What is environmental security How have writers on environmental Essay

What is environmental security How have writers on environmental security challenged the notion of security - Essay Example Environmental security is labeled as a relevant subject matter in international affairs and it is being exploited to define the motives of countries under an array of contexts. For instance, the Kyoto agreement which curtails global greenhouse gases has been disputed (Ashcroft 1998) and defended (Goodman 1998) on the basis of its influence on America's national security. Warren Christopher, the former Secretary of State, proclaimed in his 1996 speech at Stanford University the resolution of the Clinton administration "to put environmental issues where they belong: in the mainstream of American foreign policy" (Matthew 1996, 39). Subsequently, President Clinton has branded environmental security as one of the many concerns that America will be confronting in the contemporary times (Broda-Bahm 1999). The fundamental concept of environmental security signifies an attempt to put more emphasis on the issues of environmental degradation through openly fastening them to previous military notions of security. According to Lester Brown (1986), the new sources of hazards occur from depletion, soil erosion, inappropriate land use, deforestation, worsening conditions of grasslands and drastic climate changes (195). Moreover, Brown maintains that these dangers not merely threaten the national economic and political security but also the equilibrium in the globalized economy thereof. The advocates of the environment-security relationship strongly upheld the belief that the perils of environmental degradation are at least ruthless as the military menaces which most apparently are integrated under the security coverage and the materialization of these fresh threats would make people reflect on the concept of national security. Hence, Norman Myers (1995) argues that national security is no long er a matter of combat and military hardware alone; it relates progressively more to "watersheds, croplands, forests, genetic resources, climate and other factors" (258) which are seldom measured by military specialists and political heads, yet needs considerable attention in order to produce an effective combination of equally crucial securities, environmental and military. The argument for environmental security can either be explained in the assertion that environmental dreadful conditions may result in security threats, such as conflicts and hostilities, or in the declaration that environmental degradation practically represents a security hazard. Nevertheless, in both arguments, advocates call for enhanced attention to the national and international significance of eco-system wellbeing, yet the second circumstance holds singular interest for students of argument because it embodies an effort to elevate the relevance of a conventionally ignored sector through definition-association with reinforced traditional importance; the environment is positioned on the schema through classification with the customary state intentions in security (Broda-Bahm 1999). This point of classification propelled the argument for an environment-security relationship through its critics. Several intellectuals writing within the umbrella of peace research perspective have roughly criticized attempts to bind environmental objectives to the notions of national security. Daniel Duedney (1991) claims that the nationalist attitude and the war structure have a time-honoured feature that are expected to resist any "rhetorically conjured redirection toward benign ends" (28). Moreover, he