Environmental Conflict and Cooperation

Premise, Purpose, Persuasion, and Promise

James Lee

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2019
• Print ISBN: 9780815352518
• eBook ISBN: 9781351139229
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Biological Sciences
• Subtopic: Ecology
• Index: Biological Sciences

Environmental Conflict and Cooperation explores the evolution of environmental conflict as a field of research and the study of cooperation as an alternative to war.

Over four key parts, James R. Lee navigates the contours of this growing field and paints a vivid framework for better understanding issues around environmental conflict and security:

• The premise of the field and its historic manifestations

• The definition and purpose of research

• The persuasions or types of environmental conflict and cooperation

• The promise of research in leading to better decision-making and to broaching new challenges.

Over the course of these parts, the author outlines the deep historic record of this discipline, arguing that it will play a key role in understanding important future trends. Utilizing a wide variety of case studies that range from ancient examples, including conflict over the Cedars of Lebanon and the role of tin in the Peloponnesian Wars, to future-oriented scenarios, including expanded island-building in the South China Sea and the global politics of geo-engineering, Lee highlights key concepts, metrics, and policy contexts that will test current understandings. He also examines a variety of research methods and provides examples of the ways in which such research can be used to inform policy improvements.

This book will draw specific interest from students and scholars of environmental conflict and cooperation, as well as researchers of environmental politics and security studies.

PART I

The premise of environmental conflict

The central importance of environmental resources in human history is etched in the world’s landscapes. Petroglyphs, or rock images, in the Sahara Desert depict gazelles, and in the Mojave Desert of California, there are mountain goats. Pre-historic pictures in the Lascaux caves of France show horses, aurochs (ancient cattle), bison, and other animals that lived in Europe at this time. Why memorialize these creatures? Because the animals were essential to human survival – providing meat, clothing, and even fine tools (from the antlers or horns). These animals were also formidable foes, so human survival was intricately linked to a potentially deadly struggle. Hunts were large-scale, organized attacks on a herd of animals that often resulted in casualties. In these images, we see which resource concentrations emerge in human lifestyles.

Environment is, of course, important to every species, but no species has had a greater impact, in such a short time, as humans. Over the course of a few thousand years, people have terraformed a quarter of the planet for agriculture; cut most of the world’s forests; erased thousands of species; and polluted the land, air, sea, and even space. Our impact has been compared to that of the meteor that struck the Earth and killed off dinosaurs over 60 million years ago. Having vanquished nature, our greatest foe is each other in the competition to possess and use the environment and its resources.

The story is populated with tales of both conflict and cooperation. This part starts by laying out some basic concepts and assumptions about this behavior in three parts. First, Chapter 1 looks at the historical record of environmental conflict and where people choose to cooperate. Pictures on rocks or walls are only part of the environmental conflict history. Chapter 2 shows the many facets of environmental conflict through the use of an extended case study. This focus demonstrates differing types of environmental conflict and how one type can evolve into another over time. Chapter 3 explores why a book like this is needed. Perhaps it is better to say why such a book will be needed. Environmental conflict will continue to grow in importance over time.

1

THE ANCIENT ROOTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONFLICT

The term environmental conflict might seem like a recent proposition. The idea, however, is very old. Ancient accounts of the environment causing conflict describe wars fought over gold mines, desert oases, herds of bison, fruit groves, and even the wood from trees. “Pollution, ecosystem destruction, and natural resource depletion are not new problems. Many regions and localities were grappling with these issues long before the industrial revolution or even the emergence of the modern system of nation-states” (Conca and Dabelko 2015, 1). Richard Matthew (2018, 111) believes that there is a long history of environmental competition over resources, as evident in works such as Thucydides’ The Peloponnesian War (Strassler 1996) and Plato’s The Republic (Bloom 1968).

Both conflict and environment have been important factors in human development, and it would be folly to believe they do not interact. This link can be benign or aflame. Moreover, the flammability can rise to the level of deadly violence. “And just as environmental problems have a long-standing history, so do the political struggles that inevitably accompany those problems” (Conca and Dabelko 2015, 1).

The effect of war on the environment is also age-old. The “concern for the environmental impacts of war goes back to the Old Testament, Babylonia, and Ancient Greece” (Austin and Bruch 2000; Bruch et al. 2018). Such historical testaments are widely held among scholars. Jensen and Cron describe the historic roots of environmental conflict and environmental cooperation. “Even in ancient times, rules can be found on the need to ensure access to natural resources essential for survival such as clean water, lands and forests, in times of warfare” (Jensen and Cron 2018, 122).

Informal rules regarding environmental conflict and cooperation emerged early in history. The Bible’s Old Testament, specifically Deuteronomy 20:19, sets out norms regarding treatment of certain natural resources during war.

When thou shalt besiege a city a long time, in making war against it to take it, thou shalt not destroy the trees thereof by forcing an axe against them: for thou mayest eat of them, and thou shalt not cut them down (for the tree of the field is man’s life) to employ them in the siege.

