Russian Environmentalism:
Conditions and Prospects
Ernest Partridge
Published in Human Ecology:
Progress Through Integrative Perspectives
The Society for Human Ecology, 1995.
I
Russia: An Environmental
Tragedy
With the fall of communism and the breakup of the Soviet Union,
the world has learned what it has long suspected: namely, that much
of the vast expanse of the former Soviet Union is an environmental
disaster area. In their definitive book, Ecocide in the USSR, Murray
Feshback and Alfred Friendly, Jr., suggest:
When historians finally conduct an autopsy on the Soviet
Union and Soviet Communism, they may reach the verdict of death by
ecocide... No other great industrial civilization so
systematically and so long poisoned its land, air, water and
people. None so loudly proclaiming its efforts to improve public
health and protect nature so degraded both. And no advanced
society faced such a bleak political and economic reckoning with
so few resources to invest toward recovery....
For decades [the Soviet Union] was the leading producer
of oil and steel, the owner of a quarter of the planet's forest
reserves and an equal portion of its fresh water. Yet it beggared
itself by endangering the health of its population -- especially
its children and its labor force -- the productivity of its soil
and the purity of its air and water....(2)
The list of environmental horrors in the former Soviet Union are
by now familiar to the news-conscious citizen:
- The Aral Sea: As recently as 1960, this was the world's fourth
largest inland sea, with a prospering fishing industry, and a
sustainable agriculture in the surrounding region. In just thirty
years, the Aral Sea has lost two-thirds of its volume, its
fisheries are totally destroyed. The land that was set aside by
Soviet agricultural planners for extensive cotton cultivation has
been seriously polluted by fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides,
residues, and by salt and chemical residues airborne from the dry
lake bed.(3)
- Lake Baikal, the world's largest freshwater lake (by volume)
seems too vast to destroy. However, if even the world's oceans are
vulnerable, so too is Baikal. And while difficult to pollute for
that very reason it may prove impossible to restore.(4)
The lake is threatened today by industrial complexes on the north
an south ends and by agricultural runoff in its major tributary,
the Selenga River.
- The Semipalitinsk region of Kazakhstan, the primary testing
site of the Soviet nuclear weapons program, has spawned an
epidemic of radiation-induced cancers.(5)
- The Chelyabinsk region in the Urals has been devastated by the
twin horrors of nuclear radiation and industrial pollution.
Possibly the world's most radiologically contaminated area is
located at a secret weapons production facility in the region. As
a result, reports Prof. Alexei Yablokov, recently President
Yeltsin's Advisor on ecology, half of the young men of draft age
are found to be ineligible for service, due to poor
health.(6)
And so on, with some cases well known to the Western press and
public; e.g., Chernobyl, the Volga, the Baltic Sea. A recitation of
these, and other cases, is perhaps superfluous at this point.
The public-health consequences have been horrendous. Sources
immediately at hand, could provide an extensive list; however, in the
interest of brevity, I will cite, two general assessments from
Russia. First, the 1989 report of the Russian Federation's Committee
on Nature Protection: "The [Russian] Republic is in
catastrophic condition. [Five distinct regions are] on the
brink of catastrophe... It is theoretically impossible to live in
every seventh city."(7)
And, once again, Alexei Yablokov:
The natural resources in our rich country are being
wasted and misused to an extent that the country now faces
ecological crisis. Problems of toxic and radioactive wastes,
polluted air and water, and agricultural pollution have reached
extremely serious levels.... The problems cannot be
underestimated. In nearly every area of the environment, Soviet
citizens are facing real threats to their health and the health of
their children.. Declining environmental quality has fostered a
rise in illness. We share the 47th or 48th place in average life
expectancy and occupy 44th place in infant mortality in the
world.(8)
Here is a tragic story of devastation brought on by official
neglect and exploitation. However, the plundering of the Soviet
environment has also prompted some extraordinary dedication and
courage on the part of scientists, and often ordinary citizens. In
fact, as we shall see, the earliest and most persistent protests
against Soviet government policies had environmental, rather than
political, provocation.
