Do we need to preserve nature and the wilderness? Do future generations actually want them? Do we have the right to remove something that we cannot replace? The action of our ancestors led to extinction of species such as the dodo, Steller's sea cow, and the Tasmanian marsupial tiger, the latter scientists are trying to recreate from preserved DNA. Do we allow deforestation of rainforests to continue and replace them with biomes in redundant clay pits such as the Eden Project? Zoos, which once collected and exhibited rare animals are now committed to breeding programmes for endangered species and attempts to return animals to the wild.
1997 saw the largest environmental conference ever held, the Rio Earth Summit, which was a recognition by governments and nations that international environmental obligations are a crucial issue in international affairs. The problem with environmental issues is that they cross international boundaries and disputes can arise between neighbouring nations. One source of international tension is that in less developed countries there is a strong belief that the resources, which were plundered by the colonial powers should be restored. For example the island of Nauru in Eastern Europe, prior to its independence in 1968, was subject to phosphate mining on such an unprecedented scale that one third of the land was rendered uninhabitable. The island is demanding proceeds of the phosphate sales, in order to begin to try and repair the damage, through the international court of justice. Nauru is drawing on the general principle of international law that a state responsible for the administration of a territory must not cause irreparable damage to the legal interests of a successor state. More recently in the news has been the Kyoto Protocol (Japan) of November 2001, an international agreement aimed at preventing dangerous climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but the USA President George Bush has withdrawn American support for this protocol, largely due to internal political pressures and the reluctance of the average American to give up their large cars.
Organisations such as Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth believe that it is important to preserve the earth and prevent further destruction. Others such as International Fund for Animal Welfare focus more on the conservation of traditional habitat.
Greenpeace began on the sea. It earned its first fame in 1971 by sailing into the US atomic test site at Amchitk Alaska in the North Pacific and through the fights to save the seals and the whales. The sea -- with its vast expanses and murky depths, home of leviathan, burial ground for atomic reactors and toxic wastes, its very immensity a cloak for the unscrupulous, belonging to everyone but no one, and so to be seized and used at the will of the mighty -- the deep sea and its inhabitants have no neighbours and no witnesses to protest what is happening to them.
The Greenpeace fleet attempts to be that witness and good neighbour, checking to see that agreements are observed, to protest and when possible prevent destruction of marine life and resources. Greenpeace's ships - and some of the fast and manoeuvrable inflatable dinghies that have proved so effective in Greenpeace protest actions - are the organisation's unique contribution to the environmental movement. The larger ships are all equipped with complete satellite communications facilities, as well as all the day to day needed items to run a professional sea going vessel at sea.
Greenpeace has been campaigning against environmental degradation since 1971. It is committed to principles of non-violence, political independence and internationalism. In exposing threats to the environment and in working to find solutions, Greenpeace has no permanent allies or enemies.
Greenpeace does not solicit or accept funding from governments, corporations or political parties. Greenpeace neither seeks nor accepts donations, which could compromise its independence, aims, objectives or integrity. Greenpeace relies on the voluntary donations of individual supporters, and on grant support from foundations.
Friends of the Earth is one of the leading environmental pressure groups in the UK, it is largely funded by its supporters and gains additional funding through special events, grants and trading. Friends of the Earth Trust is a charity which commissions detailed research and provides information and educational material. Successes include bans on ozone destroying CFCs, reduced trade in rainforest timber, and increased support for cleaner energy technologies.
Many people have been turned off to environmental issues by extremists. Environmentalists often seem more concerned with the whales than they do with people to the point that they can make us feel guilty for being alive and for using air. Some Christians would say that we have special insight into this controversy. Why should we be concerned with a temporary dying world. If we believe what 2 Peter 3v10-12 (on overhead) says maybe we should be hastening the day of the Lord by being environmentally unfriendly! But we need to balance this with the mandates given in Genesis (1:28, 2:15) as on the overhead. We need to remember that subduing the earth involves ruler-ship and we have been placed in charge of the earth as stewards, it does not belong to us, it belongs to God.
In view of this what political action, if any, should we be involved in as Christians? Should we align ourselves with organisations such as Greenpeace, chaining ourselves to railings or joining one of their fleet of boats, or is it enough to do our bit by recycling our empty wine bottles and beer cans?