Common Ground tackles the consequences of climate change and the need for cooperative action by looking at issues of power, particularly the way power holders maintain control by deliberately and effectively dividing people. The events featured illustrate how the fossil fuel industry benefits from racial and class divisions. However, the emphasis is on examples of people joining forces across differences to protect water, air, and the environment.
Eileen Flanagan has been the Campaign Director of the Philadelphia-based Quaker Earth Action Team. She stresses that, today, we need to draw upon the wisdom of those who have navigated the “divide and conquer” tactics of those opposed to ecologically-sound policies. The Quaker Earth Action Team was founded in 2010 in part by George Lakey, the non-violent activist who gave examples of Quakers throughout history who put their bodies in the way of injustice, such as those who sailed across the Pacific in the 1950s to interrupt nuclear testing.
Today, we need to bring more people into action coalitions in order to make truly transformative change. This requires developing a sense of common purpose and overcoming a sentiment of separation. There is a need to stress a life-sustaining civilization based on an understanding of the interconnection of all life. As Eileen Flanagan writes, “Just as the crisis of the Earth has the potential to help us overcome our illusion of the separation from other species and other communities, it also has the potential to help us transcend the boundaries of nation-states. No one country can solve the climate crisis on its own.”
She shares her personal journey and her relations with community activists to form coalitions that make a difference – a useful book!
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2020, 147pp.
Thomas Nordström has written a useful book which more accurately should have been called “The Need for a World Government in Action”. He outlines many of the challenges facing the world society and stresses that the United Nations (UN) does not have the authority or the power to deal with these challenges adequately. The challenges are interrelated and thus must be faced in an interrelated way. Thus, climate change has an impact on land use which has an impact on food production. To improve food production, there must be better education on food issues as well as greater equality among women and men, as, in many countries, women play a major role in food production, food preparation, and food conservation.
As governments and UN Secretariat members become aware of an issue, the issue is taken up in one or another of the UN Specialized Agencies – FAO, WHO, ILO, UNESCO, or a new program is created: the Environment Program, or different programs on the issue of women. Today, within the halls of the UN there are negotiations for a Global Pact on the Environment and for the creation of a World Environment Organization which would be stronger than the existing UN Environment Program. Such a Global Pact for the Environment would clarify important environmental principles and relations between the existing treaties on the environment which have been negotiated separately.
In the UN, the international agenda reflects the growing influence of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and the scientific community in shaping policy. We see this vividly in the discussions on the impact of climate change. The distinction that used to be made between national and international questions has almost entirely vanished. NGOs must be able to provide possible avenues of action based on an effective theoretical analysis that acknowledges the complexity of the international environment.
Governments cannot at the same time boost expenditure on armaments and deal effectively with ecological deterioration and the consequences of climate change. Militarization has contributed to the neglect of other pressing issues, such as shrinking forests, erosion of soils and falling water tables. Militarization draws energy and efforts away from constructive action to deal with common problems. Militarization creates rigidity at the center of world politics as well as brittleness which leads to regional conflicts and civil wars. This political paralysis is both a cause and a result of the rigidity and the brittleness of current international politics. Opportunities are missed for building upon the more positive elements of a particular situation.
What is often called “complex emergencies” – a combination of political and social disintegration that includes armed conflicts, ethnic violence, state collapse, warlordism, refugee flows and famine – have become one of the most pressing humanitarian issues of our time. Today’s violent conflicts are often rooted in a mix of exclusion, inequality, mismanagement of natural resources, corruption, and the frustrations that accompany a lack of jobs and opportunities. Lack of opportunities sows the seeds of instability and violence.
As Nordström points out, behind all the current armed conflicts, there is the presence in a small number of countries of nuclear weapons. If they were used, the level of destruction would be great. Although nuclear disarmament was on the agenda of the UN General Assembly from its start, there has been little progress on nuclear disarmament issues.
As World Citizen and former President of India S. Radhakrishnan has written, “To survive we need a revolution in our thoughts and outlook. From the alter of the past we should take the living fire and not the dead ashes. Let us remember the past, be alive to the present and create the future with courage in our hearts and faith in ourselves.” The great challenge which humanity faces today is to leave behind the culture of violence in which we find ourselves and move rapidly to a culture of peace and solidarity. We can achieve this historic task by casting aside our ancient nationalistic and social prejudices and begin to think and act as responsible Citizens of the World. Nordström sets out some of the guideposts.
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
The United Nations (UN) Charter begins with the promising words “We the Peoples…”. However, thereafter the peoples’ voice fades and that of governments takes over. Yet today, Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) with consultative status with the UN play an effective role in shaping global policy. Many NGOs are transnational with members in different countries and cultures. This is one of their strengths and helps the UN to serve better all peoples.
For NGOs, there is a need to look outside the framework of the existing UN system to grasp the importance of new issues. This was the case in the late 1960s when some NGOs began to raise the issue of the environment and ecological protection before these issues were on the governmental agenda for action. Today, such an issue is the increasing amount of rural productive land that is falling under the control of urban elites, sometimes urban elites in other countries. Landownership inevitably deals with the distribution of power within a society. No development project, no matter how small or how technical, is without an impact on the distribution of power. A new well dug in a village is not simply an added social service. The new well calls into question the power of those who controlled access to water prior to digging the new well.
Although in many countries there are unions of agricultural workers, peasant leagues, agricultural cooperatives, and rural credit unions, it is nevertheless generally true that rural organizations have rarely achieved the degree of national power that has been reached by industrial workers’ unions.
A Sudanese farmer harvesting sorghum plants from seeds donated by the Food and Agriculture Organization. (C) Fred Noy/UN Photo
One answer to why the rural poor stay poor is that they are rarely well organized. Especially the least powerful among the rural poor – the tenant farmers, the landless laborers, the untouchables, the members of tribal societies – are the least well organized, the most easily divided and blocked. The economic and political power structure in many countries does not encourage the active participation of small, marginal farmers and rural workers. If measures are not taken to facilitate the peaceful participation of the rural poor, it is likely that the rural poor will turn to armed violence.
It is true that nonviolent techniques have been used to organize the powerless in rural areas. One of the first actions of Mahatma Gandhi on his return to India from South Africa was to investigate and then mediate the struggle of the rural indigo pickers. Cesar Chavez was a leading advocate of nonviolence in his efforts to organize agricultural workers in the western United States. In Sri Lanka, the Sarvodaya movement has applied Buddhist values of compassion to construct a social and economic infrastructure based on a strong community spirit.
The role of the marginalized in rural areas is not a new problem but it is one that has not received the attention it deserves. NGOs can help to focus on the issue within the UN system and so advance reform measures.
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
The January 20, 2025 inauguration of President Donald Trump has brought into sharp focus the turbulent and complex world society in which we live. As peacebuilders and citizens of the world, we face the same challenges as President Trump but with a different style and with far fewer resources at our command. We make plans but then are called to work for conflict resolution in unanticipated ways.
There are four policy challenges which face both President Trump and World Citizens: armed conflicts, currently ongoing and potential, persistent poverty in many areas, the erosion of international law and faith in multinational institutions, particularly the United Nations (UN), and the consequences of climate change.
The ongoing and potential armed conflicts are neither new nor unexpected. The Israeli-Palestinian tensions exist at least since 1936 and increased after the creation of the State of Israel. There may be some possibilities for negotiations in good faith. We must keep an eye open for possible actions.
Tensions with Iran are not new. The Soviet forces in part of Iran was the first conflict with which the UN had to deal in its early days. However, the rule by the Ayatollahs has made matters more complex.
The Russian-Ukrainian war grinds on with a large number of persons killed, wounded, and uprooted. Again, we must look to see if a ceasefire and negotiations are possible.
In Asia, the armed conflict in Myanmar between the military in power and the ethnic militias dates from the creation of the Burmese State at the end of the Second World War. A potential armed conflict between Mainland China and Taiwan dates from 1949 and the Nationalist government’s retreat to Taiwan. The potential armed conflict between the two Korean States dates from 1950 and the start of the Korean War.
The armed conflicts in Africa are no longer in the headlines, but they date from the early 1960s and the breakup of the European Empires: the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, the States of the Sahel.
Thus, we all have a poor record of armed conflict prevention and mediation. Armed conflicts should remain at the top of both the governmental and nongovernmental agenda for action.
(C) U.S. Embassy France on Instagram
Persistent Poverty: Despite the UN Decades for Development, the Sustainable Development Goals, and Article 22 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that everyone is entitled to the economic, social, and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and free development of his personality, persistent poverty exists in many parts of the world. One consequence of persistent poverty is migration from poorer to richer areas, both within countries and from poorer to richer States. Migration is a hotly debated issue in many countries, as right-wing nationalist groups make anti-migration their battle cry. Migration is likely to become an even more heated topic of debate as President Trump tries to carry out his proposal for a mass deportation of immigrants from the USA.