II
A Brief History of Russian Environmentalism:(9)
Far from being a recent development in Russian culture,
environmental science and activism has a long and honored history in
that country. In fact, Russians were early pioneers in ecological
thought. Notable among these was Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadskii
(1863-1945), who introduced the concept of Noosphere long before it
was popularized in the West by Pierre Lecompte du Nuoy. He also
developed and utilized the concept of the ecological niche -- the
function of the species in the ecosystem. Daniil Nikolaevitch
Kashkarov (1878-1941) was a pioneer in ecological community and
succession theory. Finally, Vladimir Vladimirovich Stanchinckii
(1882-1942) formalized models of energy flow and nutrient cycling,
thus refining the significant work of his mentor, Vernadskii. Though
almost forgotten, this work of these Russian scientists anticipated
research in the West which flourished decades later. Indeed, had the
accomplishments of these and other early Russian ecologists been
known in the West, a great deal of independent but redundant
"discovery" might have been avoided, and the science would today be
much more advanced.
During the Romanov dynasty, the Russian government established
zapovedniki (nature preserves), many of which still exist today.
Unlike "national parks" in the United States, these preserves were
set aside for purely scientific purposes, and human access was
severely limited. The zapovedniki enjoyed early support from the
Bolshevik government.
The preservationist and conservationist policies of the Tsarist
and early Soviet governments were effectively overthrown by the
Stalin regime. During the thirties, an official "conquest of nature"
mentality pervaded domestic economic policy. Engineering schemes were
devised and carried out that would make the most ambitious Bureau of
Reclamation commissioner blush. Giant Siberian rivers were dammed,
virgin lands opened for cultivation, deserts irrigated, and a network
of canals were excavated, connecting the Arctic, the Baltic and the
Black Seas. Often these projects were accomplished through the use of
forced manual labor, and with ruthless disregard of the cost in human
lives. The White Sea -Baltic canal was an especially notorious
example. All the while, massive industrial complexes spewed forth
pollutants into the air and water, heedless of the human and
ecological costs. Lest we forget, all this took place during a
similar, if more benign, period of technological optimism and biotic
arrogance in the United States.
During this Soviet assault on nature, there was no place for the
qualms of the ecologists. In biology, this was the era dominated by
the "cult of Lysenko," the charlatan agronomists who, by enlisting
the support of Stalin, effectively destroyed the science of genetics
in Russia for four decades, and who cast a pall upon all the biotic
sciences. Unfortunately for the strategic interests of the West,
there was no comparable triumph of ideology over the physical
sciences in the Soviet Union.
When, in 1952, death loosed the iron grip of Stalin, the
opportunity arose for some initiative on the part of the scientists.
The Soviets were always aware of the social and strategic importance
of at least some of scientists, and the consequences of Lysenko's
follies were becoming too costly to ignore. Thus in 1960, when a huge
pulp and resin complex was proposed on the shore of Lake Baikal,
protests arose from both the Academy of Sciences in Moscow, and from
the residents of the "sacred lake of Siberia." These protests were
unavailing and the complex was built. Despite promises from
succeeding Soviet and Russian regimes, it is still in operation. Yet
out of failure, the protests against the Baikalsk plant proved a
catalytic event in the formation of the Soviet environmental
movement.
Later, when the Soviet government proposed to reverse the flow of
several of the giant Siberian rivers, the Academy protested again --
this time, successfully. In 1986, the scheme was shelved.
1986 was also the year of the Chernobyl disaster, which mobilized
the environmentalists of the Soviet Union into an organized movement,
derived primarily from two sources: first, the "nature
preservationists," primarily academics and intellectuals; and the
"urban environmentalists," small groups of ordinary citizens focusing
their attention upon the unhealthy conditions of their local
areas.
