|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on September 5th, 2008 UNEP NEWS RELEASE - 2008/31 KYOTO/NAIROBI, 5 September 2008–A plan to list as a World Heritage Site an The initiative, to be supported by funding from the Government of Italy, Dams upstream on the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, which feed the fabled UNEP estimated then that these wetlands would be completely lost within The World Heritage management support plan, announced at the end of a ***
With the collapse of the Saddam Hussein Government in mid-2003, local The UNEP marshland management project, which commenced in 2004 with funding These include environmentally-friendly methods that are providing safe A Marshland Information Network has been established. Training in During this meeting, the Iraqi Ministry of Environment also requested UNEP MEAs range from the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Montreal Narmin Othman, the Iraqi Environment Minister who is in Japan for the “Because of what Saddam Hussein did, the marshlands were in danger of “Now we have 50 to 60 per cent of the marshlands back we can look forward Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary-General and UNEP Executive Director, “The work in the Iraqi marshlands may have been unique and challenging for *** Chizuru Aoki of UNEP’s International Environmental Technology Centre (IETC) This will include pilot projects on community-wide ecosystem management and According to UNESCO, the earliest that Iraq could envisage a submission to “It is essential that we continue to work with the Iraqi partners, UNESCO, *** FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: The Iraqi Marshland Project: http://marshlands.unep.or.jp/ UNEP’s Post-Conflict and Disaster Management Branch Iraq Reports: Downloadable maps and images at www.unep.org? For more information, please contact: Nick Nuttall, UNEP Spokesperson and Yukio Yoshii, Senior Liaison Officer, UNEP International Environmental Habib El-Habr, Director and Regional Representative, UNEP Regional Office *********************************** ### |
Printer Friendly
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 31st, 2008 The EU Must Reengage in the Moldova’s Transnistria (Trans-Dniester ) Problem To Avoid a Russian-Ossetian Type of Intrusion. What is at Stake here Is the Clear Return to a Reasserting Russia That Has Throws a Shadow Reading Cold War II. Front-line Countries are the GUAM Countries: Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Moldova. The Latter Is The Only One That Does Not Border Russia - But Is In Danger of Becoming Another Belarus. ——– [Comment] The EU should re-engage with Moldova’s ‘frozen conflict.’ EUOBSERVER / COMMENT - Recently, the EU has learned that a war over an obscure place such as South Ossetia can shatter the arrangements of post-Cold War Europe. The armed conflict between Russia and Georgia has reverberated even more shockingly across the post-Soviet space. Without stronger engagement with its neighbours, the EU might end up with a bi-polar Europe, not a “ring of friends” in its neighbourhood. In addition to Abkhazia and South Ossetia [in Georgia], Transnistria is a third “frozen conflict” zone supported politically, economically and militarily by the Russian Federation and used to exert influence on Moldova. The war in Georgia is beginning to have an impact in Moldova. The danger is not that of another war, but of unsustainable peace and the transformation of Moldova into a second Belarus. *** *** The Moldovan government has been ready to accept some Russian conditions, but not a Russian military presence in the reunified Moldova. It also wants Russian peacekeepers to be replaced with international civilian monitors, but has little EU support on that. On this really tough issue Moldova is left pretty much on its own with Russia. *** The EU’s biggest failure is to push for the transformation of the Russia-dominated and biased peacekeeping operation in Moldova. The EU discussed this twice. In 2003, the idea was refused by Russia. But in 2006 a few EU member states killed the scheme for fear of irritating Russia. This approach now has to be revisited in the light of the Georgian crisis. *** Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 27th, 2008 Miliband rallies ‘coalition against Russian aggression’ {starts with talks in the Ukraine.} http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/… David Miliband will make a keynote speech in Ukraine today strongly condemning Russia’s decision to formally recognise two breakaway regions of Georgia. The Foreign Secretary said he was visiting Kiev in a bid to assemble the “widest possible coalition against Russian aggression”. Russia’s president Dmitri Medvedev was yesterday accused of “inflaming” the crisis by insisting that South Ossetia and Abkhazia should be independent. Mr Medvedev told a news agency: “We are not afraid of anything, including the prospect of a new Cold War. “But we don’t want it and in this situation everything depends on the position of our partners.” He said the West would have to “understand the reason behind” the decision to recognise the regions if it wanted to preserve good relations with Russia. *** “It will also not work,” he said in a statement yesterday. “It is contrary to the principles of the peace agreement, which Russia recently agreed, and to recent Russian statements. “It takes no account of the views of the hundreds of thousands of Georgians and others who have been forced to abandon their homes in the two territories.” The Foreign Secretary was backed by Western leaders including US President George Bush and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Mr Bush condemned Mr Medvedev’s decision as “irresponsible” and called the move “inconsistent” with UN Security Council resolutions and the French-brokered ceasefire