<<  <  >  >>

date by Sherri W. Goodman, and it partici-

makers and government agencies mean when

pates in NATO's Committee on Challenges

they talk about "environmental security."

to Modern Society, which is designed to

address issues such as environmental degra-

What Is Environmental Security?

dation and the role of the military. Other

Government agencies and officials rarely

agencies such as the Environmental

clarify their terms. The words "security" and

Protection Agency and the Department of

"national interest" are bandied about with

Energy have environmental security pro-

such frequency that it is often hard to chal-

grams and work closely with DoD under the

lenge their usage and demand definitions.

terms of the Memorandum of Understand-

Nonetheless, it is possible to deduce certain

ing on environmental security, signed by the

linkages between environmental degradation

three agencies in 1996, to combat environ-

and national security from the actions and

mental threats to U.S. national security

words of the people involved. The key

around the globe.9 Pilot initiatives include a

assumptions include the following:

project on nuclear waste in the Arctic seas as

· Environmental

a result of Soviet, and later Russian, naval

degradation  and

activity. Even the Central Intelligence Agency

resource depletion threaten American

is involved in environmental security: it has

health, prosperity, and lives and need to

set up a Global Fiducials Program, which

be countered.

· Poor environmental conditions and

uses surveillance satellites to collect data on

current environmental conditions, and has

lack of resources will lead to regional

declassified thousands of photos from the

instability and conflict, and the United

past few decades to allow scientists to build a

States will then need to intervene.

· Environmental modification might be

picture of global environmental change.

One of the major problems with redefin-

used as a weapon of war, and prepara-

ing security so broadly as to include environ-

tions should be made for such use.

· Environmental conditions affect the

mental issues is that it risks rendering the

word "security" meaningless. As Daniel

success of Washington's overseas mili-

Deudney, a professor of international rela-

tary deployments and must be studied.

· Providing for America's defense should

tions at Johns Hopkins University, has

argued, "If everything that causes a decline in

be done in an environmentally safe

human well-being is labeled a `security' threat,

manner.

Environmental

the term loses any analytical usefulness and

security policies

becomes a loose synonym of `bad.'"1 0 Clear

The latest National Security Strategy,

may actually

released at the end of 1999, cites both envi-

language is essential for clear thinking, as

George Orwell has persuasively argued.1 1

ronmental threats to human life and envi-

reduce security--

ronmentally induced instability at a regional

When "security" becomes ambiguous and

especially if they

level as issues that compromise national

diluted, two dangers become apparent.

security.1 2 While President Clinton empha-

First, there is a high risk that turning envi-

tend to push

ronmental issues into a security concern will

sizes the conflict model ("preserving the

toward conflict

result in the militarization of environmental

resources we share is crucial . . . to maintain

rather than peace-

policy, with detrimental effects on society and

stability and peace within nations and among

them"),1 3 Vice President Gore opts for the

on efforts to find solutions to environmental

ful relations

problems. The second danger is that environ-

health and prosperity approach, emphasiz-

among nations.

mental security policies may actually reduce

ing the effect of the environment on the

security--especially if they tend to push

"quality of life." Under Secretary Goodman

toward conflict rather than peaceful relations

sees environmental cooperation as con-

among nations. Before examining those

tributing to building democracy, trust, and

understanding.14 In the 1996 Memorandum

issues, however, it is worth asking what policy-

4