The Ecological Imperative

When we consider the Iran Nuclear Treaty, we witness an unprecedented event in modern history. The United States, Europe, Russia, and China are on the same side of the negotiations with Iran. How is this possible?

Clearly a consensus on the spread of nuclear power has emerged, and it is a broad, ecological consensus. Each of these major powers has stepped back from their territorial imperative to allow the ecological imperative to rule.

By “ecological imperative” I mean the need to keep power and aggression in check to sustain world-wide peace. Astonishing to think these disparate nations should accept this as a common cause: world-wide peace. The ecological imperative has not ruled world events until now, unless you count the founding of the United Nations or the Marshall Plan, neither of which brought lasting peace.

The “territorial imperative” has governed world events till now, and you can still see it in the expansionism of China and the designs of the Soviet Union on the Ukraine and Estonia. This is the world as Darwin perceived it, competition for environmental niches until certain species prevail over others. The outcome of such competition could be the extinction of humanity as we know it.

So the “territorial imperative” is a losing principle. Yet the Western detractors continue to exert that principle, claiming the fragility of the treaty and its lack of protection for their territorial interests. Certainly more could be demanded from Iran, but not without shattering the ecological consensus, so fragile in itself. It is safe to say this consensus has been revised dozens of time to satisfy the diverse interests of the parties involved.

We will hear the territorial imperative invoked, along with “American Exceptionalism” in the coming Presidential campaign, because some still believe that the United States should dominate world affairs as it did in the Marshall Plan
and when the Berlin Wall fell, and when the USSR crumbled.

Those days are gone, as witnessed by intractable battles in the Middle East, from Libya to Afghanistan. The territorial imperative will never dissolve these animosities, unvanquished by military power.

The survivors are always those that learn to adapt, and adaptation today means living the ecological imperative. Politicians can play the territorial card as long as they wish, but it will be the losing card. Not the loss of power, but the loss of advantage. The advantage goes to the nations who forge treaties and enforce them. That is the ecological imperative.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *