The Greening of Machiavelli: Evolution of International Environmental Politics (RIIA) [Hardcover]

In The Greening of Machiavelli: The Evolution of International Environmental Politics, Tony Brenton sites the modern definition of environment and ecology to have emerged in the early 1960's. Although resource conservation and wildlife preservation in the US and UK were popular causes beginning in the late 19th Century, they were not issues championed by the masses. The environment was brought to the forefront when, concerns over air pollution in the early 1960's combined with the 1962 American bestseller, Silver Spring exposed the dangers of pesticide use. When in 1967, the oil tanker, Torrey Canyon ran aground, causing the largest oil spill of all time; the developed world was ripe and ready to champion this issue. Mr. Brenton points out that it was members of the `new left political movement' that were the most vocal and staunchest supporters of the environmental movement. The post-World War II Western economic boon led to the shift from consumption to a focus on quality of life. The emergence of scientific studies with apocalyptic predictions as well as a string of environmental disasters all fed into the newly established sensationalist media. Public hysteria turned the ears of "sympathetic politicians". The Western influenced United Nations saw the need to tackle the issue.

In 1972, United Nations Stockholm Conference was convened. The Conference was to deal with issues surrounding pollution, and rapid population growth. It was during the Conference that the gulf between the developed and developing world's perceptions of the environmental situation came to light. Developing nations were adamantly opposed to any regulations which could hinder their economic growth. Developed nations saw the environmental issue as being greatly exacerbated by the colossal growth in population within the developing world. Most of all, the Western politicians wanted it to appear to their constituents that they were trying to resolve the problem.

The Stockholm Declaration, which barely passed, was as Mr. Brenton described it, "so vague as to be useless for legal purposes". The inability of the international community to come to an agreement at Stockholm mirrors subsequent conferences. It is the vastly different views of the developed and developing world, which marks Mr. Brenton's theory as to why there have been such difficulties reaching a compromise on the environment. The opposing views of both parties did not change from the beginning of the history of environmentalism up to the next major world environmental conference, twenty years later.

There was success in the creation of treaties to deal with individual environmental issues following Stockholm. An example was the 1975 Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species. The plight of endangered species was one that many Westerners held close to their hearts. The Convention had such great support that trade sanctions were imposed upon nations that did not comply or would not sign. The treaty was in the best interest of the numerous developing nations who had burgeoning eco-tourism industries. All parties were satisfied by the Convention, which appeased Western voters and at the same time was in the best interest of the developing world's economy.

In 1983, the World Commission on Environment and Development published the Bruntland Report. The Report recommended sustainable development, "development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." Both the developed and developing worlds found the Report acceptable. Once again, developing nations felt it mollified the environmentalists within their own nations while, developed nations saw that it would not obstruct their own economic growth.

Mr. Brenton was in attendance as a member of the British delegation at the Rio Earth Summit, which was held in June of 1992. Going into the Conference, the developed and developing nations had vastly different goals. Developed nations were seeking positive results on environmental issues while developing nations were seeking improved economic growth, and not listing the environment as a major priority. The Conference's plan was to have two major general environmental treaties refined and then signed as well as two smaller treaties dealing with specific environmental issues signed at the Conference. The two major treaties, The Rio Declaration and the Agenda 21 were so greatly `refined' that their broadness and ambiguity made them of little value. It was the signing of the two smaller treaties dealing with biodiversity and climate change that proved to be the only marginal successes of the Conference.

So what does Mr. Brenton see for the future of the world's environment? His response-"a gloomy answer" but he quickly makes a detour, as pessimism is not his tendency. He proposes that since, all states are self-interested, as Machiavelli said, the only solution would be a political system for the world, whereby all are "citizens of the world state." But understanding that the likelihood of such a world in the foreseeable future is slim, he recommends that the world focus on improving the economic growth and democratic governments of the developing world. A strong democratic government acts as a "counterweight" to powerful and influential interest groups. Wealth enables a society to move their focus from the present to the future, and thus have long-term goals, which would inevitably include environmental preservation. On another hopeful note, he points out that many early scientific forecasts of doom have proven false and the amount of world resources have been underestimated.

If what you seek is a thorough, though dense walk through the brief history of environmentalism from the late 1960's until the early 1990's, The Greening of Machiavelli comes highly recommended. This birdseye view could have only been accomplished by an insider.