(Jensen and Cron 2018, 122)

Even then, there were evident moral boundaries for war. Trees were too important in the relatively barren Middle East to be needlessly wasted. “Severe shortages of wood led to conservation efforts in Babylonia during the time of Hammurabi” (Conca and Dabelko 2015, 1, also see Perlin 1991, 46).¹

In this time, attackers did indeed cut the forest around a besieged town. They used the wood to build ladders, battering rams, and weapons. Sieges usually lasted for long periods, so wood was also needed to support cooking and heating for the troops. The battles would generally deforest large areas around protected town centers.

Over time, it was defenders themselves who cut down the trees for two reasons. First, it denied their enemies easy access to raw materials for weaponry. Second, it took away the forest cover that helped hide archers, whose accuracy by this time had greatly improved. As fortifications became more complex, warfare strategies changed. Stone became the building choice for defensive fortress. Catapults hurled huge stones or dead bodies over the castle wall as part of the siege.

Forest resources are one of the oldest examples of conflict over non-renewable resources. The Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh coincided with the emergence of early city-states in ancient Mesopotamia (see Text Box 1.1). These areas lacked an ample supply of sturdy wood, an essential resource for building cities. Wood provided the infrastructure on which cities were built and was a very critical resource. Naturally, control of forest resources was a reason for war, often against the forest itself.²

TEXT BOX 1.1 TIMBER AS A PRIZED RESOURCE IN THE ANCIENT MIDDLE EAST

The Epic of Gilgamesh is a story of conflict between humans and the environment that was a mix of history and mythology. As small cities grew, wood was needed to construct the first centers of civilization. One coveted resource that built these initial urban centers was cedar wood, which possessed several valuable properties in construction. In this time, Gilgamesh was a king of the ancient Mesopotamian city of Uruk. He was a cruel and oppressive monarch, and his people cried out for relief. The gods answered by sending his physical and psychological equal (Enkidu), who challenged the king. The two foes wage battle for days until both, exhausted from the ordeal, declare a truce and become friends. As a bonding exercise, they agree to test their friendship by traveling to the west (modern-day Syria and Lebanon) and seizing the great Cedars of Lebanon. This act would require them to fight the protector of the forest, the creature Humbaba. Gilgamesh and Enkidu venture to the forest and immediately begin cutting trees, enraging Humbaba. A violent struggle ensues, but eventually, the two gain the upper hand. Gilgamesh slays the creature, and they take the cedars, floating them down the Euphrates River to Uruk. They were said to look like reeds floating on the water. Gilgamesh built a great city.

Myths are part story and part history. Perhaps there was no Humbaba, Gilgamesh, or Enkidu. But there was a city-state of Uruk, built in a region with few wood resources necessary for construction materials. There were surely historical expeditions with both military forces and woodsmen, who traveled long distances to bring home wood resources. Is the story just a myth? In fact, it is thought that Gilgamesh was based on the real-life figure King Enembaragesi of Sumer.

The fight to control the cedars did not end with Gilgamesh. From 2600 BCE (Before the Common Era) to 138 AD, the Canaanites, Aegeans, Armenians, and Phoenicians built great civilizations in the Middle East. Through cities such as Sidon and Tyre, cedar was exported to Palestine and Egypt, areas with large populations and relatively few forests. To build their thalassocracy (maritime empire), the Phoenicians constructed enormous sea-faring fleets for exploration, conquest, and trade. Their empire relied on the cedar.

At the time of Gilgamesh, the Stone Age was ending and the Bronze Age beginning. This new technological era brought certain resources to the forefront of interest because of their role in metallurgical technology. Unlike stone, which was, of course, widely available, these metals were relatively rare, at least for the mining technologies of the time. Making bronze required mixing tin and copper in a 1 to 10 ratio.

The Lavrion mines in Greece were sources of copper and other precious metals. There were no sources of tin nearby to Greece, so it was usually imported from central Europe. The city-state of Athens grew rich from importing tin and using local copper mines to create a bronze industry. The ore played an important historical role.

There are many references to what we know as environmental conflict by ancient writers, though the terms they use to describe the field may differ. Greek historians such as Thucydides pointed out the competition over timber and minerals from Thrace as key causes of the first Peloponnesian war (460–446 BCE). Another prized metal at the time was silver, also found in the Lavrion mines. Both copper and silver were crucial to the rise and success of Athens in ancient history (see Text Box 1.2). Income from the mines built a great empire and enabled the Greeks to defeat much larger foes.

