and then PLEASE go to this site and "like" it.

Then take one more minute to click this link to sign their petition which says:

Over the past decade, the people of Darfur have suffered through a devastating genocide, have been forced to flee their homes by the millions, and innocent men, women and children in Darfur suffer continuing attacks, many of which are launched by the Government of Sudan. While promising peace talks for Darfur are currently being held in Doha, a few key players threaten to derail the entire process.

The Doha peace process is Darfur's best hope for a peaceful future. We must speak out together to ensure its success.

Urge the United States to take further action for peace in Darfur.

Sign our petition to Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough, one of President Obama top advisors who deserves praise for his diligent work to ensure a peaceful referendum for South Sudan. Join us in asking Mr. McDonough to continue the great work he has begun and lay out the steps he needs to take to ensure a successful peace process for Darfur.

Once you take action, why don't you let us know in our comments section.  We'd love to hear from you.