Dispatch — December 10, 2015, 7:31 pm

Live Ghosts

“Indigenous people from Indonesia to Alaska have come to the Paris climate summit in the hundreds, perhaps even the thousands, to defend their lands and their people from erasure.” 

Photograph by Darren Aronofsky

Photograph by Darren Aronofsky

Not long ago, Jannie Staffansson’s great-aunt fell through the ice in the Scandinavian Arctic and was never seen again. Unreliable ice is just one effect of climate change in the Arctic, a place where the impact of a warming planet is especially acute. Another is temperature swings that melt and freeze snow, icing over the forage that reindeer—and, in the Western Hemisphere, caribou—normally eat. “They are starving,” Staffansson said in Paris on Saturday. She is a member of the Sami people, an indigenous group of reindeer herders whose way of life she strives to protect. As she made clear, this is an increasingly impossible task.

Indigenous people from Indonesia to Alaska have come to the Paris climate summit in the hundreds, perhaps even the thousands, to defend their lands and their people from erasure. Those who have few ties to places are least likely to notice or care about the threat of climate change. Meanwhile, those whose histories, identities, cultures, and survival are most reliant on the particulars of a location are most likely to understand what’s really at stake. This conference is in part a battle between life and money, a clash between the people who believe in the immutable value of place and the powerful who focus on alienable commodities. While much of the world is fighting for survival, the representatives of a few rich nations and powerful interests are defending their wealth. That’s why they balk at doing what’s required to limit the earth’s temperature increases to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

People from the Arctic and sub-Saharan Africa, from island nations and mountain villages, are all fighting to keep their cultures, their economies, their environments—and in many cases, themselves—alive. They are fighting to not become ghosts. When I encounter them here, they seem like the opposite of ghosts: their vibrant traditional clothing and the passion and directness with which they speak make the bureaucrats seem like faint, forgettable apparitions. (Even the officials who appear to be on the right side of history tend to speak in vague, abstruse language that can make you forget that what we’re discussing is genocide and annihilation.)     

Indigenous people at the conference are focused on the recognition of their rights, which in a recent draft of the evolving agreement was moved from the main body to the preamble, where it’s considered to be less meaningful. Another concern is the United Nations’s REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) program, which on its face protects forests, but does so in ways that may wrest control away from those living in them. One spokesman from Kenya’s Sengwer people, Yator Kiptum, recently told Justin Kenrick, a policy advisor from the advocacy group Forest Peoples Programme, that “trying to address climate change by making payments for supposedly locking up carbon in forests in the global south leads to governments and conservation institutions seeking to take control of the forests from the very people who have protected and sustained those forests for millennia.” 

On Tuesday morning, I attended a sunrise canoe launch by the Kichwa people of Sarayaku, a rainforest region in central Ecuador. Along the bank of the Canal Saint-Martin, I met a woman from the Lummi tribe who told me how climate change is affecting her homeland and way of life in coastal Washington State. Elliott Bay, she said, has warmed so much that salmon, which are central to Lummi culture and subsistence, no longer return to their waters. The Lummi had fought for generations to defend their fishing rights, but now their access to the salmon is being sabotaged—not by laws but by the impact of the dominant culture. “We are coming,” another Lummi woman told me, “to make a statement that the earth is alive.”

The Kichwa have been fighting successfully against oil extraction, which threatens to destroy their rainforest as it has done in other parts of Ecuador inhabited by indigenous peoples. The women had delicately drawn patterns across their faces, the men wore headdresses made of iridescent blue feathers, and their canoe was a magnificent dugout, perhaps thirty feet long, with a prow shaped like the narrow head of a hummingbird fish.

“For the first time in history, a canoe from the Sarayaku in Ecuador has arrived in France, the canoe of life,” said José Gualinga, the former president of Sarayaku. “We’re here with a message that we’re still alive and still fighting. We are keeping oil in the ground. We’re keeping our forests alive. People in the most remote places are doing this work.”

Why is it a canoe for life? “Because our first ancestors, the children of the moon, constructed this,” tribal member Mirian Cisneros explained, “and it doesn’t need oil. It is our symbol of resistance.”

It was both a beautiful and a wrenching gesture, an attempt to interject a vision into the negotiations happening in the fortified convention center far away. 

Think of the climate conference agreement-in-the-works as a blueprint for a machine with innumerable parts. Reducing the amount of carbon that goes into the atmosphere, and sequestering some portion of the carbon that’s already there, is an economic and ecological question that impacts nearly everything on earth. Almost all of the conference’s 195 participant nations have submitted their own complex proposals for how they will do it. Now comes the agreement about collective action and international interactions and money. That this many nations might actually agree on something with this many moving parts—fuel and energy consumption, forestry and agriculture, finance and investment—seems miraculous. While many outside the conference assert that an agreement won’t be good enough, insiders hope that the commitments can be ratcheted up as science and technology continue to shift what is feasible—or as growing devastation deepens motivation.

Meanwhile, the entire conference is trying to work around one rogue nation: the United States. Most countries would prefer that a treaty emerges from the conference, but the U.S. Senate is guaranteed to block any binding one, just as it did the Kyoto Protocol. A nonbinding agreement is being negotiated instead. Whatever terms the Obama Administration commits to will likely be undone in a matter of months if a Republican is elected president next year.

The language of U.S. obstructionism denies not only the existence of climate change, but also the value of people, places, and species. It’s a language that describes a dead world. But addressing climate change requires that we understand the interconnectedness of all things. It’s why the Lummi keep declaring that the earth is alive. 

Here in Paris, the vividness of people’s language often correlates to the intensity of the threats against them. “We have no time left for rhetoric,” Enele Sosene Sopoaga, the prime minister of Tuvalu, said Monday. “Any temperature increase beyond 1.5 degrees will spell the total demise of our and other island nations.” Barnabas S. Dlamini, the prime minister of Swaziland, spoke of a drastic drought destroying agriculture and ecosystems in his southeastern African country. Siaosi Sovaleni, Tonga’s deputy prime minister, said that his country’s “development achievement has been destroyed overnight” by climate change. These are people who would rather not become ghosts. They should haunt us and the powerful negotiating this treaty. They are doing their best to do so.

A dozen volunteers, mostly young Lummi men, carried the Kichwa dugout to the canal on Tuesday morning after the informal press conference. José Gualinga sat in the stern with a broad paddle. Three Kichwa women sat in front of him, including Mirian Cisneros, who periodically blew a curved ceramic horn. As the wooden boat with the long fishhead prow and the snake carved on its side glided through the waters, it and its passengers looked permanent, eternal, while the tall buildings of the city behind them looked fleeting and unreal. Speaking the day before on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States, Thoriq Ibrahim, Energy Minister for the Maldives, had said, “COP21 will be the last chance the world will ever have.”

Share
Single Page

More from Rebecca Solnit:

From the September 2017 issue

Now and Then

From the July 2017 issue

Occupied Territory

Get access to 167 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

December 2017

Document of Barbarism

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Destroyer of Worlds

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Crossing Guards

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“I am Here Only for Working”

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Dear Rose

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Year of The Frog

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
Destroyer of Worlds·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In February 1947, Harper’s Magazine published Henry L. Stimson’s “The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb.” As secretary of war, Stimson had served as the chief military adviser to President Truman, and recommended the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The terms of his unrepentant apologia, an excerpt of which appears on page 35, are now familiar to us: the risk of a dud made a demonstration too risky; the human cost of a land invasion would be too high; nothing short of the bomb’s awesome lethality would compel Japan to surrender. The bomb was the only option. Seventy years later, we find his reasoning unconvincing. Entirely aside from the destruction of the blasts themselves, the decision thrust the world irrevocably into a high-stakes arms race — in which, as Stimson took care to warn, the technology would proliferate, evolve, and quite possibly lead to the end of modern civilization. The first half of that forecast has long since come to pass, and the second feels as plausible as ever. Increasingly, the atmosphere seems to reflect the anxious days of the Cold War, albeit with more juvenile insults and more colorful threats. Terms once consigned to the history books — “madman theory,” “brinkmanship” — have returned to the news cycle with frightening regularity. In the pages that follow, seven writers and experts survey the current nuclear landscape. Our hope is to call attention to the bomb’s ever-present menace and point our way toward a world in which it finally ceases to exist.