Linked to persistent poverty are trade issues and the protectionist trends in many countries. President Trump has proposed higher tariffs for good coming into the USA. This policy may set off tariff wars. Obviously to counter persistent poverty, world development policies must be improved – easier said than done!
The Erosion of International Law and Faith in Multinational Institutions: Armed conflicts and persistent poverty are closely related to the third issue: the receding United States (U.S.) involvement with the UN, the World Bank, the IMF, the World Court and other multinational organizations. Some of the foreign policy authorities appointed by President Trump are overtly critical of the UN and the International Criminal Court. There has already been an Executive Order to halt U.S. funding of the World Health Organization. However, there is no unifying vision of what a new world society would involve. The battle cry of “Make America Great Again”, if repeated by each State for itself, “Make Panama Great Again”, could be a loud concert but not conducive to positive decision making.
The Consequences of Climate Change: The fourth major group of issues concerns the consequences of climate change and the ways to lessen its impact. During the campaign for the presidency, Trump threatened to pull the USA out of the Paris Climate Agreement, and he has now signed an Executive Order doing so. The issue of climate change has been brought to the world agenda by scientists on the one hand, and by Nongovernmental Organizations and popular, often youth-led efforts, on the other hand. It is likely that these vital efforts related to climate change will continue despite climate policy resistance by some in the Trump administration.
President Trump said during his inaugural ceremony that “The Golden Age of America begins now… We stand on the verge of the four greatest years in American history.” We will have to watch closely and judge in four years. What is sure for peacebuilders and citizens of the world is that we stand on the verge of four more years of serious challenges. Thus, there is a need for cooperative and courageous action.
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
The Pact for the Future was accepted by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in a three-stage process. The first stage was a nearly year-long drafting of the document with many small revisions in the 56 paragraphs setting out the goal of a renewed UN better able to guarantee peace and development. The second stage was a last moment motion by the Russian Federation which asked for a vote, finding some of the wording, especially on human rights, too strong. The Russian motion was put to a vote with 143 States voting for the text of the Pact, 15 abstentions, and 7 opposed (Russia, Belarus, North Korea, Iran, Syria, Sudan, and Nicaragua.)
After this vote, the President of the General Assembly called for a vote by acclamation. Everyone applauded, some more vigorously than others. Thus, the Pact was adopted by consensus.
The Pact should be seen as a springboard for action rather than as an end point. With the 193 UN members potentially involved in drafting the document, there was a need for compromises and general ideas rather than any new specific proposals. The Pact is a reaffirmation of the goals and processes of the UN system, but it also notes the need for constant renewal. In paragraph 6, the Pact states, “We recognize that the multilateral system and its institutions, with the United Nations and its Charter at the center, must be strengthened to keep pace with a changing world. They must be fit for the present and the future – effective and capable, prepared for the future, just, democratic, equitable and representative of today’s world, inclusive, interconnected and financially stable.”
Paragraph 9 states, “We also reaffirm that the three pillars of the United Nations – sustainable development – peace and security, and human rights – are equally important, interlinked and mutually reinforcing. We cannot have one without the others.”
In practice, it was easier to stress sustainable development since the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals had already been set out, through progress is very uneven. For peace and security, there are Articles 25 and 26 stating that, “We will advance the goal of a world free of nuclear weapons. We will uphold our disarmament obligations and commitments.” A culture of peace is mentioned in a number of places, but no specific steps are set out.
For two days prior to the governments’ discussion and voting on the Pact, there was what were called “Action Days” to which were invited Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs), academics working on UN issues, and the representatives of business corporations involved in international trade. The two days were certainly a time for networking if not for “action”.
The Pact is a partially open door for UN cooperation with NGOs stating in a general way the “participation of relevant stakeholders in appropriate formats.” More specifically, the Pact calls to “Facilitate more structured, meaningful and inclusive engagement of nongovernmental organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council in the activities of the Council in line with ECOSOC resolution 1996/21”. The door of the Pact was most open to youth calling for an increase in the representation of youth, which can only be via NGOs. We will have to see what, as NGO representatives, we can make of the partly open door.
