Competition between nations drives this century. Every country is constantly trying to create the most advanced technology before another country creates it. The environmental degradation that results due to these developments is not a priority for most countries. Violence and industrial warfare are results of this competition. For this reason, I agree with Ausbel’s belief that industrial warfare leads to environmental degradation. Nevertheless, environmental stresses will lead to water wars and agricultural wars in the future.
Recognizing the interconnectedness of all beings and complex processes is essential to developing an environmental ethic as well as creating peace in our world. We must understand that we need animals and microorganisms to survive, the same way that developing countries need to export to other countries to keep their economic standing. By recognizing our relationship with nature as well as our connection to all other humans, feelings of compromise and forgiveness will develop on their own. Therefore, I believe that the role of interconnectedness in our world is the most effective tool to create peace and harmony.
Humans have the tendency to be selfish. Having different goals, therefore, does not encourage them to work together and create peace. I do believe peace plays a significant role in saving our environment because it creates unity between everyone, which will in turn allow us to work towards a common goal. By recognizing that we are all interconnected, like the Iroquois Peacemaker stated, feelings of empathy as well as a desire to help others develop. This will allow us to work together to save our environment and all things dependent on it.
Environmental 
Although Ausubel makes a good point that “industrial warfare” can lead to water and agriculture wars in the future, it is important to remember that such wars have been going for as there have been humans. Even before environmental stress was ever though of, nations have been fighting for access to water and fields. It is human nature, rather than human innovation, that leads to conflict. In that sense, I agree with you and the Peacemaker.
It’s strange when you think about it that the world seems at such odds with each other, considering the environment is ours collectively to protect. The author puts forth the idea that group goals will help nations to move past ancient feuds. It’s too bad that we can’t have the wisdom to see that the Earth should be our goal and is equally ours to protect. Cynically I want to say that regardless of what we do, the Earth will go on. It’s our future that hangs in the balance.
I really enjoyed the connection that you made between interconnectivity and the idea of compromise and forgiveness. The focus on how humans feel about what they have done to the environment, as a justification for increases in our sustainability is extremely egocentric. The knowledge of how each factor of our planet is interrelated to all of the others through some cycle or process should be enough for humans to want to change their ways of life due to innocent organisms and ecosystems receiving the consequences of their actions. However, I guess we can’t complain about the way change comes about, as long as it does.
Peace is one of the most important factors leading to the sustainment of the environment through the actions of the human population, as well as the relationship between humans and other animals, plants, insects, etc. Humans should not be able to continue flourishing through technology and encompassing larger areas of the environment, while other organisms that have a natural right to inhabit these ecosystems are being forced out and susceptible to additional anthropogenic circumstances such as being hit by a car. Peace in the environment, through the self-incorporation of humans, will result in a greater peace of mind.