for the recent drastic decline in the air quality in Hong Kong.

SOOtiJ of the smog has been attrib-

uted to ~hide e~ons, coa1buming power plants and factories within the region. The in-
creased lerels of air pollutants subsequently led to an increase in acidity of rainfall in both Japan
and South Korea. The increased prevalence and intensity of acid rain have a n~ impact on
lakes and forests.
The regularity of ~rder pollution issues within Asia has led experts to call for more regional
pacts to be enacted within Asia to tackle these problems. Setting e~on limits on sulphur diox-
ide, nitrogen oxide and other chemicals, which is what u.s.and Europe are doing, may be useful
in controlling ~rder pollution. Yet, while the implementation of regional pacts will go a
long way in resolving this transnational problem, obstacles other than bureaucratic inertia will
hinder the legislation of such regional or international pacts. This is due to the fact that any gain
by one country is likely to be made at the expense of another. In fact, there eren exists the possibil-
ity that such discussions in which countries only have their own interests at heart may eren exacer-
bate strained ties be~n nations.

In certain cases, counter-accusations ~r who is responsible for a certain act of pollution may
make matters eren more complicated. This is dearly delineated when Indonesia pointed out that
Singaporean and other Asian inwsrors either have stakes, or own, the palm plantations routinely
blamed for some of the fires. lastly, eren if any amicable compromise among nations could be ar-
ri~ upon, some monitoring device has to be in place to ensure that what have been agreed on
will be feasibly enforced. G~n the increasing ecological footprint that humans are making upon
the planet, decisions need to be made and actions executed before ~rsible and irreparable
damage is made to the Earth.

PARlY I 03

Is politiOi the solution
to environmental problems?
By Bryan Hui Chit Xiang
Before vve marvel at the latest technolo-
gies and celebrate its potential contributions to-
wards the economy, one should not ignore the
cries made by environmentalists appealing for
us to pause and think about the consequences
human activities ~ upon the environment.
In fact, the rapid construction of factories will
only exacerbate environment pollution.
Throughout history, the environment has con-
stantly pa;ed challenges to man in the fonn of
gradual environmental change and natural di-
sasters. Although Man has -vet to learn how to
mitigate the effucts sufficiently or to fully over~
come these problems, he nevertheless creates
na:rer challenges for us by inmluntarily (but
not unknowingly) speeding up the rate of envi-
ronmental change. While it is undeniable that
advancement in technology has brought about
unprecedented imp~ments in standards of
living for the masses, it has also resulted in seri-
ous environmental degradation. The question
that one should ponder then \\Quld be whether
it is justifiable for us to destroy the environment
in the pursuit of economic successes, and if so,
to what extent? In this article, I will discuss why-
un\1\d
Ont~\\anr.
politics is the obvious and viable solution to prob-
lems caused by the environment and also discuss
the limitations of politics in protecting the envi-
ronment.
To understand why politics is the obvious sohl-
tion to environmental problems, we must firstly
understand the main charncteristics of environ-
mental pollution. As environmental problems
are usually widespread and not confined -within
national boundaries, there are huge consequenc-
es to masses of people not responsible for these
problems. For instance, the Chemobyl disaster in
1986 led to radioactive plume spreading to exten-
sive parts in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, leading
to the resettlement of hundreds of thousands of
people. Transnational boundary problems such
as these can only be successfully solved through
collaborations between countries. Environmen-
tal problems bring out the important but loosely
regarded notion of interdependency between
countries as the solution often requires collective
effort by the various gO\emments.
Depending on how politics is being played out, it
PARTY I 04
could help or m)rsen the situation. In the ~ of
Myanmar, Cyclone Nargis caused great devastation
to the people. As the Myanmar goremment strug-
gled to cope with the rescue of her people, they re-
fused pro~ional aid from other countries and
NGOs. This lack of international cooperation was
to the detriment of the people of Myanmar as they
were deprnro of crucial help in the initial ~ry
stages. E\\!n though the Myanmar goremment
had sub;equently made concessions under the Ulll-
brella of ASFAN, critical time had been lost. From
here, it could be seen that politics could be used to
tackle problems caused by the environment but
only if it is p~ out according to a tactful script.
The limitations of politics to tackle environmen-
tal problems are both structural and ~ological.
Historically, the dimensions of politics ha\\! mainly
remlved around the state and the industry. The
ramification of this is that environmental policies
often take a backseat to economic issues. This is
due to the widespread fear that the implementa-
tion of environmental policies will incur additional
costs to the industries, hence accounting for the im-
mense resistance put forth by the industries.
Though this structural barrier seems to be huge,
the greatest hindrance to environmentally friendly
policies lies in the mindset of the people.
In Singapore, people generally do not assume "en-
vironmental citizenship". This can be seen in how
proenvironment campaigns are usually organized
by the goremment. The result of this topdown
effort is that Singaporeans are o&en fur from
being convinced of the importance and need
for environmental conservation. Hence, the
citizenry rarely push for proenvironment poli-
cies to be implemented In another way, it can
also be argued that with increasing urbanisa-
tion, the effects of environmental degradation
is less visible to the people and ~ a result, they
are unable to comprehend the extent to which
our environment has deteriorated. In addition,
when one considers the substantial benefits
that technology has best:cMOO upon us, there is
increased reluctance to accept the fact that \\e
are dealing significant damage to our environ-
ment and a need to rethink our accepted vvays
of doing things. One needs to acknowledge that
the problem of the hasty plunge into techno-
logical and economic pursuit \\QuId result in
the implementation of painful measures which
has significant economical ~. It is this inabil-
ity to convince people that the threat of the envi-
ronment is real that has resulted in a slow prog-
ress tovvards environmental conservation. Must
\\e feel the pain first before the cries can be
heard?
In conclusion, \\e lta\e reached a crucial turn-
ing point where \\e are compelled to chOU'le be-
M:'en greater technological advances (which in-
\U~ environmental ~) and the heed to ad-
dress the ~ of envirorunental degrada-
tion which haW Decome in~ hard to
ignore. By recognising and resolving the limita-
tions of politics, it is probable that environmen-
tal conservation is realizable. Eml though it re-
mains an uncertainty that politics is the sohr
tion tDwards resolving environmental prob-
lems, the consequences will be dire if man~a
continues this reckless degradation of the
ronment.