The Soviet leader most supportive of environmental causes was also
the last: Mikhail S. Gorbachev. In 1988, he established a new
Ministry: "Goskompriroda" -- The State Committee on Nature. Soon
after its establishment, Dr. Nicolai Vorontsov became the Minister. A
man of extraordinary fortitude and courage, Vorontsov is notable for
being the first non-communist Soviet minister since the early 1920s.
As testimony to his courage, he was the only minister to vote against
the abortive August, 1991 coup against Gorbachev. He later stood and
spoke with Boris Yeltsin on that celebrated tank in front of the
Parliament building.
With glasnost and the official recognition of the
environmental crisis in the Soviet Union, the way was open for
citizen activism, and the emergence of such significant figures as
Sviatoslav Zabelin and Alexei Yablokov (regarded by many as "the
Sakharov of the Russian environment").
In 1988, environmental groups from throughout the Soviet Union
confederated into the Socio-Ecological Union (SEU), which today
consists of over two hundred organizations, and remains the leading
independent voice of environmental conscience in Russia and the
republics of the former Soviet Union.
Thanks to the advent of glasnost the SEU was given semi-official
tasks of monitoring and reporting environmental conditions in the
Union. In fact, a year ago a large track of Siberian land was leased
to the SEU as a nature sanctuary -- an historically significant
event, since "it marked the first time since the 1917 revolution that
a private organization had acquired Russian land for a nature
reserve."(10)
However, despite its recent growth and accomplishments, and the
valor of its proponents and leaders, the emerging environmental
movement in the former Soviet Union faces severe challenges and
opposition, from the entrenched nomenclatura (surviving officials
from the Soviet era), from emerging entrepreneurial business
interest, and from "patriotic" nationalistic movements.(11)
The rise and prominence of the Russian environmental movement is a
dramatic story that deserves to be told throughout the world.
However, much more urgent than this human story is the continuing
tragedy of the Russian environment, and the efforts to restore it at
a time of extreme political instability and economic hardship. This
is a problem of acute interest to the entire world, since:
- the polluted air and water of the Commonwealth Republics do
not respect boundaries. Instead, they contaminate the common
atmosphere and oceans of our planet.
- contamination of products (especially food) inhibits the
expansion of international trade.
- continuing radiological and water contamination, and the
consequent diseases, inhibit travel and tourism.
- the economic consequences of this environmental damage are no
longer speculative and remotely "in the future" -- they are acute,
chronic, and urgently contemporary. Such consequences include the
total collapse of commercial fisheries in the Aral Sea, and
extreme diminution of the fisheries resources in the Black and
Caspian Seas as well as the abandonment of large areas of Ukraine
and Belarus, due to the Chernobyl reactor disaster.
While this list could be prolonged, we will not do so, since all
this and more has been extensively reported and documented
elsewhere.
III
Environmentalism and the Rise of "Civic Society" in
Russia
Pause for a moment and reflect upon these past eight years!
For almost 70 years -- the entire lifetime of most Russians and
Soviets -- a totalitarian regime had complete control of education
and media, and suppressed the importation of "alien" ideas.
And yet, to many Russians, it is as if it had never happened. For
instance, consider:
- The Orthodox church is flourishing.
- Free market is enthusiastically embraced. (For the freest
market you'll ever want to see, visit Novo Arbat in Moscow, or
Nevsky Prospect in St. Petersburg.)
- Nowhere on earth are Americans more loved, admired and
emulated(12) albeit not always,
alas, for our most admirable traits or highest culture.
Unfortunately, this good-will may well be squandered through
over-exposure. The Russian-American journalist, Vladimir Pozner,
warns that "some Americans have managed to accomplish in a few
years, what the Soviets failed to accomplish in seventy years:
they have caused many Russians to hate Americans."(13)
- Personal values are replacing those of the state. Oleg
Yanitsky writes: "Ordinary citizens were no longer willing to
display enthusiasm for building an illusory "shining future," but
began, independently and very actively, to fix up the present.
