War in Iraq

Wars are often fought as a result of conflict over scarce resources. Wars often lead to environmental damage that result in resources becoming even scarcer.

Here is a collection of church statements on the environmental dimensions of the current war in Iraq.

World Council of Churches Media relations office

20 March 2003

WCC statement on Iraq: "Wars cannot be won, only peace can"

Reacting with "profound sorrow" to news that a military attack on Iraq has begun, World Council of Churches (WCC) general secretary Rev. Dr Konrad Raiser has today released a statement calling the attack "immoral, illegal and ill-advised".

In condemning the attack led by the United States, Raiser points out that it began "without the consent of the UN Security Council" and that it ignores "the voice of civil society, churches and other faith communities in those countries and world-wide".

He emphasizes that the attack is "politically dangerous" and "culturally unwise". "By relying on the right of the powerful, including the use of threat and economic pressure to influence other states to support their action, these countries undermine international rule of law that has taken half a century to construct," he states.

Expressing his conviction that "non-violent means to solve the conflict have been far from exhausted," Raiser argues that "the only sustainable response to terrorism is to achieve rule of law, within the rule of law".

"At this time for repentance," he continues, "we pray for all the people who will suffer in this war, as well as soldiers and their families." Recalling the overwhelming response of the global church community against the war, he notes that "The energy that has been released bears witness to a spirituality that calls for peaceful coexistence of all nations and peoples in accordance with the principles enshrined in the UN Charter. That energy must not be lost." He says churches need to continue efforts to stop the war, assist those in need and "cooperate with people of other faiths, especially Muslims, to restore confidence and trust amongst the nations of the world".

Raiser calls on the governments of the US and the UK and their supporters to cease all military activity, and on all parties "to abide by human rights obligations under international humanitarian law".

"Although this is a day when diplomacy was rejected by some, our call for peace remains," Raiser concludes. "Any war comes at a high price of death of soldiers and civilians, destruction of property and the environment, and the division of people, governments and cultures. This war is no exception. Wars cannot be won, only peace can."

CHRISTIAN ECOLOGY LINK

PRESS RELEASE 15 Feb 2003

CHRISTIANS JOIN ANTI WAR MARCH AND CALL FOR STRONGER AND MORE ECOLOGICAL 'JUST WAR CRITERIA'

Members of Christian Ecology Link will be attending the demonstrations against war on Iraq on Saturday in London and Glasgow. In a statement today CEL Chairman Tim Cooper said:

"In his Newsnight interview with Jeremy Paxman last week, the Prime Minister, when asked whether a military attack on Iraq would be a just war, sidestepped the question. We can only conclude that he recognises that it does not meet the just war criteria.

Church leaders opposing war in Iraq have used the just war principles. We agree that military action would not meet the current just war criteria. Yet like the Archbishop of Armagh and All Ireland, who recently called for an additional criterion to take account of humanitarian considerations, we believe that the just war principles could be extended further, given the destructive capability of weapons of mass destruction.

A further criterion would reject war 'where substantial and irrecoverable harm to the environment, including humans and other species, is likely to be caused by the use of powerful bombs or biological, chemical or nuclear weaponry.'

Such a clause would be justified on Biblical grounds such as Genesis 2:15, Psalm 24:1, and 2 Timothy 2:24."

Christian Ecology Link has written to the Prime Minister to oppose the use of pre-emptive military action without United Nations backing.

War and the Environment

"What are the environmental effects of a war with Iraq?" asked an e-mail earlier this week.

For all of us -- legitimately -- the enormous, immediate cost of war on human communities is a focusing point for our concern. It is good and right that we think about what war does to our brothers and sisters in the war zone -- the soldiers of all nations, and the citizens of the targeted regions.

But it is also good and right to ask larger questions, questions that look years into the future, questions that broaden the circles of compassion, questions that probe into wide-ranging ecological systems.

What are the environmental effects of war and the war machine?

A few details come to mind rather quickly. We picture the blazing oil wells from the Gulf War a decade ago that drenched the soil and water of the region in tar, and filled the skies of an entire hemisphere with smoke. We realize that tanks and humvees chewing across the desert will destroy fragile ecosystems.

In Iraq, the high potential for the use of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons lifts the specter of widespread, long-lasting and poorly understood environmental and health risks. When we think of powerful bombs striking chemical, biological and nuclear production facilities, we can begin to consider the frightening substances that will be entombed or released from that rubble.

Those are some of the clear and immediate effects. It may take some background knowledge or more careful thinking to notice other sorts of problems.

Especially in Iraq, where war will target an urbanized population, water supplies will be effected. Sewage treatment plants will be destroyed and water sources will be contaminated. Humans and wildlife will share in the toxic repercussions for years to come.

In a conversation this week, I heard a concern about the depleted uranium used in armor-piercing ammunition -- a substance used in the Bosnia conflicts that now has been linked to persistent health problems. The lead in "conventional" bullets is also a health hazard when it is scattered in quantity across the environment. The explosives used in bombs contain cyclonite (a carcinogen) and perchlorates (which damage thyroid glands).

Countless examples from around the world show that swarms of refugees are environmental, as well as humanitarian, disasters. Around refugee camps, forests and fields are denuded in the search for food and fuel. Scarce water supplies are exhausted. Sewage and garbage overwhelm existing minimal infrastructures.

Battlefields remain high-risk locations for generations. Unexploded bombs from WW II are still a serious hazard in Europe. Land mines scattered in conflict zones around the world kill and maim civilians -- and wildlife -- long after the end of the conflicts.

And there are even more diffuse effects.

When war destroys wetlands and disrupts tranquil ecosystems, the migration and reproduction of wildlife is altered. In Afghanistan, the effects of war have caused the number of birds flying across the region to drop by a staggering 85 per cent.

Let us not forget the energy consumption and related pollution from the modern war machine. From the US side alone, unimaginable quantities of oil are being burned to move troops and equipment, to fly training and reconnaissance missions, to support the naval fleets and to air condition the desert bases. This profligate use of energy is a real and significant contribution to global warming and global air pollution.

Within the US, the Pentagon is seeking a blanket exemption from a wide range of environmental rules dealing with endangered species, protected habitats and toxic chemicals. All too often, the military sees environmental preservation as contrary to national security, rather than an important basis for long-term global security.

+ + + + +

Despite clear experiences and quantities of research, the images and statistics of war's ecological effects do not come immediately to mind. That fact says something about how we tend to think of ourselves in isolation from the rest of creation. It simply does not occur to most of us to include environmental devastation as one of the persistent horrors of war.

Perhaps that is not surprising. Even in our own communities, it is usually a struggle to identify the hazards of pollution, the impacts of toxic waste, and the disproportionate costs of environmental injustice. Here at home, the dangers of ecological disruption and climate change are so often dismissed by those who favor business as usual. Is it any wonder that those sorts of questions don't figure prominently in the debate about war?

I fear that a US-led attack on Iraq is all but inevitable. I grieve the many layers of blindness and insensitivity that make such an option palatable to decision makers and the populace -- including the stunning lack of concern about all-too-real environmental effects.

I cling to the hope that a deepening awareness of humanity's dependence on an ecologically healthy world may help to support and inform the work for peace -- for God's shalom -- both in the next few weeks, and in the years to come.

Shalom!

Peter Sawtell

Executive Director

Eco-Justice Ministries