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
In our current globalized world society, there is an increased role for politics without borders. Politics no longer stops at the water’s edge but must play an active role on the world stage. However, unlike politics at the national level which usually has a parliament at which the actors can recite their lines, the world has no world parliament as such. Thus, new and inventive ways must be found so that world public opinion can be heard and acted upon.
The United Nations (UN) General Assembly is the closest thing to a world parliament that we have today. However, all the official participants are diplomats appointed by their respective States – 195 member states. UN Secretariat members, the secretariat members of UN Specialized Agencies such as UNESCO and the ILO, are in the hallways or coffee shops to give advice. Secretariat members of the financial institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF are also there to give advice on costs and the limits of available funds. The representatives of Nongovernmental Organizations (NGO) in Consultative Status with the UN who can speak at sessions of the Economic and Social Council and the Human Rights Council cannot address the General Assembly directly. However, they are also in the coffee shops and may send documents to the UN missions of national governments.
(C) Jérôme Blum
Politics without borders requires finding ways to express views for action beyond the borders of individual countries. Today, most vital issues that touch the lives of many people go beyond the individual State: the consequences of climate change, the protection of biodiversity, the resolution of armed conflicts, the violations of human rights, and a more just world trade pattern. Thus we need to find ways of looking at the world with a global mind and an open heart. This perspective is an aim of world citizenship.
However, World Citizens are not yet so organized as to be able to impact political decisions at the UN and in enough individual States so as to have real influence. The policy papers and Appeals of the Association of World Citizens (AWC) are often read with interest by the government representatives to whom they are sent. However, the AWC is an NGO among many and does not have the number of staff as such international NGOs as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Greenpeace.
The First Officer and External Relations Officer, Bernard J. Henry, and the Legal and Mediation Officer, Attorney Noura Addad, representing the AWC at an OECD roundtable in March 2019 (C) Bernard J. Henry/AWC
We still need to find effective ways so that humanity can come together to solve global problems, that is, politics without borders. Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
In the early hours of December 19, 2022, the delegates to the United Nations (UN) Convention on Biodiversity (COP 15) reached an agreement on a Biodiversity Framework after 12 days of intense negotiations. The theme of COP 15 was “Ecological Civilization: Building a shared future for all life on earth”. There were some 15,000 persons present during the meetings: government delegates, some 70 Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs), academic research institutes and business companies. The global biodiversity framework, to be called the “Kunming-Montreal Framework”, sets out to protect at least 30 percent of the world’s land and water by 2030. Montreal, Canada, is the headquarters of the UN Secretariat of the Convention on Biodiversity, and Kunming is the city in the People’s Republic of China where the conference was to be held but was changed because of COVID 19 restrictions.
There is general agreement among specialists that world-wide there is a loss of biodiversity due to a number of factors such as increase in mono-culture agriculture, livestock grazing, the loss of forest lands through lumbering and firewood gathering, overuse of pesticides and the growth of urbanization. Many ecosystems are under stress and facing degradation. The tree and plant cover of the world have been taking increasing losses in almost all parts of the world. There is also the impact of climate change and a lack of rainfall in some parts of the world.
As with many UN conferences, a key issue of discussion is finance. The protection of biodiversity and the restoration of degraded areas costs money without necessarily bringing in new financial wealth. There is a Global Environment Facility which is called upon to manage increase funds.
It is hoped that NGOs can play a vital role at the international level on biodiversity protection. At the national level in many countries, NGOs have played an important role in the creation of national parks and protected areas. Can they play a vital role at the international level? While there are some long-standing international ecological organizations, none yet have been able to mobilize a wide international public opinion. However, what was new at Montreal was the concerted effort of women’s organizations to have a gender focus put into the Framework for the first time. They were successful, and the Framework states that the Framework should “ensure gender equality in the implementation of the Framework through a gender-responsive approach where all women and girls have equal opportunity and capacity to contribute to the objectives of the Convention, including by recognizing their equal rights and access to land and natural resources and their full, equitable, meaningful and informed participation and leadership at all levels of action, engagement, policy, and decision-making related to biodiversity.”
There is also a growing movement among young people for the safeguard of biodiversity who may watch closely at the ways the Framework leads to action. As Marco Lambertini, Director General of World Wildlife Fund International, said, “The agreement represents a major milestone for the conservation of our natural world, and biodiversity has never been so high on the political and business agenda, but it can be undermined by slow implementation and failure to mobilize the promised resources. Governments have chosen the rights side of history in Montreal, but history will judge us all if we don’t deliver on the promise made today.”
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
Dans un premier temps, il nous semble important de faire un rappel de l’état des lieux environnemental dans lequel se trouvent la terre et ses ressources, en considérant les interactions entre l’humanité et les écosystèmes qui y vivent.
Selon le Rapport Planète Vivante de WWF (2020), les activités humaines ont amené à une diminution de 68% des populations mondiales de mammifères, d’oiseaux, de poissons, de reptiles et d’amphibiens en 50 ans.
En Europe, par exemple, l’Union Internationale pour la Conservation de la Nature (UICN) indique la disparition de 36 espèces entre 2015 et aujourd’hui, et plus de 11% sont menacées d’extinctions (dont 58% d’arbres endémiques et 40% de poissons d’eau douce).
En Afrique, ce sont 700 millions d’hectares de terres (soit plus de dix fois la surface de la France), qui ont été dégradées par la pression humaine, et ce en lien avec la désertification et le surpâturage (source : la Banque mondiale, 2016). Cette situation crée un cercle vicieux, qui amène à une urgence alimentaire, laquelle nécessite à son tour une exploitation excessive des arbres et une sur-utilisation des engrais et pesticides[1].
Au niveau mondial, le stock de poissons a reculé de 50% entre 1970 et 2010, les côtes africaines étant les plus pillées au monde, notamment par la Chine[2]. Il se pourrait que les stocks halieutiques exploités par les êtres humains déclinent jusqu’à disparaître en 2048, si l’on en croit les prévisions d’Isabelle Autissier, présidente de WWF-France (jusqu’en janvier 2021).
Quant aux villes, si elles n’occupent que 3% de la surface continentale mondiale[3], elles concentrent 55% de la population mondiale et consomment plus des deux tiers de la demande énergétique mondiale (source : Rapport de situation 2019 sur les énergies renouvelables dans les villes de l’ONU). Elles sont, par ailleurs, particulièrement vulnérables aux changements climatiques et aux catastrophes naturelles du fait, entre autres, de leur forte concentration humaine, tout en étant en partie les causes de ces aléas climatiques[4].
L’histoire de l’humanité est en train de se jouer, en notre défaveur à tous ; il n’y a pas de région, de pays ou de continent épargnés. Il y a une réelle urgence à s’en préoccuper, car si nous n’agissons pas, c’est notre propre espèce que nous mettons en péril.
Une des premières conséquences de ces désordres environnementaux est d’obliger, inexorablement, des populations à se déplacer.
Bien que l’histoire de l’humanité soit faite de migrations, ces dernières se multiplient fortement, depuis quelques années. Auparavant, c’était les guerres, les violences, maintenant, ce sont aussi les aléas climatiques qui poussent les êtres humains à quitter la terre qui les a vus grandir et qui leur a permis de construire leurs identifications fondamentales.
Nous savons que, d’une manière générale, toute migration, à laquelle s’ajoute celle due à l’environnement, provoque des perturbations socioculturelles énormes, autant pour ceux qui la subissent que pour ceux qui l’accueillent. Elle engendre des souffrances humaines indicibles qui questionnent et violentent notre humanité.
Lequel d’entre nous n’a pas encore, en mémoire, ces images insoutenables des migrants noyés gisants sur les plages, en particulier sur les deux rives de la Méditerranée ?
Parmi ces migrants, combien sont des réfugiés climatiques ? Nous n’avons pas encore assez d’études qui nous renseignent avec précision sur cette question, mais il est avéré qu’ils sont de plus en plus nombreux.
Pourtant, force est de constater que le sujet des réfugiés climatiques est le parent pauvre de la politique actuelle, le lien entre migration et réchauffement climatique faisant l’objet d’un silence assourdissant de la part de nos politiques. Pour autant, en 2013, un rapport du Conseil norvégien pour les réfugiés (NRC) fait état de 22 millions de personnes ayant été déplacées en raison de catastrophes naturelles, ce qui est trois fois plus élevé que le nombre des personnes fuyant un conflit.
Mais qui sont ces migrants, ces réfugiés de l’environnement ? Ce sont des personnes « qui sont forcées de quitter leur lieu de vie temporairement ou de façon permanente à cause d’une rupture environnementale (d’origine naturelle ou humaine) qui a mis en péril leur existence ou sérieusement affecté leurs conditions de vie »[5].