plan. “Russia’s action only exacerbates tensions and complicates diplomatic negotiations,” Mr Bush said. Ms Merkel condemned Russia’s decision as “absolutely not acceptable,” but said Europe must still keep channels of communication open with Moscow. French Foreign Ministry spokesman Eric Chevallier said the Russian decision was “regrettable, and we reaffirm our attachment to Georgia’s territorial integrity”. France, which currently holds the EU presidency, has called an emergency meeting of EU leaders on Monday to review the relationship between Russia and Europe. *** Yesterday Russia cancelled a visit by Nato’s secretary-general, and it has complained that the alliance is bolstering its military presence in the Black Sea. And in a move that is likely to increase tensions even further, Mr Medvedev later warned that his country may respond to a US missile shield in Europe through military means. Mr Medvedev said the deployment of an anti-missile system close to Russian borders “will, of course, create additional tensions”. He said: “We will have to react somehow, to react, of course, in a military way.” Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 26th, 2008 God created an abundant world, filled with glorious creatures both large and small. As stewards of God’s Creation we are called to protect all life, to keep and care for the garden. The blessing of fruitfulness is given to all of Creation in Genesis, and it is our duty to ensure that all life is allowed the opportunity of fruitfulness. God blessed the Earth so that all living beings will prosper with great abundance and diversity.
Every year, October the 4th is recognized as St. Francis Day, and is often celebrated through a Blessing of the Animals Service. The service recognizes the ideals of St. Francis of Assisi, who wrote a Canticle of the Creatures, an ode to God’s living things. “All praise to you, Oh Lord, for all these brother and sister creatures.” Christians everywhere celebrate the feast of St. Francis of Assisi on October 4 by blessing their pets in the spirit of this patron saint of animals and ecology.
It is in that tradition that we pass God’s blessing onto other generations of animals, reminding ourselves that God is in covenant not just with us, but with all of Creation. This St. Francis Day, we invite you to celebrate in two ways. First, by holding a Blessing of the Animals Service in your community. Click here to view an online resource, including basic how-to’s, along with worship and scriptural resources. Also, we encourage you to make the celebration of the biodiversity of God’s Creation an integral part of your church’s faith life, through our upcoming resource “Tending the Garden”. Click here to reserve your copy now, or check online for its availabilty in PDF form in the next 2 weeks. The reference link is: http://www.nccecojustice.org/animalbless… http://www.nccecojustice.org/adamah.htm http://www.nccecojustice.org/landhome.ht… http://www.nccecojustice.org/landantholo… The National Religious Partnership for the Environment - http://www.nrpe.org/ Coalition on the Environment and Jewish Life, Protecting Creation, Generation to Generation. http://www.coejl.org/index.php ____________________________________________________________ Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 22nd, 2008 The following was published on Japan Times online and we think it is either very naive or somewhere partisan and misleading. Is it possible that Russia took positions on Kosovo, so they van prepare the base for their positions on South Ossetia and Abkhazia? Then, what kind of Russians are the people of South Ossetia? Do they really want back under a Russian roof, or actually they would prefer to have their own State for the Ossetians - North and South United? We can only pray that the Japanese readers will be better informed then Mr. Thakur and those that gave him the ACUNS 2008 Award for the best recent book on the United Nations system think. You have to admire the chutzpah of the neocons for their castigation of Russia for attacking another country and emulating, in the Caucasus, NATO’s behavior in the Balkans. Who does Vladimir Putin think he is — U.S. President George W. Bush? If U.N. authorization is not a necessary condition for waging war lawfully and legitimately, then we must accept the resulting international anarchy and the law of the jungle in world affairs. We no longer cede the right to any one state to use massive force within its borders free of external scrutiny or criticism. Claims for reversing the progressive restrictions on the right to interstate armed violence will be met with even more skepticism. To argue that NATO alone has the right to determine whether military intervention, by itself or any other coalition, is justified against others outside the coalition, is a claim to unilateralism and exceptionalism that will never be conceded by the “international community.” The claim that NATO should be set up as the final arbiter of military intervention by itself and every other coalition is breathtakingly arrogant. In justification, Russia has pointed to Georgian complicity in killing thousands of South Ossetians, the fact that many of these are Russian citizens, the responsibility of Russia to protect its nationals, and the responsibility of the international community to protect South Ossetians from genocidal attacks by Georgia. Moscow is wrong to invoke the norm in this case, but no more so than the Americans and British were wrong in Iraq five years ago. Both actions prove the risks of unilateral interpretations and actions and the wisdom of channeling action through the U.N. Otherwise, the only certain end result is vigilante justice, which is no justice at all. The U.N. Charter encapsulates the international moral code and best-practice international behavior. The urge to “humanitarian intervention” by