The Mine Disaster in Turkiye

From the moment I heard about the disaster in the İliç district of Erzincan, I started to think about the troubled times I spent when I was working in that region and my writings on disaster management, which is my area of expertise. Disasters are not always caused by natural events, they are divided into two in classification as natural and human-induced. The mining disaster in Erzincan, like many mining disasters in our country, falls into the second category. Sometimes natural disasters can also create secondary human-induced effects, but our subject here is a disaster that occurred without any natural effects. From the moment the disaster struck, many experts appearing in print and broadcast media have been providing all kinds of technical information on the subject. Therefore, instead of talking about it, I find it appropriate to discuss what should be done at the social level to prevent similar events in the future. 

Generally, disasters are the fate of societies ruled by unwise rulers. I should mention here that I use the term "unwise rulers" for the typology of rulers elected by societies far from science and morality, who put their personal interests above all social interests. From this perspective, the role of public policies in the occurrence of disasters is very important. Public policies are complex processes in which many factors play a role. As a result, they have the potential to create major changes in the social structure. At the decision point, we can say that political powers exist. In other words, political powers are responsible for everything good and bad that happens in a country in a very general sense. 

Sometimes the impact of a disaster can be so great that all measures taken are insufficient and the disaster occurs. But even in this case, the effects vary according to the level of organization of the society. The unchanging fact is that in every case the dimensions of the disaster are determined by the public policies implemented. Every disaster can also be seen as a reflection of a public policy that was determined, maintained or not determined in time. For example, when a nuclear power plant is built, the risk of a nuclear disaster is taken. Of course, many precautions are taken and control processes are organized to prevent its occurrence, but there is still the possibility that this risk will somehow turn into a disaster. 

Therefore, it is imperative for a political power to manage its policy processes with reason and science. This means a process where certain individuals do not make morally and scientifically problematic decisions, where managers are able to assess all kinds of sensitivities and meritorious experts are able to assess and report on any risks that may arise. Of course, a country's energy policies may require the construction of a nuclear power plant. However, from the moment this policy choice is made, many precautions and scientific processes must be carried out in a very sensitive manner. For example, political preferences should not affect the flow of scientific processes. Many negativities such as trying to bring forward the planned times, appointing unqualified people or structures, and unethical relations with companies can lead to the decisions being one of the main reasons for the realization of a disaster risk in the future. 

Many countries may face a difficult political choice between development and environmental impacts. Especially for developing countries, this choice is a very common dilemma. For this reason, since the 1970s, the concept of "sustainable development" has become the mainstay of development policies. Another dramatic dimension of the issue is the imposition of environmental impacts, which developed countries do not take into account in their development processes, on developing countries by international organizations. However, there is an undeniable fact that environmental impacts have the potential to negatively affect the lives of living beings for many years. This is why environmental impact assessment (EIA) reports should be perceived not as a procedure to be overcome in order to implement a policy choice, but as a warning document that scientifically demonstrates the possible consequences of the choice made. 

Let's talk about what happened before the mining disaster in İliç. When you go online and search, you come across the following news dated June 30, 2022: "It was announced that the Çöpler Gold Mine Complex, which has been operating for 12 years in Çöpler Village in the İliç district of Erzincan, and which recently came to the agenda with allegations of cyanide leakage, has ceased its operations. However, plans are underway to triple the capacity of the mine." (1). The article goes on to point out that a major environmental disaster would occur in the event of an earthquake. 

During the term of Murat Kurum, currently AKP Istanbul Mayor Candidate, as the Minister of Environment, Urbanization and Climate Change, a more risky environment was created with the increased capacity in 2020 without the need for an EIA report. What happened after this is described as follows: "According to the news in BirGün, during Murat Kurum's ministry, one year after the company's cyanide disaster, the foundations of today's disaster were laid by approving the capacity increase with the decision 'Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is not required' on June 16, 2022." (2). With the aforementioned increase, the capacity of the mine was tripled. 

The parliamentary question submitted by CHP MP Gürsel Erol during the term of the Minister in question almost foreshadows the impending disaster. Although Erol asked questions to the Authority about a possible disaster, he received the answer that "all necessary measures were taken". While the question of how many workers lost their lives after the disaster took place remains unanswered, the possibility of the cyanide solution reaching the Euphrates River brings to mind a nightmare scenario. Questioning what is the gain that would be worth such a fear is a belated accounting. 

First of all, it should be noted that the landslide in this case does not appear to be a spontaneous one, but rather one caused by the method of operation of the mine. This is the interpretation of experts in this field. Geologists also note that the tailings storage pond is on a fault line. This directly makes the ministry, which considers EIA reports unnecessary, a "strong suspect". How such a waste storage was allowed without the necessary geological analyses is an issue that needs to be asked to account and the responsible parties must be held accountable. Most likely, it will remain unanswered. 

Imagine a country where healthy information cannot be accessed even after disasters occur. Imagine a country where those responsible are not held accountable in any way. Imagine that where the law should speak, someone comes out and says that all this is "from God" and the dead remain dead. It seems very horrible to me. Does it look like that to you? I don't know if a country with thousands of years of state tradition in the 21st century can fall into this situation. But let three apples fall from the sky and let the names of these three apples be law, morality and justice. 

References

(1) https://sivilalan.com/2022/06/30/siyanur-sizintisinin-yasandigi-altin-madeninin-genisletilmesini-durdurmak-icin-mucadele-suruyor/ 

(2) https://t24.com.tr/haber/copler-madeni-ndeki-kapasite-artirimi-izni-murat-kurum-un-bakanligi-doneminde-verilmis,1151735