Alors comment sont catégorisés ces « réfugiés climatiques », appelés aussi « déplacés » ou « éco-migrants » ? Ils sont, d’emblée, intégrés aux seules catégories existantes: celles des « réfugiés économiques » ou des « réfugiés de la misère ». En effet, ils n’ont pas de statut juridique, car ils ne remplissent pas les critères de la Convention de Genève signée en 1951.
Cette dernière n’accorde l’assurance d’une protection aux réfugiés que dans certains cas, à savoir, « des situations de persécutions liées à la race, à la religion, à la nationalité, aux opinions politiques, ou à l’appartenance à certains groupes sociaux » (UNHCR).
De ce fait, les pays d’accueil, connus pour leur qualité de vie et leur sécurité, et vers lesquels se dirigent naturellement ces éco-migrants, ne disposent d’aucun budget pour recevoir ces derniers.
Selon le Rapport mondial sur le déplacement interne (2020) de l’ONG Internal Displacement Monitoring Center (IDMC), chaque année, plus de 20 millions de personnes qui sont déplacées, le sont pour cause de catastrophes naturelles, dont 86% de nature hydrométéorologique.
Alors, quels sont les changements environnementaux qui provoquent de tels flux migratoires ?
L’Ined (Institut national d’études démographiques) fait état de 3 phénomènes[6] principaux :
1) L’intensité accrue des catastrophes naturelles.
En effet, entre 1995 et 2015, plus de 600.000 personnes sont décédées du fait de ces catastrophes météorologiques. Plus de 4 milliards de personnes ont en été blessées, ou sont tombées dans une forte précarité à la suite de ces catastrophes. (Source : rapport du Bureau des Nations unies pour la réduction des risques de catastrophes)
2) La hausse du niveau des mers.
Elle risque de rendre inhabitables certaines zones basses à forte densité de population.
C’est le cas de nombreuses régions du Bangladesh[7], par exemple. Ce pays, tout comme l’Inde, a vu s’accroître ses problèmes socio-économiques et politiques en raison notamment du déplacement des Rohingyas, forcés de fuir le Myanmar.
3) La raréfaction des ressources hydriques, aussi appelée stress hydrique.
Elle engendre sécheresse et désertification. C’est notamment le cas des États du Sahel, où les modèles climatiques prédisent une aggravation de la sécheresse dans les années à venir. Cette situation a déjà été à l’origine de déplacements majeurs de populations et d’une perte importante du bétail dans cette région d’Afrique. Le bétail, rappelons-le, constitue la principale source de production agricole[8].
Par ailleurs, et depuis quelques années, on assiste à une augmentation des inondations meurtrières notamment en Afrique de l’Ouest. Ces évènements sont dus à différents phénomènes tels que le changement de l’usage des terres, la réduction des jachères, ou encore la déforestation et l’urbanisation. Tout ceci rend les sols incapables d’absorber les eaux diluviennes notamment dans la zone du Sahel[9].
Ainsi, en 2018, ce sont 250.000 Afghans qui ont dû fuir leurs villages en raison des fortes chaleurs, induisant une vulnérabilité extrême de cette population, déjà exposée aux conflits armés.
Selon un rapport du Conseil norvégien pour les réfugiés, « en 2013, les catastrophes naturelles ont fait presque trois fois plus de déplacés que les guerres » (INED) et 85% d’entre eux sontdes pays en développement.
Pour une grande partie de ces populations, c’est l’exode vers l’Occident, et particulièrement l’Europe, qui est le plus tentant et le plus tenté, dans l’espoir de vivre dignement, ou tout au moins de survivre …
Comment dès lors permettre à ces populations de vivre dans leurs territoires, d’y travailler et d’en utiliser les ressources ?
Certaines bonnes pratiques locales, simples d’accès, notamment pour les populations autochtones pourraient aider à lutter contre ces problématiques environnementales. Quelques-unes commencent d’ores et déjà à émerger et devraient faire, nous l’espérons, effet « boule de neige ».
À titre d’exemple, citons le mouvement de la ceinture verte au Kenya (Green Belt Movement) qui a été lancé par la biologiste Wangari Maathai et qui encourage les femmes à planter des arbres, ce qui leur permet, à terme, d’améliorer leur niveau de vie.
