2 Ecology, War, and Nuclear Testing in the Pacific …
21
certainly varying in their scope. From a narrowly scientific point of view, ecology
may refer simply to non-human organisms in relationship with their environment.
For the purposes of this discussion, the term ecology is used in the wider sense
of a network of relationships between different life forms, or in Santmire’s (1985)
words, “a network of interrelationships between God, humanity, and nature” (p. 9).
This concept can be understood at a global, regional, or local level. For example,
every rainforest has its own unique ecosystem, set within the larger network of
global ecology. Specific to this discussion, Machlis and Hanson (2008) noted that
“environmental research related to warfare is limited in depth and fragmented by
discipline” (p. 729), wherefore they have proposed the term “warfare ecology” as a
means of more appropriately focusing specific research in this area of concern.
The nature of the relationship between humans and the rest of creation is an
important issue, and it is clear that in spite of differing emphases, a wide umbrella
of philosophical or spiritual approaches would agree that humankind is part of what
may be called “the web of life” (Capra 1996). That does not mean that all life, human
and non-human, is necessarily of equal value, but it remains true that humankind and
ecology are indelibly intertwined.
Inevitably, war leads to the enormous waste of finite resources as well as a host of
other destructive consequences such as the contribution to global warming caused by
additional greenhouse gas emissions. Each of these issues in turn exacerbates other
related consequences, compounding and complicating the impacts to humans and
the environment. While the purpose of this discourse is not to document in fine detail
the ecological damage that war has caused and continues to cause, it is nevertheless
necessary to provide at least a sense of how this damage often presents. Historically,
the impact has always been significant although present day approaches including
“scorched earth” policies, the use of chemical and other endlessly destructive
(‘sophisticated’) weapons create ever-increasing stress on ecosystems.
Opportunities for Future Research
The recent War in Iraq is illustrative of these kinds of issues, with three areas of
impact noted, although it is acknowledged that there is significant overlap between
these. Firstly, the wastage of non-renewable resources represents an enormous cost.
For example, between 1975 and 2017, the U.S. military alone consumed 181,436
million gallons of jet fuel, in addition to other forms of fuel (Crawford 2019, p. 10).
That translates into 3,629 million metric tons of CO 2 emissions (p. 32). Crawford
(2019) provides further details:
In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, oil wells were set alight and burned for several months. Oil
infrastructure was targeted again in 2015, when the US bombed oil infrastructure in Iraq
and Syria as a means of reducing ISIS revenue. And when ISIS retreated, it set oil wells
and pipelines on fire in Iraq and Syria. In many cases, these fires burned for several months.
(p. 16)
21
certainly varying in their scope. From a narrowly scientific point of view, ecology
may refer simply to non-human organisms in relationship with their environment.
For the purposes of this discussion, the term ecology is used in the wider sense
of a network of relationships between different life forms, or in Santmire’s (1985)
words, “a network of interrelationships between God, humanity, and nature” (p. 9).
This concept can be understood at a global, regional, or local level. For example,
every rainforest has its own unique ecosystem, set within the larger network of
global ecology. Specific to this discussion, Machlis and Hanson (2008) noted that
“environmental research related to warfare is limited in depth and fragmented by
discipline” (p. 729), wherefore they have proposed the term “warfare ecology” as a
means of more appropriately focusing specific research in this area of concern.
The nature of the relationship between humans and the rest of creation is an
important issue, and it is clear that in spite of differing emphases, a wide umbrella
of philosophical or spiritual approaches would agree that humankind is part of what
may be called “the web of life” (Capra 1996). That does not mean that all life, human
and non-human, is necessarily of equal value, but it remains true that humankind and
ecology are indelibly intertwined.
Inevitably, war leads to the enormous waste of finite resources as well as a host of
other destructive consequences such as the contribution to global warming caused by
additional greenhouse gas emissions. Each of these issues in turn exacerbates other
related consequences, compounding and complicating the impacts to humans and
the environment. While the purpose of this discourse is not to document in fine detail
the ecological damage that war has caused and continues to cause, it is nevertheless
necessary to provide at least a sense of how this damage often presents. Historically,
the impact has always been significant although present day approaches including
“scorched earth” policies, the use of chemical and other endlessly destructive
(‘sophisticated’) weapons create ever-increasing stress on ecosystems.
Opportunities for Future Research
The recent War in Iraq is illustrative of these kinds of issues, with three areas of
impact noted, although it is acknowledged that there is significant overlap between
these. Firstly, the wastage of non-renewable resources represents an enormous cost.
For example, between 1975 and 2017, the U.S. military alone consumed 181,436
million gallons of jet fuel, in addition to other forms of fuel (Crawford 2019, p. 10).
That translates into 3,629 million metric tons of CO 2 emissions (p. 32). Crawford
(2019) provides further details:
In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, oil wells were set alight and burned for several months. Oil
infrastructure was targeted again in 2015, when the US bombed oil infrastructure in Iraq
and Syria as a means of reducing ISIS revenue. And when ISIS retreated, it set oil wells
and pipelines on fire in Iraq and Syria. In many cases, these fires burned for several months.
(p. 16)