WEAVING THE CONNECTIONS

The Newsletter of the Center for Women, the Earth, the Divine

Volume 15             Winter 2009/2010              Number 3

 

The Trusteeship of the Commons—Continued

Eleanor Rae

 

In the Winter 2008-2009 of Weaving the Connections I wrote about using the Trusteeship Council at the United Nations as the Trusteeship of the Commons. In this Council we would address the issues of that which we all hold in common: the air, the oceans, the other-than-human species. Based on the experience at the December 2009 Climate Convention held in Copenhagen, which resulted only in non-binding statements, I would like to add another item to the responsibilities addressed in the Trusteeship Council—that of accountability because non-binding agreements simply do not work. That accountability could and should be based on science, using, for example, the four indicators proposed by the 10,000 member strong International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme: sea level rise, global temperature, Arctic sea ice melt and the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Based on these four indicators, an index using data beginning in 1980 and updated annually, would provide a timely snapshot of how Earth’s systems—ice, oceans, land surface and atmosphere—are reacting to climate change.

The failure of Copenhagen makes more urgent the need to address not only climate change, but also certain interrelated issues—and to do so in a coordinated way as part of the Commons. As the nineteenth century naturalist John Muir observed: “…when one tugs at a single thing in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of the world.” This tugging reveals at least six interrelated concerns that indicate why Earth will not cope for long without our commitment to change our lifestyles.

These issues are:

1. Biodiversity. We are currently undergoing a loss of species comparable to that of the other mass extinctions that have occurred only five or six times in Earth’s history. The big difference is that this extinction is human-caused.

2. Ocean acidification. Increasing acidity is impeding the ability of shell production by marine creatures as well as imperiling the world’s reef system. This acidification is occurring at a rate around 100 times faster than any observed natural rate.

3. Population pressure. While it took us almost 10,000 years to reach a billion people, we now add that many every 12 years. This is an issue that must be addressed not only as an increase in numbers but also as one of life-styles.

4. Peak oil. Within a decade, it is projected that our current oil burning equivalent of 82 million barrels a day will have risen to 100 million barrels, and this at a time when output from oil fields will have plummeted to barely a third of what it is today.

5. Peak food. The global food system relies on cheap oil, fresh water, soil and natural gas, all four of which are in decline. The food riots of 2008 are a warning sign to us of events to come.

6. Peak water. During the twentieth century, human water usage increased nine-fold, and this at a time when all major glaciers are retreating and ground aquifers are being over-extracted. In addition, our rivers are being severely polluted, depriving the world of a valuable fresh water supply.

Recently, the UN General Assembly announced that a follow-up to the Rio Earth Summit of 1992 would be held there in 2012. Will this be “too little, too late?” My fervent hope and prayer are that, before that time, enough people will grasp the enormity of Earth’s condition and commit to act as a world-wide movement to save this planet, our home, for the sake of all of our children and grandchildren—both human and non-human.

 

*******************************************

Indigenous Women Adapting to Climate Change

 

Indigenous peoples—especially indigenous women—remain under-represented in global      talks on climate change. But they have a vital contribution to make, says Victoria Tauli-  Corpuz. The sustainable, low-carbon lifestyle? Indigenous peoples have lived it for millennia. “Many of the solutions that are being discussed now have always been a way of life for our ancestors and present generations,” says Tauli-Corpuz.

A member of the Kankana-ey Igorat peoples of the Philippines, Victoria Tauli-Corpuz is chairperson of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues and founder and director of Tebtebba, an indigenous people’s policy research centre. Tali-Corpuz fought for—and, ultimately, helped win—the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was adopted by the General Assembly in 2007.

Raised in a village in the Cordillera region of the Philippines, Tauli-Corpuz came to Manila on a scholarship in the early 1970s and soon became involved in demonstrations against the Vietnam War. She returned home to find that her ancestral lands were threatened by a huge hydroelectric dam project. “We had to organize ourselves to protest the dam project,” she says. “So, that’s how I started, and I never stopped.”

Now Tauli-Corpuz is turning to the issue of climate change, which she sees, fundamentally, as an issue of social justice. Reducing greenhouse-gas emissions is only half the battle; the other half, often neglected, is about promoting sustainable, equitable development. Here, indigenous women can play a central role, as they often have responsibility for—and valuable knowledge about—sustainable agriculture, forestry, watershed management and more.

Indigenous women are also taking an active role in adapting to climate change—by developing crops that are flood-and drought-resistant, protecting water resources, and taking care of those sickened by water-and vector-borne diseases that are more prevalent in a warming world.

Different responsibilities mean that indigenous women—and women generally—are affected by climate change in different ways than men. It’s important to understand those differential impacts, says Tauli-Corpuz, because, “if you are not aware of them, the solutions you bring about might not necessarily solve the problems of women.”

Tauli-Corpuz learned much about the problems women face while working in indigenous communities in the Philippines. Trained as a nurse, she saw that reproductive health is a critical component of women’s well-being. In indigenous communities where infant and child mortality rates are high, women will often have many children to ensure that some survive. Also, where many hands are needed for subsistence-farming, indigenous women face great pressure to bear many children. In some cases, women who attempt to control their own fertility are subjected to domestic violence. At the other end of the spectrum, indigenous women in some countries have faced forced sterilization at the hands of the government. That’s why Truli-Corpuz has long advocated for appropriate family planning services for indigenous women. “It is a problem if you lack family planning services,” she says, “and it is also a problem if they are not the right services.”

