Technologies and Ecologies of War, Censored News Cluster

The realities of today's operational environment...is modified by population explosion, urbanization, globalization, technology, resource demand, climate change and natural disasters, and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Social Text

2015

Shiloh Krupar’s Hot Spotter’s Report and Jacob Darwin Hamblin’s Arming Mother Nature make important new contributions to the growing body of literature on war, environment, and the military-industrial complex. They do so, however, in ways that could not be more different. Krupar, a geographer and Associate Professor of Culture and Politics at Georgetown University, employs an innovative, interdisciplinary methodology— drawing on “relational aesthetics, such as theatrical collage, and combin[ing] satirical performance with empirical and theoretical writing” (16) to indict what she calls “green war”: the material, ideological, and epistemological practices through which the United States military uses the environment and science to prop itself up. A work of art as much as academic scholarship, Hot Spotter’s Report offers ideas and approaches relevant to myriad areas, including queer ecology, radical geography, performance studies, environmental justice, disability studies, and animal ...

Military review, 2007

the authors also address medical contributions, including Walter Reed's efforts to suppress typhoid and yellow fever, and scientific contributions, notably J. Robert Oppenheimer's work on the atomic bomb. For the most part the authors avoid controversy. In a statement of breathtaking simplicity, they note that a uranium bomb "destroyed Hiroshima, a plutonium bomb Nagasaki, and Japan surrendered" (p. 104). No mention is made of opposition to or criticism of the use of atomic bombs, whether by scientists before August 1945 or by postwar critics citing Cold War imperatives. Perhaps the authors believe enough ink has been spilled on this controversy, but some reference to the intense debate surrounding the Fiftieth Anniversary exhibit at the Smithsonian would have highlighted the ironies, tragedies, and emotions generated by modern weaponry and war. Sidebars that highlighted salient issues in the historiography of technology and the U.S. military would have enhanced the value of this book. Notably absent is any critical discussion of biological and chemical weaponry. Meanwhile, the select bibliography fails to list works by Lewis Mumford (perhaps the most incisive critic of the U.S. military's "megamachine") or relevant articles from the Journal of Military History, Technology and Culture, and similar scholarly journals. While a book that takes time to define terms like "bullet" and "bayonet" is obviously intended for the uninitiated, one might also expect guidance with respect to more advanced themes. Controversial themes and issues such as interservice rivalries, political and economic pressures, and President Eisenhower's warning about the military-industrial complex are not developed fully. Curiously, although published in 2006, the timeline of this book ends in 1999 with air attacks in Kosovo. Similarly, the last chapter ends with a rushed account of the Gulf War of 1991 and the concept of a "Revolution in Military Affairs." One might imagine a different (and timelier), post 9-11 conclusion, perhaps stressing the difficulties of asymmetrical warfare and the unpredictable and often surprisingly labile nature of technology (e.g., "civilian" cell phones used as triggers for roadside bombs). The American military's enormous investment in high-tech weaponry in the 1980s and 1990s was geared primarily to conventional conflicts against like-minded opponents; the wisdom of this investment is now being tested in low-intensity conflicts and messy urban settings like Iraq. Here the authors could have built on their discussion of the Vietnam War, where they note that American technical virtuosity did not produce victory, forcing the military to reconsider its emphasis on superior technology as uniquely efficacious. Nevertheless, the strength of this volume is that it provides solid historical underpinnings for more advanced discussions about, and research into, these and similar subjects.

Sociology Compass, 2012

This brief article considers the environmental impacts of militaries from a sociological perspective. The authors begin with an overview of treadmill of destruction theory, which highlights the expansionary tendencies and concomitant environmental consequences of militarism. This discussion is followed by a narrative assessment of military developments and expenditures, with a particular focus on the US military over the past century. Next, the authors detail the increasing environmental impacts associated with the growth and structure of militarization, and conclude by calling for future sociological research to seriously consider the environmental impacts of the world's militaries.

This brief article considers the environmental impacts of militaries from a sociological perspective. The authors begin with an overview of treadmill of destruction theory, which highlights the expansionary tendencies and concomitant environmental consequences of militarism. This discussion is followed by a narrative assessment of military developments and expenditures, with a particular focus on the US military over the past century. Next, the authors detail the increasing environmental impacts associated with the growth and structure of militarization, and conclude by calling for future sociological research to seriously consider the environmental impacts of the world's militaries.