En Mongolie, toute une muraille verte a également vu le jour, pour résister à l’avancée du désert de Gobi.
Au Burkina Faso, des paysans construisent des cuvettes en demi-lunes qui permettent de concentrer les précipitations et réduire le ruissellement[10].
Au Rajasthan, pour récupérer l’eau des moussons, recharger les nappes phréatiques et réalimenter les rivières, les paysans ont remis au goût du jour le « johad », une technique agricole ancestrale, qui consiste à collecter les eaux de pluie pendant la saison des moussons et les utiliser en les faisant filtrer dans le sous sol pendant la saison sèche[11].
Wangari Maathai
On peut aussi évoquer la transformation de la villa « ASSIE GAYE » au Sénégal en 2009-2010, qui s’est faite grâce à l’utilisation de matériaux locaux, comme la terre crue argileuse. Elle est alimentée en énergies renouvelables, grâce à un générateur éolien, un générateur photovoltaïque et un collecteur thermique. Ce qui en fait une maison durable, à la fois sur le plan écologique et économique[12].
Enfin, nous devons rappeler qu’il est indispensable pour l’humanité de relever le défi majeur de ces problématiques environnementales et humaines qui s’offrent à elle. Il nous faut intégrer tous les possibles en matière de changement climatique annoncés par les rapports du Groupe GIEC, dans le but d’y répondre.
Il serait ainsi plus urgent d’attribuer certains budgets étatiques à la prise en charge des réfugiés climatiques, plutôt que d’augmenter, par exemple, ceux inhérents à la défense et à l’armement.
Par ailleurs, la lutte contre le fléau de l’évasion fiscale pourrait, éventuellement, profiter à ces mêmes réfugiés et ainsi limiter la pression sur les pays d’origine ou encore sur les pays accueillant ces migrants.
Pour clôturer mon propos, j’emprunte un peu de sa sagesse à Wangari Maathai qui précise qu’« Aujourd’hui, nous affrontons un défi qui exige un renouvellement de notre mode de pensée, pour que l’humanité cesse de menacer le système qui assure sa propre survie. Nous sommes appelés à aider la terre à guérir ses blessures et, à guérir les nôtres – en fait, à embrasser la totalité de la création dans toute sa diversité, sa beauté et ses merveilles. »[13]
Nadia Belaala est architecte et ingénieure sociale, anciennement Officier du Développement durable de l’Association of World Citizens.
[5] Cournil, C. (2010). Les “réfugiés environnementaux” : enjeux et questionnements autour d’une catégorie émergente. Migrations Société, 2(2), 67-79. https://doi.org/10.3917/migra.128.0067
[7] Kholiquzzaman Ahmad, Q. (2006). Changement climatique, inondations et gestion des crues : le cas du Bangladesh. Hérodote, 2(2), 73-94. https://doi.org/10.3917/her.121.0073
Frantz Fanon (1925-1961) whose birth anniversary we mark on July 20, was a French psychologist, writer, and participant in the Algerian struggle for independence (1954-1962). He was born in Martinique, then a French colony which now has the status of a Department of France. The bulk of the population are of African descent, having been brought to the West Indies as slaves. Although the basic culture is French, some in Martinique are interested in African culture, and as in Haiti, there are survivals of African religions, often incorporated into Roman Catholic rites.
In 1940, as France was being occupied by the German forces and a right-wing nationalist government was being created in the resort city of Vichy, sailors favorable to the Vichy government took over the island and created a narrow-nationalist, racist rule. Fanon, then 17, escaped to the nearby British colony of Dominica, and from there joined the Free French Forces led by General De Gaulle. Fanon fought in North Africa and then in the liberation of France.
Once the war over, he received a scholarship to undertake medical and then psychiatry training in Lyon. His doctoral thesis on racism as he had experienced it in the military and then during his medical studies was published in French in 1952 and is translated into English as Black Skin, White Masks.
In 1953, he was named to lead the Psychiatry Department of the Blida-Joinville Hospital in Algeria shortly before the November 1954 start of the war for independence in Algeria. He treated both Algerian victims of torture as well as French soldiers traumatized by having to carry out torture. He considered the struggle for independence as a just cause, and so in 1956 he resigned his position and left for Tunisia where the leadership of the independence movement was located. As a good writer, having already published his thesis followed by a good number of articles in intellectual journals, he was made the editor of the Algerian independence newspaper. There were a number of efforts by the French security services to kill him or to blow up the car in which he was riding. Although wounded a number of times, he survived.