Tauli-Corpuz believes that reproductive health care is crucial for women, and she believes that it is important to stabilize population. But she disagrees with those who see population growth as a major cause of climate change. “I don’t think that’s really the main thing,” she says. “The main thing is really the lifestyles—the economic development model that’s being pushed.” Moreover, “if you think population is the problem, and undertake centralized ways of controlling population growth, we will be in an even greater mess.” Ultimately, says Tauli-Corpuz, “women have to be the ones to decide how many children they have.”

Taken from “United Nations Population Fund (UNPFA) State of World Population 2009,” ( access complete report article at  www.unfpa.org/swp/2009/)
 

                                                           

Associates of C:WED:

 

Eleanor Rae, Ph.D., founder

Anne Andersson, editor

Giles E. Rae, publisher

 

Representatives at the United Nations:

      New York:     Lina Gupta, Ph.D.

                                   Alayne O’Reilly, Ph.D.

              Vienna:        Susanne Schaup, Ph.D.

      

Mission Statement

 

The Center for Women, the Earth, the Divine is dedicated to exploring the parallels that exist between the imaging and treatment of women and of the Earth, and how our images of the Divine are related to these parallels.

We began by exploring these relationships within the context of our own tradition— the Christian. While we continue our exploration in this tradition, we have also engaged people of other traditions such as the Buddhist, Goddess, Hindu, Indigenous, Jewish and Muslim. Our work is made available through talks, workshops, writings and retreats. The immediate purpose of the Center is educational, while the ultimate goal is the healing of the Creation.

The founder of C:WED is Eleanor Rae, Ph.D., author of Women, the Earth, the Divine, President Emerita of the Network Alliance of Congregations Caring for Earth and founder of the Earth Values Caucus at the United  Nations.          

 

—————————————————————                             

 

 

Just War Theory

(as found in “Opportunity Lost: Obama in Oslo”)

by Daniel C. Maguire, Professor of Ethics at Marquette University

can be accessed at

www.consortiumnews.com/2009/121509c.html

 

In his acceptance speech for the Nobel Peace Prize, President Obama cited the "Just War Theory" in regard to Afghanistan. [Although he] was gifted with the chance of a lifetime to make a classic speech on the politics of peace-making, Obama failed [to do so.]

The Just War Theory gives six conditions necessary to justify war. Fail one and the war is immoral. These six are:

 (1) A just cause. The only just cause is defense against an attack, not a preemptive attack on those who might someday attack us.

 (2) Declaration by competent authority. Article one Section 8 of the Constitution, which gives this power to the Congress has not been used since 1941. Congressional resolutions instead yield the power to the president. The United Nations Charter. Article 2, Section 4 prohibits recourse to military force except in circumstances of self-defense which was restricted to responses to a prior “armed attack” (Article 51), and only then until the Security Council had the chance to review the claim.

 (3) Right intention: This means that there is reasonable surety that the war will succeed in serving justice and making a way to real peace.

 (4) The principle of discrimination, or non-combatant immunity. The science of war has made this condition so unachievable that only the policing paradigm envisioned by the UN Charter could ever justify state-sponsored violence. Police operate within the constraints of law, as a communitarian effort, with oversight and follow-up review to prevent undue violence.

 (5) Last resort. State-sponsored violence [must be] the last resort.

 (6) The principle of proportionality: Put simply, the violence of war must do more good than harm. In judging war the impact on other nations and the environment must also be assessed in the balance sheet of good and bad results.

Victory in war is an oxymoron. No one wins a war: one side may lose less and may spin that as victory.

 

****************************************

For further commentary, the following may be of interest:
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/war/#2,and the article of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops which can be accessed atwww.usccb.org/comm.nationaltragedy/justwar.shtml

“Two Traditions: Nonviolence and Just War,” excerpts from “The Harvest of Justice is Sown in Peace, a reflection of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops on the Tenth Anniversary of The Challenge of Peace Nov. 17, 1993.”

*****************************************

C:WED invites our readers to respond to the concept of the Just War Theory. We will be pleased to print your comments in the next issue of Weaving the Connections.

 

                     

We Are the Ones We’ve Been Waiting For

Hopi Nation: Oraibi, Arizona

 

There is a river flowing now very fast. It is so great and swift, that there are those who will be afraid. They will try to hold on to the shore. They will feel they are being torn apart and will suffer greatly. Know the river has its destination. The elders say we must let go of the shore, push off into the middle of the river, keep our eyes open, and our heads above the water. And I say, see who is in there with you and celebrate.

At this time in history, we are to take nothing personally. Least of all, ourselves. For the moment that we do, our spiritual growth and journey comes to a halt.

The time of the lone wolf is over. Gather yourselves!

Banish the word struggle from your attitude and your vocabulary. All that we do now must be done in a sacred manner and in celebration.

We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.

 

                    

               

 

 

1/24/2010 rev 1

 Home