Contemporary protracted conflicts across the Middle East have presented health professionals and systems, as well as the humanitarian response, with unprecedented challenges. The changing nature of warfare has meant that today conflicts are increasingly taking place in urban settings with high civilian casualties and massive population displacements. The medical and humanitarian response to these needs is often partial and inadequate and takes place in settings marked by the degradation and even targeting of humanitarian health actors and establishments. The attacks on MSF health facilities in Afghanistan, Syria and Yemen have underscored the changing roles and responsibilities of humanitarian medical aid in responding to endemic conflicts in the region, and have opened up many broader questions related to rethinking the medical, public health, and humanitarian responses in contemporary warfare. On the 4th and 5th May 2016, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) staff members, civil society, academics, students and members of the public gathered at the American University of Beirut (AUB) to participate in a conference titled “Changing Ecologies of War and Humanitarianism.” The conference was organized by MSF, AUB’s Faculty of Health Sciences, and the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs. The aim of the conference was to critically examine contemporary theoretical and operational challenges to humanitarian action within and beyond the conflict zones of the Middle East. The conference sought to historicize, analyze, and reflect on the changing dynamics of contemporary warfare and the resulting challenges in the provision of healthcare. The two-day conference was held at the Issam Fares Institute in AUB, and consisted of a keynote lecture, four panels, and multiple opportunities for open discussion. Participants were invited to engage in an active and lively discussion on the key themes and draw on lessons learnt that shape the future of research on healthcare under conflict and the practice of humanitarian aid. The conference marked two critical events: MSF’s first project in conflict was in Beirut in 1976; and AUB’s 150th anniversary, which marked the University’s long tradition of medical, educational, and humanitarian presence in the region. The conference was therefore both timely and pertinent. The concept note and program for the conference was prepared by Jonathan Whittall, MSF Head of Humanitarian Analysis, and Omar Dewachi, Assistant Professor of Anthropology and Global Health and co- director of the newly instated Conflict Medicine Program at AUB. The significance of the conference is that it was held at a critical point in time for medicine and humanitarianism. It was not a coincidence that the conference took place one day after the passing of a UN resolution on the protection of hospitals in conflict zones. While humanitarian aid in war zones has always been contested, a survey of recent events across the region suggests an unprecedented number of targeted attacks on medical facilities and humanitarian services. In light of its critical relevance to current events in the region, the conference also formally established the necessity for humanitarian and local academic institutions to collaborate to think beyond the present limits of crisis and put forth options for moving forward. The panels were organized around the following conference themes: ▸ The changing histories and landscapes of humanitarian aid ▸ War on medicine: The targeting and implication of medicine in warfare ▸ Responding to populations on the move ▸ Emerging global health trends in contemporary conflict in the Middle East Building on the themes of the conference, this document reports on the proceedings of the conference and some of the critical points that emerged during the two-day event.

Since the First World War, industrial warfare has harnessed the power of ‘nature’ to create ever-more efficient means of destroying human life through its use of chemical, biological and nuclear technology. At the same time, it has developed the potential to cause what has been termed ‘ecocide’, examples of which include the long-term impact of high density herbicides in Vietnam, and the Kuwaiti oil fires. In this timely issue of Green Letters – published during the four-year anniversary of the First World War – authors address the range of approaches that ecocriticism can bring to examining representations of modern warfare, and how the language of war has been appropriated for ‘environmentalist’ causes.

International Journal, 2004

In 1991, new weapons were used for the first time by the American and British troops in Iraq. These weapons proved to have high destructive capability against armored machinery and tanks. Later, there were many signs of being a weapon to destroy the human beings, animals and plants, which raised huge controversy and sharp criticism among scientists, doctors and environmentalists. Despite the opacity and deception, many of the secrets of depleted uranium ammunition were exposed, and confirmed the seriousness of use and serious repercussions on the environment and public health, which stepped up the international campaign against its manufacturing and use. However, the brilliant military success and profits of the military industry tempted the Pentagon and NATO to continue production and use of these weapons. Despite the high human and environment risks DU was used in various conflicts like Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo and Serbia, Afghanistan, Gaza, Lebanon and recently in Libya. It is noteworthy to mention that the public and even some scientists, researchers and news media are ignorant of the effects and risks of the use of DU in military operations. This raises the point that there should be a large campaign to raise public awareness to prevent the risk of DU weapons. Based on scientific research and updates, we would like to high light the waste of wars in Iraq: Our paper shed the light on the size of depleted uranium(DU) weapons used in the wars on Iraq and the legacy of waste (their nature, size, and the contaminated regions), as high risks on humans and the environment. This is one of the leading environmental, health and social tragic problems in Iraq. This problem should be addressed immediately, seriously and effectively.