The
war is officially over, but predictably multiple wars of
a different kind would surface post war.
The
requirement for multiple rebuilding efforts in a post
war situation is immense that often, concerns of
environment and ecology, despite their life sustaining
significance are forgotten in the mêlée.
It
shouldn’t therefore, shock anyone to learn that Sri
Lanka has not conducted any impact assessments during 26
long years of combat to ascertain the ecological cost
emanating from a protracted civil war.
We
have failed to go beyond mapping out, that too out of
sheer necessity, areas that are considered vulnerable to
earth slips and landslides.
The
only other impact assessments undertaken came post
tsunami with emphasis falling on the restoration of
drinking water supply and to strengthen coastal buffers
to reduce future calamities.
But
the consequences of war remain unassessed. Like slow
death, it continues to have a huge impact on every day
life and cause a heavy burden on the northeastern
environment, if one narrows the impact to that.
Mine clearing
The
status of ecological refugees, if one were to yet again
strictly confine to the war torn areas is not known. The
only area in which the state had so far been active is
mine clearing, which is key in rehabilitation.
Struggling to cater to the humanitarian crisis and the
influx of refugees, the government implements a
comprehensive mine action programme to make the country
mine free soon. Seven international demining
organisations, the Sri Lanka Army and one local NGO are
now working in the northeast clearing mines, both
manually and mechanically.
The
pioneering efforts of demining were undertaken by the
Sri Lanka Army (SLA) in 1996 while the government’s
comprehensive programme commenced in 2003 with the first
national steering committee being appointed in August
2002 following the truce.
While
Sri Lanka lags behind, much research has been done on
the ecological impact on other wars. The key wars
witnessed during the past three decades are those caused
by military conflicts in the Vietnam War, the Gulf War
and the Kosovo conflict. There have been efforts to
legally, scientifically, environmentally and
economically assess the cost of these wars. They are
also expected to help serve as eye openers.
Public health
Accordingly, research claims that one of the most
undermined issues in conflict areas though a terrible
indication of ravaged environment is public health.
Sanitation, water supply, contamination of wells and
fields, the possible spreading of vector and water borne
diseases, contamination and even slow poisoning are
areas that are sadly overlooked.
Nothing has been said about the island’s northeastern
fields, how arable the land could be, or what kind of
contamination level prevails in the wells and waterways
due to shelling and other residual military activities.
This
should add a fresh dimension to those who seek to
control territory. That long engagements rendering
thousands of people refugees also leave in their wake a
trail of destruction. The impact caused leads to slow
deaths, peculiar diseases, low immunity, respiratory and
skin ailments, health and a degraded environment upon
which there is no reliance possible.
Days away from June 5 — World Environment Day — Sri
Lanka needs a new focus, to rebuild the liberated north.
This also means environmental rebuilding.
|
Refugee related envirinmental problems
According to research conducted by R.
Ramasubramanian of the School of International
Studies, Pondicherry University, refugee-related
environmental problems have their origin in the
sudden imbalance created by the increase in the
refugee populations and the environmental carrying
capacity.
This is made more serious by the absence of
ameliorative environmental actions. South Asia also
experiences a wide range of environmental damage due
to deadly conflicts.
He
says that environmental degradation is a worldwide
phenomenon with every nation virtually now compelled
to experience some form of habitat destruction or
degradation.
In
identifying the links between environment and
refugees, Ramasubramanian says that the first link
is migration due to environmental problems causing
the creation of a category of environmental
refugees. The other is the impact of refugee influx
on environmental processes.
Environmental problems
The influx of Bangladeshi refugees into northeast
India during the late 1970s led to a 12% loss in the
total forest cover, it is estimated.
Environmental problems associated with refugees in
South Asian states are normally due to the
consequences of high refugee concentrations as
opposed to military engagements per se damaging the
area.
A
report by the Green Belt organisation suggests that
only 23 refugee camps were set up in
Afghanistan
during 1998. But within two years the number
increased to 61. In the absence of mitigating
measures, physical deterioration of the surrounding
environment soon takes place, generating other
problems for the local population.
Referring to
Sri Lanka,
he says that in the north of Sri Lanka, a perennial
hot house of conflict and displacement, the state
wrestled with camp rehabilitation and resettling the
returning refugees into fragile ecosystems, the
surrounding regions were gripped by ongoing
conflict, and the environmental issues produced by
war.
War against terror
Hundreds of thousands of refugees from Afghanistan
began to leave their home as a result of the “War
against terror” launched by the US, presenting
massive environmental challenges on several fronts.
During the birth of
Bangladesh
from East Pakistan in 1971, millions of people moved
out into northeast India and even Nepal. These mass
flights of civilians had a major impact on the
surrounding countryside in which they sought safety.
These figures are not intended to dispute the fact
that concentrated groups of displaced people
negatively impact on the environment, but merely to
help put things in perspective, adds the report.
For most countries, the loss of any forest cover may
be a major issue because of habitat degradation,
loss of ecosystem functioning, often leading to
reduced levels of income or a lower quality of life.
Reversing the loss or environmental damage in such a
case is a costly and not always a practical
solution. |
