Oil
on water: will the media get this Big Story? [March
21, 2003 - 9.00 GMT]
By
Nalaka Gunawardene
"If
the wars of this century were fought over oil, the wars of the next century
will be fought over water." Ismail Serageldin, an eminent Egyptian
architect and planner, made this remark in 1995 when he was vice president
for sustainable development at the World Bank.
Well,
we are in that new century now, but old habits die hard. The war in Iraq has
been fuelled by oil interests, and – starting at the time it did, on March
20 – effectively sidelined global talks to secure freshwater for all.
Even
as the United States launched its attack on the country that sits on the
world’s second largest oil reserve, the Third World Water Forum was in
progress at the Japanese cities of Kyoto, Shiga and Osaka. The event,
running from March 16 to 23, is this year’s biggest international
conference on a sustainable development issue and involved hundreds of
government and civil society representatives trying to resolve one of the
major survival issues of our time: equitably sharing the world's finite
freshwater resources for our homes, farms and factories.
The
two processes cannot be more different. One aims to use force while the
other seeks to foster co-operation among nations to cope with water
scarcity. The increasingly isolated United States has abandoned the United
Nations process in its single-minded determination to disarm Iraq, a nation
it considers a major threat to peace and security. Meanwhile in Kyoto, the
nations of the world – including, but not led by, the United States –
were discussing an issue that is far more central to humanity’s security.
It has the full blessings of the UN, which has designated 2003 the
International Year of Freshwater.
Yet
the water forum seems hardly newsworthy to the major news organizations that
are preoccupied with war. For months, the global television networks were
gearing up for Iraq war coverage. The first Gulf War helped globalise CNN,
and this time around, there are other international and regional channels
competing for the eye balls. Locked in a battle for dominant market share,
CNN International and BBC World are trying to outdo each other in covering
the conflict exhaustively -- and to the exclusion of everything else. In the
do-or-die media marketplace, ‘soft issues’ such as water are easily
edged over by conflict. As cynical news editors will confirm, if it bleeds,
it leads.
The
notions of national and global ‘security’ – on which the Iraq war is
being waged – are relics of the Cold War that are completely out of sync
with today’s global realities. Who says we have entered the 21st
century?
In
the closing decade of the last century, as the world grappled with one
crisis after another – ranging from famine and drought to global warming
and HIV/AIDS – the notion of ‘security’ was radically redefined to
include ecological and social dimensions. What is now termed ‘human
security’ is concerned not so much with weapons as with basic human
dignity and survival. As first articulated in the UN Development
Programme’s Human Development Report in 1994, human security
includes safety from chronic threats such as hunger, disease and repression,
as well as protection from sudden and harmful disruptions in the patterns of
daily life.
The
rationale for this was brilliantly summed up by the late Mahbub ul Haq,
former Finance Minister of Pakistan and architect of the Human Development
Index: “If people are sleeping on pavements, ministers have no business
shopping for modern jets and howitzers. While children suffocate in
windowless classrooms, generals go about in their air-conditioned jeeps.
Nations might accumulate all the weaponry they want, but they have no
strength when their people starve…”
A
world in which four out of every ten people live in areas of water scarcity
is not secure. And if urgent action is not taken, this will increase to two
thirds of humanity by 2005. Ensuring water quality is as important as basic
access: preventable diarrhoeal diseases – including cholera and dysentery
-- kill more than seven million children every year. That is 6,000 deaths
every day.
James
Grant, former executive director of UNICEF, once used a powerful metaphor to
describe this scandalous situation: it was as if several jumbo jets full of
children were crashing everyday – and nobody took any notice.
If
the media are obsessed with death and destruction, why aren’t these
numbers registering on the their radars? Why is it that silent emergencies
forever remain ignored or superficially covered? Even statistics don’t set
the media agenda: for example, according to the UN, twice as many people are
still dying from diarrhoeal diseases as from HIV/AIDS in China, India and
Indonesia. But the international donors and media assign far more importance
to HIV than to clean water.
No
other factor can distort reality as oil. Oil comes on top of water both in
the physical world, and in the murky world of global politics. Our
collective dependence on petroleum immediately ensures the Iraq war a
disproportionately high rank in public and media concerns.
It’s
not just the United States that is addicted to oil – we all are. Addicts
tend to lose sight of the cost of their dependence, as we have. On 24 March
1989, the oil tanker
Exxon Valdez ran aground on in Prince William Sound in Alaska and a
fifth of its 1.2 million barrels of oil spilled into the sea, causing
massive damage to over 3,800 km of shoreline. Investigations implicated its
captain for grossly neglecting duty. Shortly afterwards, Greenpeace ran a
major advertising campaign with the headline: “It
wasn’t his driving that caused the Alaskan oil spill. It was yours.”
Greenpeace
continued: “It would be easy to blame the Valdez oil spill on one man. Or
one company. Or even one industry. Too easy. Because the truth is, the spill
was caused by a nation drunk on oil. And a government asleep at the
wheel.”
A
nation drunk on oil is waging a war that has more to do with oil than
anything else. Our news media are behaving just like cheer-leaders.
War
is undoubtedly a big story. But so should be water. One in six humans does
not have safe drinking water, and one third of humankind lacks adequate
sanitation. We may be living on the Blue Planet, but the waters are muddy
and lifethreatening to billions.
For
sure, a bunch of people huddling together in three Japanese cities won’t
solve this crisis overnight. But unless knowledge and skills are shared, and
a political commitment is secured, safe water for all will forever remain a
pipe dream.
Will
it take a full-scale war over water in one of the flashpoints around the
world for the military-industrial-media complex take sufficient interest in
this survival issue?
(That
might happen sooner than we suspect.)
It’s
ironic that the Water Forum was undermined by the Iraq war breaking out in
the very same week. Washington has poured oil over everybody’s water.
Nalaka
Gunawardene is science writer in Sri Lanka, and is also on the board of Panos
Institute South Asia.
[This
article is reproduced with the permission of the writer]
PRINT
THIS STORY

Contact Information: Send mail to gosl@presidentsl.org with questions or comments about this web site.
Last Updated
Date: March 21, 2003 - 9.00
GMT. |