TEXT BOX 1.2 SILVER IN GREEK WARS

Athens controlled the Lavrion mines, which were a rich source of silver but also possessed quantities of copper, lead, and other minerals and metals of value. These metals were important in this new age of metallurgy. The silver was fashioned into Tetrhadrachmon coins that were the currency of the time. The Athenians were literally mining money. The local copper deposits, mixed with imported tin, provided a source to make bronze. Bronze was the advanced technology of the time. Athens got rich via the mines and invested in a maritime fleet that made them into a great power. The Athenian fleet of warships helped them defeat the Persians in the struggle with Persian King Xerxes. During the Peloponnesian Wars (431–404 BCE), Sparta defeated Athens at the battle of Dekelia in 413 BCE and gained control of the mines. By this time, however, the ores were mostly abandoned. The mines never again reached the same levels of production and sat dormant until the 1800s, when they experienced a brief revival. The ores were finally exhausted in 1982 and the mines abandoned.

The Bronze Age lasted several millennia and spread widely. Its collapse (about 1200 BCE) destroyed many ancient empires. The demise is not because of a failure of bronze technology but rather because of its success. The Bronze Age led to a surge in population and technology. It also led to over-population, deforestation, increased salinity of irrigated farmland, and a society that was segmented by structure and hierarchy.

Some believe that the Iron Age which followed hastened the Bronze Age collapse. The use of carbon steel was much more durable and lasted longer than the weaker tools or instruments made of bronze. People who adopted the new iron technology at an early point were able to craft not only better farming implements but, more importantly, much better weapons. With the discovery of new smelting techniques, it became relatively easy for anyone to make iron. Technology had overtaken natural resource limits.³

The Agricultural Revolution was built on fertile soil and ample water. People learned how to improve soils through crop rotation, so water became of pre-eminent importance. Water has long been a part of the history of environmental conflict. Drawing water from rivers for irrigation, the new farmers produced bountiful food that led to a population boom. Over time, water scarcity began to emerge, which led to disputes and wars. Demand in many places eventually exceeded supply, especially during certain years. All of the larger water basins (Nile, Indus, Ganges, Euphrates-Tigris, Amu and Sri Darya, Yangtze, Mekong, and others) have endured a long history of armed conflict (Vink 2018, 285).

In the western hemisphere, other environmental conflict issues were playing out. There is evidence of organized warfare in the Maya region of Central America dating back to 1000 BCE. Over a long period, development meant changes in social relations and the extant environmental conditions. The Mayan region saw considerable regional conflict in the 7th and 8th centuries. As the population grew, and agriculture intensified, there was a shift of warfare drivers from balance of power interests and chiefly politics to scarcity and trade-driven conflict (O’Mansky and Demarest 2007, 11).

In addition to renewables, there was competition over non-renewable or finite resources. Key trade items focused on rare products and exotic goods, such as “jade, pyrite, obsidian, quetzal feathers, and jaguar pelts” (O’Mansky and Demarest 2007, 17). These products were for ceremonial rather than industrial purposes, different from the tin trade in the Bronze Age.

The Maya region was highly populated, so warfare usually involved large armies engaged in hand-to-hand warfare on a vast scale. The time scale for these wars took place over extremely long periods, sometimes decades of protracted struggle. Using the environment was an essential part of war-planning, including the development of massive earthworks. This landscaping was an eerie forerunner of trench warfare during World War I (O’Mansky and Demarest 2007, 13).

The Mayan Wars were dominated by either binary or more diffuse power struggles. The early Mayan Wars centered on alliances led by the two major empires of the time. “Conflict throughout much of the southern lowlands was guided by the great superpowers Tikal and Calakmul,” who presided over various shifting allegiances among a collection of smaller city-states (O’Mansky and Demarest 2007, 13). Some scholars have compared this constellation of warfare to the Cold War Era and the Soviet and Western power blocs.

Over time, the power of Tikal and Calakmul declined, and other powers rose. The result was a more diffuse system with many more competing power centers. This transition in Mayan history to shifting alliances in some ways characterized the classic balance of power period in Europe during the 19th century (O’Mansky and Demarest 2007, 21). The Mayan Wars, however, were hardly monolithic in characterization and constantly ebbed and flowed throughout the area. “The manifestations of Maya warfare were always multiple, with shifts in emphasis from region to region and period to period” (O’Mansky and Demarest 2007, 33).

Christopher Columbus recorded evidence of intra-American warfare during his first voyage to the New World in 1492. His journal of the first contact on the island of San Salvador recounted a meeting with young warrior men who had a number of scars on their bodies. The men told him the wounds had been incurred fighting off raiders from other tribes (Dunn and Kelly 1989), who meant to steal resources, including people.

The lure of gold, however, kept Columbus going forward. Knowing the possibility of violence, Columbus left 39 sailors on Hispaniola to build a fort at La Navidad when he departed back to Spain. Local chiefs promised to provide access to gold resources in the island’s interior highlands, and the sailors were to mount expeditions to find the source until the return of Columbus. When he came back on his second voyage in 1493, he found 39 graves and a burned fort. This did not deter Columbus or Spain from pursuing their a...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• Text boxes
• Preface
• Part I The premise of environmental conflict
• Part II The purpose of environmental conflict
• Part III Persuasions of environmental conflict
• Part IV The promise of environmental conflict
• Appendix A: ICE coding categories
• Appendix B: Ranked data points used in plots
• Index