SUBSCRIBER LOGIN






Search First Things

Advanced Search

RSS

Secondhand Smoke
Archives

Categories

Monthly


« Previous  |Home|  Next »         

Tuesday, June 29, 2010, 11:48 AM
Wesley J. Smith

Afghanistan is one of the world’s poorest countries.  But it has the potential for great riches.  A recent finding discovered that there may be more than $1 trillion in minerals in the ground waiting to be mined.  From the story:

The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials. The previously unknown deposits — including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium — are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe. An internal Pentagon memo, for example, states that Afghanistan could become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium,” a key raw material in the manufacture of batteries for laptops and BlackBerrys.

The only way to get at that wealth is to mine it.  But ecocide, if enacted as an international “crime against peace,” would substantially prevent the people of Afghanistan from exploiting their own riches (although I suspect that ecociders would consider it Gaia’s riches and its mining akin to rape).  After all, ecocide would not just punish pollution, as in the BP oil spill.  But it would also criminalize large scale mining and other methods of natural resource development and exploitation.

If companies knew that going after these riches would land them in the dock in the Hague, the minerals would stay in the ground forever.  That might please environmental radicals who would just as soon humans vastly cut our population and live lightly on the land, and who we might add, don’t live in destitution.  But it would keep the Afghans mired in horrible poverty and prevent them from moving forward into a more modern way of life.  And thus we see with clarity the vivid harm to humankind that the ecocide drive in particular, and radical environmentalism in general, threaten.

5 Comments

    Tweets that mention Radical Environmentalism: How “Ecocide” Would Keep Afghanistan Mired in Poverty » Secondhand Smoke | A First Things Blog -- Topsy.com
    June 29th, 2010 | 12:11 pm

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Vince Humphreys, Lisa and Marcie Dreyer, Wesley J. Smith. Wesley J. Smith said: Radical Environmentalism: How “Ecocide” Would Keep Afghanistan Mired in Poverty » Secondhand Smoke A First Things Blog http://shar.es/mD632 [...]

    Jeffery
    June 29th, 2010 | 8:13 pm

    As if non-existent “Ecocide” policies are Afghanistan’s biggest worry. If Afghanistan has valuable mineral deposits I predict they will be mined and key Afghan politicians and Western businesspeople will prosper while the bulk of Afghan citizens may make a few bucks mining. Is that what you mean by progress?

    Name the developed nation that got there by mining or extracting petroleum? Saudi Arabia? Iran? Venezuela? Zimbabwe?

    Please don’t pretend that this is of significant benefit for Afghanistan.

    Wesley J. Smith Reply:

    Jeffrey, as usual you miss the point, or perhaps better stated, don’t address it. This post isn’t really about Afghanistan. Afghanistan is an illustration. If the Afghans could get past their own dysfunction and tap into that resource, it would lift their country. The POINT of the piece was that an ecocide law would prevent that. Jeez, it isn’t hard. Besides, look at Norway. North Sea oil has made them very well off.

    Don Nelson
    June 30th, 2010 | 2:22 pm

    Alaska has done pretty well with oil and Nevada benefits a lot from mining.

    Michael
    July 3rd, 2010 | 3:38 am

    Dear Jeffrey,

    Re. your request to name a country that got rich by mining. How about:

    United Kingdom (primarily coal)
    United States (coal, gold, ore)
    Germany (coal, iron ore)

    Will that do for starters?

Links

Blogs

Find Us

Contact