Moreover, they did this in such a way as to ensure that they
themselves could enjoy the fruits of the efforts they had
invested. The participants in the "grass-roots" movements thus
rejected yet another dogma -- about the priority of public (read:
state and apparatus) values over personal ones. Instead, they
affirmed that a society develops only when those who build it
develop themselves and achieve satisfaction. It seems to me that
this represents a complete revolution in our consciousness and in
society as a whole, a revolution which so far we have sensed only
dimly."(14)
- Moral concern is especially conspicuous among the Russian
environmentalists. Yanitsky continues: "This moral resource is
implicit in people's values and aims, in their inner readiness to
mobilize and to take direct action in order to turn their goals
into reality. I have no wish to present the environmental movement
as an army of selfless martyrs or mindless enthusiasts. On the
contrary, the successes of the movement are due largely to the
scientific prognoses and sober calculations of its leaders. But at
the basis of these successes are to be found honesty, shame, pity,
conscientiousness, a concern for justice -- that is, moral
values."(15)
- Thus, after 70 years of "top down" control, an authentic
"grass roots" civil society is emerging. This "civil society" was
a necessary prerequisite to the environmental movement. And that
movement now most vividly and effectively embodies the enduring
qualities of civic society: broad-based local support, initiative
from the local level, dedicated and shared concern, and ongoing
communication with like-minded and like-concerned individuals
throughout the country, and beyond. "Civil society" is an old
concept and condition. But one of the most important factors in
the emergence and the sustenance of the "grass roots"
environmental movement in Russia is very contemporary. This is the
utilization of electronic communication. Thanks to generous and
wisely considered contributions from the West, e-mail
communications within Russia, and from Russia to the outside world
have been essential to the success of the environmental movement.
In my conversation with Oleg Yanitsky, this astute observer of
Russian environmentalism told me that electronic communications
have "enabled [the movement] to mobilize its rather modest
human resources very quickly and very effectively. This gives the
members a sense of ... community. And what is more important, the
e-mail gives them a sense of belonging to a global community...
And e-mail democratizes communications, making the environmental
movement members informed ... in advance of events.... All in all,
e-mail is a powerful resource that makes the environmental
movement actually independent."(16)
IV
Environmental Ethics in Russia
Sad to say, despite the spectacular growth and vitality of Russian
environmentalism, Environmental Ethics as an academic discipline is
in approximately the same stage as it was in the United States in
1960: no academic journals, no professional association, very few
publications -- in other words, virtually non-existent.(17)
However, at the International Conference in Philosophy in Moscow,
August, 1993, a few sessions on the topic were scheduled, and
featured Russian participants. Meanwhile, the International Society
for Environmental Ethics is actively seeking members in the former
Soviet Union, and the journal Environmental Ethics is donating
several subscriptions to libraries in Moscow and St. Petersburg. Most
importantly, as with the United States in the 1960s, Russia contains
and sustains a rich fund of nature literature, and, as noted above,
has an honorable tradition of concern for the environment. Activist
Irina Platonova, born in Siberia, tells Oleg Yanitsky:
... people without forests are people who have been
cheated and robbed. A forest isn't just the trees outside your
window. Nature means a forest with animals and insects. You know
here I often look at the sky, because here in the city it's the
only thing that links me to nature. Another thing is that a person
who is deprived of nature is also deprived of literature, and of
the ability to understand it. Such a person can't be a patriot,
because all of Russian ... art, painting literature and music are
linked with nature...(18)
Sentiments such as these, from a culture so rich in literature,
science and humane thought, assures us that significant contributions
to environmental philosophy should soon be coming to us from
Russia. Copyright, 1995, by Ernest Partridge
NOTES
1. Sviatoslav Zabelin, quoted in Oleg N.
Yanitsky, Russian Environmentalism, (Moscow: Mezhdunarodni
Otnosheniya [Foreign Affairs] Publishing House, 1993), p.
