
Vulnerable Nations Call for Ecocide to Be Recognized as an International Crime - ciconia
https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2019/12/06/ecocide-international-criminal-court-vanuatu/
======
daenz
Here's the definition they're working with[0]:

>Ecocide is loss, damage or destruction of ecosystem(s) of a given
territory(ies)… such that peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants has been or
will be severely diminished

– definition submitted by Polly Higgins to the UN Law Commission in 2010

0\. [https://ecocidelaw.com/ecocide-law-2/](https://ecocidelaw.com/ecocide-
law-2/)

~~~
mc32
It would seem that development of natural resources as well as population
growth could result in “ecocide”. Whom do they sue?

~~~
larnmar
Whoever has deep pockets but is politically weak enough.

~~~
outside1234
Norway and their oil fund is my guess for the first target.

------
ISL
The key is finding pragmatic ways to react to a finding of harm that will
result in positive change.

After WWI, the League of Nations was formed, in large part to mitigate the
risk of war. Unfortunately, the primary known way to punish a warring nation
is with a war.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations)

~~~
steve19
The primary means is sanctions. War is a often a last resort.

~~~
ISL
That hasn't worked out well as one might have hoped in Eastern Ukraine/Crimea
nor South Ossetia.

~~~
meiraleal
That's because you can't expect every country to submit. Russia will not,
China will not.

The same way the US would not stop bombing the middle east and Africa or
overthrow legitimate governments in Latin America if them, China and Russia
decided to sanction America.

~~~
ISL
Exactly -- and the trick is finding a viable way to get even large countries
to hold themselves to account for their share in ecological catastrophes.

------
caseysoftware
I think this should start with a simple question:

 _How many square miles (or square meters) of territory have they lost due to
sea level rising?_ This should probably exclude erosion but could be an
interesting additional point/counter.

That would establish a) that they've suffered damages and b) the scope of said
damages. Identifying the guilty parties would be the next challenge but it's a
starting point.

~~~
lazyjones
Also, will they pay us if it turns out they actually gained territory?

[https://phys.org/news/2018-02-pacific-nation-
bigger.html](https://phys.org/news/2018-02-pacific-nation-bigger.html)

------
spodek
Guilt would seem to depend on per capita emissions, not total emissions. I
don't see why the size of the nation would permit its citizens to pollute more
per capita.

If so, many vulnerable nations would probably be guilty, which is probably how
the law should work, but might not be how they expect. Many small, vulnerable
nations emit more per capita than IPCC recommendations
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhous...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhouse_gas_emissions_per_capita).

Eventually, nations will probably make laws against people polluting like they
have now against littering. One of the purposes of laws is to regulate
behavior that affects others.

~~~
kortilla
Guilt should be based on total emissions if the entire country is being
considered because that’s what matters to the planet.

~~~
spodek
Kuwait leads the world in per capita emissions but has a population of 4.5
million. No problem?

So someone who pollutes a lot can change nationality and pollute more?

------
ageofwant
Zoom in on any place on earth where agriculture is happening, like here
[https://www.google.com/maps/place/Narrogin+WA+6312/@-33.4993...](https://www.google.com/maps/place/Narrogin+WA+6312/@-33.4993604,117.5214949,37310m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x2a31532b54842baf:0x400f6382479fb20!8m2!3d-32.9311967!4d117.1785277)

and tell me that is not grand scale ecocide.

------
ripvanwinkle
This is an idea whose time is just around the corner.

