Al Gore shares the Peace Nobel Prize with UN's pannel on climate change. How strange a choice! I am not sure that I agree with the judgement of the Norwegian academy. Gore is already so famous so he does not need more publicity, and on top of everything he only made a movie, and a movie that can be criticized from many points of view! But I guess it's a way to bring to world's attention the importance of climate change and its relevance for peace. It may though thin out the meaningfullness of the Peace prize.
Nevertheless, this decision is in agreement with some recent studies on the impact of environmental damage and resource scarcity on conflict levels. Clearly when a region decays environmentally both migration to other, livable, places and strong competition for remaining resources occur. Migration may lead to conflicts between the local and the refugee populations, and the resource competition may grow into war.
Therefore I see the argument in favor of ICCC and Gore, but at the same time cannot help but deplore that it is just the Peace prize that must draw attention to climate. Maybe there were some other, better, choices this year, including a 97 year old Polish woman who saved the lives of Jewish children during WWII. Or maybe I am too traditionalist in my definition of peace.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment