Post 3 - Resource Wars

            Klare asserts in “Resource Wars” that the inevitable shortage of many valuable goods will lead to conflict (Klare, 20). While I would agree with the class in that most current conflicts are either exacerbated by resource competition or wholly unrelated to resource use, I believe that within the next century some of Klare’s arguments will prove correct.  I do think shortages of arable land, oil, and water are inevitable. It is certain that we are consuming these resources at a pace too fast for the earth to replenish itself. Innovation and technological developments, coupled with increased efficiency, may serve to reduce the severity of these shortages. However, many of the states that are resource poor already do not have the necessary revenue or government structure needed to ensure sustainable exploitation or equitable distribution.

Klare argues that as we increase consumption of already precious materials and resources, the price of these goods will increase dramatically (Klare, 20). Indeed, the more scarce land and oil become, the more expensive they will be. Their market value, in addition to the lack of substitutes (for land and water), will make these resources worth fighting over. These conflicts (violent or otherwise) will be tied primarily to access. As the goods increase in value, the elite in many lesser-developed nations will quickly move to take control of the resource. Especially when it comes to water, how could there not be conflict? It is necessary to survive and has absolutely no substitute. In water poor countries, access to the limited water supply already exacerbates local ethnic and religious conflicts.

There is no global market for water, and the concept of who owns the sources and how it should be allocated are widely contested. As shortages begin to occur, whether localized or globally, the lack of regulatory structure surrounding water in many countries will give way to chaos. This can be seen in Bolivia, as the government attempted to privatize the water supply. This was done in an effort to ensure better distribution and quality of available water to those in the city of Cochabamba. However, the public felt that the companies managing the water were not actually cleaning it up, but rather polluting the local water sources and fixing prices. Evidence of these conflicts can be seen throughout the world. Though this issue is one of distribution and ownership, it stems from the fact that many countries are already concerned about their water availability. The issue of how to distribute a resource that is necessary to survival creates tension between private corporations, the government, and the public. This tension can inevitably lead to conflict. (http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/vanovedr/)

While interstate conflict over resources may be arguable, I believe intrastate conflict is guaranteed. Particularly in less developed nations, in which ethnic, religious, and other conflicts already persist, competition for land and water will quickly escalate. I predict the need for water in particular, as shortages occur, will supersede any other conflicts existing within a state. The economic relationships built between many developed nations may serve to buffer any international conflict over temporary shortages. However, it does not seem logical that a political theory of peace will overcome people’s innate need to survive. Though resource scarcity or shortages may not ever get to a point that would breed such desperation, I believe it is a possibility that must be considered.