ABSTRACT: The following are just two of the possible actions the Radical Party could undertake to save the environment. The first concerns the Danube, and consists in setting up a supranational authority, as the one means of avoiding the catastrophes that could result from political conflict arising between the different countries. The second involves nuclear defence in the East. By intervening in this problem, we would also be able to make a proper and more general enquiry into the link between nuclear power for civilian and military use not only at a national level, but also at a supranational and world level now.
The fact that many of the problems the world is experiencing are interdependent makes the need for a powerful federalist campaign all the more urgent. Freedom and autonomy, effective laws and subsidiarity, are the principles on which the new world order and a new democratic society must be founded.
----------------------------
"The principal aim of environmental policy today must be to make the law effective once again by determing the precise conditions for its application." This is the opinion of Mario Signorino, Chairman of the Italian branch of "Friends of the Earth".
(THE NEW PARTY, MARCH 1993)
It was an official event, the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, which brought the first twenty years of environmental problems to a close and saw the beginning of a new phase, that of telling achievements in this area but also of an ecological crisis which is gradually getting out of hand.
In the same way, the pioneering days of environmentalism, in which oases were created and powerful demonstrations held, is coming to an end and there is a need for a more mature kind of environmentalism which, if it manifests itself as a political process and culture, could be the co-protagonist of real change.
As we go through this period of transition many things are weighing heavily upon us, such as: urgent problems being met by total inertia; institutions without suitable political instruments; inadequate politcal cultures, and the complexity of the issues in question.
There is never, and it is unthinkable that there might be, a clean break between the old and the new. Positive processes come into being amongst the wreckage of the old world, accompanied by counter trends, delays and insufficient means which act as a constant threat.
It is true that in recent years the environment has become the object of political campaigning in all developed countries. It may have resulted in new political parties (the ecologists) being formed, but this has not changed the fact that environmental problems are given very little emphasis in the programmes of leading political forces and in activities undertaken by governments.
The environment is now discussed in all the relevant international institutions and even during the summits held by the seven most industrialized nations, but the result is a virtual incapacity to enforce formal agreements.
Although most countries have administrative bodies to deal with the environment they risk becoming isolated structures with no say in government choices; they often lack a specific strategy or do not possess an efficient operational structure.
There is a tendency to link environmental problems more and more to development, which has resulted in the formulation of the "sustainable development" concept. However, it is still only a vague theory that has not as yet produced any concrete results and which has, in fact, been brought seriously into question by the actual recession affecting developed economies. There is the risk that, like the theory of "interdependence" it will prove to be impracticable. In the same way that formal recognition of human rights and cultural identity becomes meaningless when it is denied in reality.
Ecological organizations and movements have seen a considerable increase in their sphere of influence; nevertheless, they still find it difficult to come up with the right solutions due to a lack of maturity and of resources and, above all, of adequate political and institutional instruments.
Many people judged the Rio Summit to have been a failure in this context. But this is not the problem: the work carried out at a diplomatic level - for almost three years! - by the UNCED (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development) was only the start of a process, the results of which are yet to be seen The process was officially sanctioned by the Rio Summit, during which the participating countries themselves gave what they could reasonably be expected to give in the present situation. Eventual successes or defeats will literally be decided from day-to-day; however, it is clear that no goal will be reached unless there are some big changes in political thinking.
The principal aim of environmental policy today must be to make the law effective once again by determining the precise conditions of its application. Legislators have had an "International Law for the Environment" in the making for some time now. If truth be told, with all the consuetudinary laws, statements of principles, regional and international agreements, and protocols, a vast structure has been created, which unfortunately only serves to emphasize the fact that very little has been achieved in practice. Who holds the key to this extremely complex puzzle? Certainly not the anxious political leaders who have always trailed two steps behind, lost in a labyrinth of bureaucratic procedures, committees, programmes and funding. The only way out is to create punitive international laws which act as a deterrent.
Two possible areas for future Radical action were identified during the work carried out by the congressional Commission dedicated to the environment.
The first concerns the Danube, and involves the creation of a supranational authority, as the one means of avoiding the catastrophes that could result from political conflict between the different nations.
The second involves nuclear defence in Eastern Europe. This question has already been examined at international summits, but as yet no effective action has been programmed. With the result that there is still a vast number of high-risk nuclear power stations in the former Soviet Union and in those countries which up until a short while ago had to submit to the "empire". We must, therefore, make the necessary provisions, at least in an initial phase, regarding those power stations that are potentially as dangerous as the one at Chernobyl. By intervening in this problem - both in Eastern and Western Europe - we would also be able to make a proper and more general enquiry into the link between nuclear power for peaceful and military use not only at a national level, but also at a supranational and world level now.
-----------------------
DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT, HUMAN DEVELOPMENT AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Numerous people took part in the proceedings of the congressional Commission: "Democratic Development, Human Development and the Environment", chaired jointly by Alfonso Pecoraro, member of the Green Group in the Italian Parliament, and Maria Ivanian, Secretary of the Green Party in Moscow. They included: Laurent Akoun, National Secretary for International Relations of the Ivory Coast Workers' Party; Walter MacLean, Canadian MP and President of the Council of "Parliamentarians for Global Action"; Basile Guissou, former Burkina Faso Minister; Iokubas Minkiavicius, representative of the Lithuanian Scientific Academy; Bashir Mountasser, member of the UNFPA (United Nations for Population Activities); Roberto Savio, Executive Director of "Interpress Service"; Antun Skenderovic, member of the Croatian Democratic Union of Vojvodina, and Marco Vianello Chjiodo, Executive Director of the UNICEF.