powerful states, coalitions of the willing or regional organizations outside their own area of operations must be bridled by the legitimizing authority of the U.N. as our only available international organization for this purpose. The second problem is the opposite one — of behaving as if geopolitics and realism belong on history’s shelf and have no relevance or applicability anymore. As Henry Kissinger is reported to have said after the Argentine invasion of the Falklands that roused the slumbering British lion into action to retake the islands by force, “a great power does not retreat forever.” The end of the Cold War saw a very rare phenomenon in human history. Russia acknowledged its defeat and the new world order that came out of it. But instead of demonstrating grace in victory and some sensitivity to Russia’s legitimate fears, interests and national dignity, the West has repeatedly rubbed Russian noses in the dirt of their historic Cold War defeat. Kosovo was detached from Russia’s Serbian ally and its declaration of independence readily recognized earlier this year. Instead of being dismantled with victory in the Cold War, NATO, an alliance in search of a role and mission, has progressively expanded its borders and reach steadily closer to Russia, slowly but surely encroaching on some areas that are part and parcel of Russian historical soul and identity. Great powers have core vital interests that they will defend. Repeated warnings from Russia of red lines that must not be crossed were serially dismissed as the angry growls of a Russian bear in deep and permanent hibernation. Russia has been encircled by Western bases, missiles and allies, while alternately taunted, ignored and dismissed. Champion chess players that they are, the Russians bided their time before checkmating the West brutally but brilliantly in South Ossetia and firing a warning shot across the bows of other former parts of the now forgotten Soviet empire. No two situations are exactly alike. Still, much as most Westerners dismiss any analogy between Russia’s actions to pry South Ossetia and Abkhazia away from Georgia and NATO actions to detach Kosovo from Serbia, most others do accept the basic parallel. Those who wish to back rebel movements and internationalize a crisis by intervening militarily had better be prepared for payback time in other places and conflicts. And for the moral hazards to come home to roost. The wreckage of Georgia’s towns and countryside proclaim the ruins of the Bush administration’s foreign policy that has so recklessly squandered the hard won fruits of the Cold War in terms of both moral authority and geopolitical gains. Ramesh Thakur is distinguished fellow at the Center for International Governance Innovation in Waterloo, Canada. His book “The United Nations, Peace and Security” recently won the ACUNS 2008 Award for the best recent book on the United Nations system. Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 15th, 2008 Georgia and the Ukraine made moves to get closer to the West - they applied to become members of NATO. Georgia also worked with Western Europe in order to help the EU with access to Azerbaijan and Central Asia petroleum and gas. Russia clearly did not regard this bypassing of its traditional authority over what it considers as its brood. At the UN they still are bunched as former CIS and other Eastern bloc friends. Georgia had to be punished and Ukraine had to be thought that its future may be of the same sort. Now, did the Georgians think that the US will be more then a paper tiger? Lots of promise, social help - but militarily? Then - it really is not direct US interests, but rather EU interests. So, why would Russia not say to itself that showing the EU that the US is a paper tiger - nu - that is something that can also help loosen further the EU-US ties. Will the US react by telling the Russians that their economy does not justify their being members of the G8? That would be a reasonable game-play, but who will pick this up in the US Presidential contests? Aha! so here we go. Bush looked into Putin’s eyes and saw honesty. Perhaps he was right of sorts and Putin has now provided a pay-back. Russia’s moves strengthen McCain in his competition with Obama. Was this move intended to help the Republican’s in the Presidential competition, and a sign of an oil-hungry party in charge, that barks but does not bite, rather then a new force that would make the world less dependent on oil - and oil these days is indeed the only thing going for the present version of a degraded Russia. The future is bleak for Russia in a world that will be dominated by China and India with the billion-plus people, and their booming internal economies that by now whistle at Russia as there is very little except brute nuclear power that this country has to offer them. Oil - yes - but the oil to China and India will arrive by ship rather then by pipe - and if it is a pipe - that pipe will come from Central Asia and not Russia. Do we think that National borders are holly? No! But then South Ossetia belongs together with North Ossetia to one Free Ossetia State - and that is clearly not what Russia wants. They did not let go of Chechnia either. So the question here is whose ox is being gored - and the ox will suffer just the same under this or another regime. The South Ossetians of Georgia had at least a chance at a new and better life. By playing the Russian cards they blew it and that is why the civilized world is on Georgia’s side. If this sort of game digs deep into the Ukraine, our best advise to the Ukraine government is to take the Czech example of friendly divorce, and let go of those eastern territories that want some more Russian punishment. Ukraine will then soon find out that they are better thereof - and the Russian Ukrainians will just be set back and have to start their lives anew.
Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on August 12th, 2008 GEORGIA: Where the Cold War Never Ended. PRAGUE, Aug 11 (IPS) - As war breaks out in Georgia, the geopolitical struggle between the U.S. and Russia becomes more violent and closer to Russia’s border than ever. The conflict started after Georgian troops tried to take control of the Georgian breakaway region of South Ossetia, which had been de facto independent and protected by Russian peacekeeping forces since 1992. Russia has responded by launching an extensive military operation in South Ossetia, repelling Georgian forces from regional capital Tskhinvali, 100 km northwest of the Georgian capital Tbilisi, and advancing into Georgian territory. Mikheil Saakashvili, President of the 4.6 million Caucasus country, claims the Russian “invasion” was premeditated. Abkhazia, another breakaway region in Western Georgia that proclaimed independence in the same year, has also become entangled in the conflict by taking Russia’s side. Sporadic clashes between Georgian and separatist soldiers were not rare, but hostilities never reached the current extent. The Georgian move apparently took Western leaders, who had warned against attempting a military solution, by surprise. Ivan Sukhov, a journalist specialised in the region told Radio Free Europe on Friday that Saakashvili had taken “a position that is awkward for the West, since Georgia has consistently positioned itself as a principled opponent of military action. Even if the Georgian actions were provoked by the South Ossetians, this is a serious political mistake.” Georgia seemed determined to expose Russia’s involvement in Abkhazia and South Ossetia and present the conflict as one between Western democracy and Eastern authoritarianism, possibly hoping to obtain a more decisive Western intervention in the conflict. The attempt to revive cold war rhetoric was palpable in Saakashvili’s parallels of Georgia’s situation with the 1956 Hungarian and 1968 Czechoslovak interventions by the Soviet Union. One possible goal of the Georgian leadership’s military intervention was to internationalise the conflict so as to change the format of the present Russian-dominated peacekeeping mission, and facilitate the regions’ peaceful or forcible reintegration. Many have seen in Georgia’s rash decision the first consequence of Kosovo’s unilateral independence from Serbia last February. The move has encouraged the separatist claims of the South Ossetian and Abkhaz leaderships, and Georgia’s renewed determination to fully regain its territorial sovereignty. The leaders of the separatist regions trust that after Kosovo’s independence, the consent of the sovereign state is no longer necessary if a greater power can guarantee its security. Moreover they have deployed similar arguments to those applied in Kosovo: a past of ethnic-driven war which left thousands of civilians dead and countless displaced on both sides. Unhappy with the U.S.-promoted Kosovo independence, Moscow had promised an adequate response to the latest violation in international law, and its first step came with the institutionalisation of ties with Georgia’s two breakaway regions in March. Unlike the West in Kosovo, Russia can claim the conflict in its southern regions directly affects its own security, and above all, that of a population of which 80 percent hold Russian passports. Russian claims of arbitrary killings of up to 1,600 civilians by Georgian forces have not been independently verified, although a few Western journalists have started to take interest in testimonies by Ossetian refugees allegedly witness to human rights abuses by Georgian troops. If the claims were to be at least partially verified and Russia was to show self-restraint and restore order, its ambition of a role as a legitimate world power and a regional pacifier could gain credibility. Besides Kosovo, Russia was irritated by Washington’s enthusiastic promotion of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) membership for two of Russia’s neighbours, Ukraine and Georgia, as well as U.S. plans to build a missile defence system in Eastern Europe which it claims will alter the balance of forces in Europe. Georgia’s NATO bid was presented by the U.S. and Georgia’s former communist Eastern European allies as a chance to expand the area of freedom and democracy and to limit the expansion of Moscow’s authoritarian tendencies in Russia’s near abroad. Many elites in the post-communist countries tend to believe that Russia is inherently inclined towards authoritarianism and expansionism and that the Soviet Union was just another expression of this impulse. But the Western European member states, aware that Georgia’s commitment to liberal democracy was dubious and territorial tensions on the rise, decided to postpone the discussion on Georgia’s membership of NATO. Many have noted an increase in Saakashvili’s authoritarian tendencies over the last year, with the arrest of opposition activists and the abuse of state resources by merely citing the “Russian threat”. The U.S. has also been openly providing military support and training to the Georgian army while often encouraging Georgia to see itself as a crusader for democracy in the midst of authoritarianism. But as a member of NATO, a young and nationalistic state like Georgia could have drawn the entire alliance into a direct military confrontation with Russia. Different points of view were posted by Open Democracy.net : http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/geo… Permalink | ### |