Just over a decade ago, "green issues" were considered to be the preserve of worthy blokes with beards, BO and a T-shirt one size too small for them. The only other time that anyone ever mentioned "green issues" was in the hushed atmosphere of the STD clinic. Now there is a "day" for practically every environmental cause going. From global warming to recycling, there is a special "day" designated for us to parade our concerns, alongside the logo of the corporate sponsor.
But surely the world we live in is a big enough issue for us to be concerned with all year round. If anything, we should have an annual "Fuck the Environment Day". On that day, everyone would leave the car running, cover the local park in Agent Orange and have unsafe sex while eating whale meat beside a blazing oil tanker. We could even get a coloured ribbon for everyone to wear on the day - if there are any colours of the spectrum that haven't appeared as ribbons yet.
Relegating the environment to neat "causes", and making it a political subcategory separate from human rights, democratic accountability and issues of corporate power, suits government and business interests alike. Unless there are genuine challenges to these interests, environmentalism will remain a token gesture. The BP-sponsored exhibit at the Natural History Museum urges visitors to protect the planet, but fails to mention protecting the Colombian peasants who faced paramilitary forces deployed to defend BP's oil fields. Had such forces organised a fun run for the rain- forest, BP would, no doubt, have had its company logo emblazoned on every jogging vest, yet would have remained oblivious to the logistical chaos caused by every runner having his or her own starting gun. Naturally, the bullets would be lead-free.
One past master of the art of tokenism is the Export Credits Guarantee Department. It was the ECGD that Balfour Beatty approached to underwrite contracts worth £200m for the proposed Ilisu Dam project. The dam, if built, could displace up to 78,000 Kurds and create a public health disaster for those left; it could also, in conjunction with other dams, affect the downstream flow of water into Syria and Iraq. Despite this, the ex-minister for trade Richard Caborn* still managed to thunder about the Ilisu dam: "It's a hydroelectric dam - it's environmentally friendly." He failed to mention that the ECGD is setting up a financial package to help build the replacement nuclear reactor for Chernobyl. Scottish farmers might remember the fallout from the old Chernobyl reactor as not very eco-friendly, although, on the plus side, you could strap irradiated sheep to the roof and pick up satellite TV for free.
More importantly, Caborn's assertions about Ilisu are a misconception. Large dams create methane, a greenhouse gas far more dangerous than CO2, thus contributing to global warming. There are environmental problems inherent in large-scale dam-building that are entwined with human rights. The Three Gorges Dam in China is in the process of destroying one of the world's areas of most outstanding natural beauty and, amid international fears that the construction is unsafe, the project has been plagued with bribery and corruption. At least 1.4 million people will be displaced by Three Gorges, and attempts to resettle the local people have resulted in riots in which eight policemen were killed. With the Chixoy Dam in Guatemala, 400 people were massacred at Rio Negro by security forces to make way for the project, which, according to the World Bank, has proved to be "an unwise and economic disaster". The construction of the Kainji Dam in Nigeria led to poverty and hardship for those left in the area as essential yam production dropped by 100,000 tonnes and fish stocks downstream decreased by 60-70 per cent. So, when the World Commission on Dams reported last year that it could not prove that these dams were environmentally friendly, it was probably just a tad of an understatement.
Meanwhile, just as new Labour is suggesting that it may not back the Ilisu Dam, the ECGD has revealed plans for Ilisu II. This time, the engineering firm Amec is in the frame for £68m worth of financial cover to build the Yusufeli Dam on the Coruh River in north-eastern Turkey, displacing an estimated 12,000 to 15,000 people, mainly minority Georgians. A spokesperson for the ECGD said: "Amec has had to fill out an environmental impact questionnaire; it's 14 pages long, so it's very long and very thorough." Fourteen pages' worth of thoroughness - that's about one whole page per thousand Georgians. They must be flattered by all the attention.
In my perfect world, the questionnaire would carry only one question: "Will Gaia the Earth Mother ever forgive your mortal soul? Please answer this in tree bark and finger-paints." In reality, it matters little what the questions are, because, according to the same ECGD spokesperson: "No project has ever been turned down because of the questionnaire."
That is to say, it is yet another token gesture.
*Richard Caborn is currently minister for sport, and the answers he is looking for are: 1) Rugby has an oval-shaped ball; 2) Tennis has the net in the middle; 3) The "one hand, one bounce" rule is still not recognised in international cricket