217.
2. New York: Basic Books, 1992, p. 1.
3. Cf. "A Tale of Two Lakes: Aral and
Baikal," On the Other Hand: News from the Russian
Environment," Edited by Ernest Partridge, (Ashland, Wisconsin),
I:3, p. 14-19.
4. B. Kamarov, The Destruction of Nature in
the Soviet Union, M. E. Sharpe, White Plains, NY, 1980, p.
16.
5. Paul Lowe, "The Soviets' Poisoned Land,"
Los Angeles Times Magazine, Feb. 21, 1993, p. 34
6. A. V. Yablokov, cited by Feshback and
Friendly, op. cit., pp. 9, 174-5. About a year ago, the estimable Dr.
Yablokov appeared to ABC's Nightline, with a stunningly candid
on-site report on the radiation hazards in Chelyabinsk region, and
their public-health consequences.
7. Sovetskaya Rossiya, April 28, 1987,
p. 6.
8. "A Perspective from Another Country: The Soviet Task," EPA
Journal, Jan/Feb. 1990., pp. 50-2. In this remarkable article,
Yablokov continues with a list of specific environmental assaults
upon human health in the (then) Soviet Union -- a list too extensive
and detailed for citation here.
9. The definitive work in English on the
history of Russian environmentalism is Models of Nature by
Douglas Weiner, (Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 1988).
10. Peter Matthiessen, "The Last Cranes of
Siberia," The New Yorker, May 3, 1993. See also, OTOH, #3, p
13.
11. These points are explored in detail in
Irene Khalyi's previously unpublished paper, "The Environmental
Movement in Russia: Contemporary Trends," On the Other
Hand... I-3 (May, 1993), pp. 5-13.
12. Oleg Yanitsky points this out at some
length, in an interview with me which took place at his Moscow apartment
in August 25, 1993. That interview is included in Online Gadfly --
see "A Conversation with Oleg Yanitsky."
13. In that same interview (see previous
note), Yanitsky notes that most American commentators on Russia are
quite ignorant of the conditions, culture and history of that vast
country. Moreover, they rarely speak the Russian language, and thus
do not have direct access to primary materials. Yet Americans do not
hesitate to offer free advice to their Russian friends and
colleagues.
Unfortunately, Yanitsky's complaint is entirely justified. To cite
a personal experience, three years ago, on a return flight from
Moscow, I sat next to the President of a "free enterprise think tank"
which, mercifully, I will not identify. He told me at length "what
the Russians need" from us, and how he instructed them at the
symposium which his Institute had sponsored. Throughout the ten hours
of that flight, I heard not one iota of evidence that he had learned
anything from the Russians, much less that he had changed his mind on
any substantive issues. His mind set was no less fixed than that of
an evangelical missionary. And this is by no means an exceptional
case in my experience. I must wonder how long the good will of our
Russian friends can survive the onslaught of such arrogance and
ignorance.
14. Op. cit., pp. 35-6.
15. Yanitsky, op. cit., 117
16. Yanitsky, interview. Op. Cit. I can
personally testify to the amazing improvement brought about by the
computer revolution. The cost of a phone call to Moscow can quickly
add up to three figures. Mail takes several weeks to deliver, and
even so is frequently lost. Yet an e-mail message can cost mere
pennies, and be read within a few minutes of its transmission. The
recent visit to our campus of three researchers from St. Petersburg
would have been quite impossible without dozens of preparatory e-mail
communications which preceded that visit. With such
order-of-magnitude decreases in cost and increases in speed, added to
the admirable facility of educated Russians in the English language,
there remain no further technological barriers to the full admission
of the Russians to the global community of environmentalists.
17. Anton Struchkov, "Environmental Ethics in
the Soviet Union," paper delivered at the CSU-Fullerton Symposium, Environmental Ethics: Now and into the 21st Century, March
8, 1991.
18. Quoted in Yanitsky, op. cit., 82-3.
|