In 1959, the British colony of the Gold Coast was granted independence and took the name of Ghana under the leadership of Kwame Nkrumah. Nkrumah was a pan-African, having participated in a number of pan-African congresses starting in the 1930s. He viewed the independence of the Gold Coast as the first step toward the liberation of all colonies in Africa, to be followed by the creation of African unity in some sort of federation. Ghana attracted a good number of activists of anti-colonial movements. Fanon was sent to Ghana to be the Algerian Independence Movement (Front de Libération Nationale, FLN) ambassador to Ghana and as the contact person toward other independence movements.
From his anti-colonial activity, he wrote his best-known study of colonialism, the mental health problems it caused, and the need for catharsis Les damnés de la terre, translated into English as The Wretched of the Earth. The title comes from the first line of the widely sung revolutionary song L’Internationale. For French readers, there was no need to write the first word of the song which is “Arise” as in “Arise, you Wretched of the Earth” (“Debout, les damnés de la terre”). The meaning of the book in English would have been clearer had it been called Arise, Wretched of the Earth.
Fanon was very ill with leukemia, and Les damnés de la terre was written by dictation to his French-born wife that he had married during his medical studies. He received in the hospital the first copies of his book three days before his death. He had been taken for treatment to a leading hospital just outside Washington, DC by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The role of the CIA in support of, or just infiltrating for information, the Algerian independence movement is still not fully clear. Frantz Fanon was buried in a town in Algeria then held by the independence forces. The 1962 peace agreement with France granting independence followed shortly after his death. Fanon is recalled warmly in Algeria for his part in the independence struggle.
The final four pages of Les damnés de la terre are a vital appeal for a new humanism and for a cosmopolitan world society based on the dignity of each person. For Fanon, there is a need to overcome both resignation and oppression and to begin a new history of humanity.
Note
Two useful biographies of Fanon in English are David Caute, Frantz Fanon (New York: Viking Press, 1970), and Irene Gendzier, Frantz Fanon. A Critical Study (New York: Pantheon Books, 1973)
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
The States Parties to the United Nations-sponsored Treaty on Desertification met in Abidjan, Ivory Coast on May 9-20, 2022. The 197 member states agreed to an appeal to work more actively to prevent continuing desertification and to win back lands currently under great pressure. Because the conference was being held in Africa, much attention was given to the advances of the desert in the Sahel states and the possibility of building a “Green Wall” of trees to stop the advance.
The Green Wall of Sahel (C) Sevgart
The Treaty was designed to be the centerpiece of a massive worldwide effort to arrest the spread of deserts or desert-like conditions not only in Africa south of the Sahara but wherever such conditions encroached on the livelihood of those who lived in the desert or in its destructive path.
The destruction of land that was once productive does not stem from mysterious and remorseless forces of nature but from the actions of humans. Desertification is a social phenomenon. Humans are both the despoiler and the victims of the process.
Increasingly, populations are eking out a livelihood on dwindling land resources. Thus, there must be renewed and strong efforts for land regeneration. Desertification needs to be seen in a holistic way. If we see desertification only as aridity, we may miss areas of impact such as humid tropics. We need to consider the special problems of water-logging, salinity or alkalinity of irrigation systems that destroy land each year. Because desertification disturbs a region’s natural resource base, it promotes insecurity. Insecurity leads to strife. If allowed to degenerate, strife results in inter-clan feuding between cultivators and pastoralists, cross-border raiding, and military confrontation.
Earth is our common home, and therefore in the spirit of world citizenship, we must organize to protect it. It is up to all of us concerned with ecologically-sound development to draw awareness to the dangers of desertification and the promises of land renewal.
It is important to understand the way of life of those who live on the edge of deserts. Hsuan Tsang (623-664) is a symbol of such an effort at understanding. Hsuan Tsang crossed the harshest deserts, in particular the Takla Mahan, and the tallest mountains on his quest for the innermost heart of Reality. He travelled from China to India to spend two years at the Nalanda Monastery in what is now Bihar State in northern India to study and translate into Chinese certain important Buddhist sutras. He also studied the lives of the people he met, showing an openness to the cultures of others, especially those living on the edge of the desert regions he crossed.
Prof. René Wadlow is President of the Association of World Citizens.
Association of World Citizens 