Illustration by Darrel Rees. Source photographs: Kim Jong-un © ITAR-TASS Photo Agency/Alamy Stock Photo; Donald Trump © Yuri Gripas/Reuters/Newscom
Article
Crossing Guards·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Ambassador Bridge arcs over the Detroit River, connecting Detroit to Windsor, Ontario, the southernmost city in Canada. Driving in from the Canadian side, where I grew up, is like viewing a panorama of the Motor City’s rise and fall, visible on either side of the bridge’s turquoise steel stanchions. On the right are the tubular glass towers of the Renaissance Center, headquarters of General Motors, and Michigan Central Station, the rail terminal that closed in 1988. On the left is a rusted industrial corridor — fuel tanks, docks, abandoned warehouses. I have taken this route all my life, but one morning this spring, I crossed for the first time in a truck.

Illustration by Richard Mia
Article
“I am Here Only for Working”·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

But the exercise of labor is the worker’s own life-activity, the manifestation of his own life. . . . He works in order to live. He does not even reckon labor as part of his life, it is rather a sacrifice of his life.

— Karl Marx

Photograph from the United Arab Emirates by the author. This page: Ruwais Mall
Article
The Year of The Frog·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

To look at him, Sweet Macho was a beautiful horse, lean and strong with muscles that twitched beneath his shining black coat. A former racehorse, he carried himself with ceremony, prancing the field behind our house as though it were the winner’s circle. When he approached us that day at the edge of the yard, his eyes shone with what might’ve looked like intelligence but was actually a form of insanity. Not that there was any telling our mother’s boyfriend this — he fancied himself a cowboy.

“Horse 1,” by Nine Francois. Courtesy the artist and AgavePrint, Austin, Texas
Article
Dead Ball Situation·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

What We Think About When We Think About Soccer, by Simon Critchley. Penguin Books. 224 pages. $20.

Begin, as Wallace Stevens didn’t quite say, with the idea of it. I so like the idea of Simon Critchley, whose books offer philosophical takes on a variety of subjects: Stevens, David Bowie, suicide, humor, and now football — or soccer, as the US edition has it. (As a matter of principle I shall refer to this sport throughout as football.) “All of us are mysteriously affected by our names,” decides one of Milan Kundera’s characters in Immortality, and I like Critchley because his name would seem to have put him at a vocational disadvantage compared with Martin Heidegger, Søren Kierkegaard, or even, in the Anglophone world, A. J. Ayer or Richard Rorty. (How different philosophy might look today if someone called Nobby Stiles had been appointed as the Wykeham Professor of Logic.)

Tostão, No. 9, and Pelé, No. 10, celebrate Carlos Alberto’s final goal for Brazil in the World Cup final against Italy on June 21, 1970, Mexico City © Heidtmann/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images

Factor by which single Americans who use emoji are more likely than other single Americans to be sexually active:

1.85

Brontosaurus was restored as a genus, and cannibalism was reported in tyrannosaurine dinosaurs.

Moore said he did not “generally” date teenage girls, and it was reported that in the 1970s Moore had been banned from his local mall and YMCA for bothering teenage girls.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Report — From the June 2013 issue

How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

"Gun owners have long been the hypochondriacs of American politics. Over the past twenty years, the gun-rights movement has won just about every battle it has fought; states have passed at least a hundred laws loosening gun restrictions since President Obama took office. Yet the National Rifle Association has continued to insist that government confiscation of privately owned firearms is nigh. The NRA’s alarmism helped maintain an active membership, but the strategy was risky: sooner or later, gun guys might have realized that they’d been had. Then came the shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, followed swiftly by the nightmare the NRA had been promising for decades: a dedicated push at every level of government for new gun laws. The gun-rights movement was now that most insufferable of species: a hypochondriac taken suddenly, seriously ill."

Subscribe Today