Paris, 5 June 2008 – The Assembly has called for national parliaments to encourage the international community to make a greater commitment to addressing the environmental impact of military action.

Submitting a report entitled “Assessing the impact of armed conflict on the environment”, Lord Russell-Johnston (United Kingdom, Liberal Group) said the public had become aware of the issue only “relatively recently”.  It is “almost new ground [and] should no longer be ignored, particularly because of the spectacular growth in the external operations” of the European Union. The damage could include destroyed infrastructure, contamination of soil and disruption of the agricultural cycle, he added.

Lord Russell-Johnston, Chairman of the Parliamentary and Public Relations Committee, was speaking on behalf of Rapporteur Gianpaolo Silvestri (Italy, Non-affiliated) who was unable to attend.
 
The resolution contained in the report, which was adopted unanimously by the Assembly, acknowledged that damage could not be avoided entirely in the event of war, but argued that the aim should be a level deemed more tolerable. The consequences of military action on the environment “are sometimes more disastrous than the war operations themselves”, it said.

“The means employed should never be disproportionate to the desired military objective”. Governments should “make a serious commitment for their armies to comply – in peacetime and in wartime – with international standards designed to safeguard natural resources”. For the European Union, concepts such as preventive action and assessing and attributing responsibility should be taken up by the European Defence Agency (EDA).

Addressing the Assembly on Wednesday during a discussion of the report, Gohar Bakshaliyeva, Vice-President of the Azerbaijan Parliament, said that Armenia’s occupation of 20% of Azerbaijan’s territory was “an ecological disaster” for her country and that the international community “should insist that Armenia meet international standards”. 
 
Mrs Bakshaliyeva accused Armenia of “systematic destruction of natural resources”, including “serious damage” to 250 000 hectares or 23% of the country’s farmland and the use of chemicals to fell trees in order to boost profits. On May 3, the occupying forces deliberately started a fire that had spread to other parts of the country and would probably continue to burn until the end of August, she asserted.

An estimated US$26 billion worth of environmental damage had been caused, she said. Water supplies had been diverted, flooding land in the winter and causing droughts in the summer. “The result is that arable land is no longer suitable for farming” she claimed. Toxic waste has been dumped in the River Arax, which also flows through Armenia, and the water table has been polluted. Phenyl levels were 13 times higher than the norm and those of sulphates nine times higher, Mrs Bakshaliyeva said.