{"id":432,"date":"2021-07-20T17:27:55","date_gmt":"2021-07-20T09:27:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/caarchives.org\/?p=432"},"modified":"2022-02-07T16:45:27","modified_gmt":"2022-02-07T08:45:27","slug":"the-art-of-war-and-diplomacy-at-the-taipei-biennial-with-latour-and-schmitt","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/caarchives.org\/the-art-of-war-and-diplomacy-at-the-taipei-biennial-with-latour-and-schmitt\/","title":{"rendered":"The Art of War and Diplomacy at the Taipei Biennial\u2014With Latour and Schmitt | Paul Jobin"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\u3010<\/strong>by<\/em> Paul Jobin, June 2021\u3011<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n From November 2020 to March 2021, the Taipei Fine Arts Museum (TFAM) hosted the Taipei Biennial, curated by renowned French sociologist of science Bruno Latour and two young curators, Martin Guinard and Eva Lin, with the theme \u201cYou and I Don\u2019t Live on the Same Planet.\u201d Along with Chun-Mei Chuang and other colleagues in Taiwan, I was honored to lend a hand as a consultant in preparing this biennial and to take an active part in the organization of some of its side events.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The opening symposium entitled \u201cNew Diplomatic Encounters\u201d focused on the art of diplomacy in the age of a climate emergency and a dramatic extinction of species.[1]<\/a> Drawing on the concepts of \u201cclimate war(s)\u201d and \u201cclimate diplomacy\u201d as defined by Latour, I seized this opportunity to ask him to clarify an issue that had puzzled me and that I had been hesitant to discuss with him until then: in a nutshell, are the thoughts of Carl Schmitt\u2014the infamous legal scholar who supported the Nazi regime\u2014really essential for addressing the climate war? Below is a revised version of my remarks as well as the answer from Bruno Latour.[2]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Diplomatic Clashes and Climate Wars<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The symposium focused on this question: \u201cHow can we engage in new diplomatic encounters when our perceptions of the global climate crisis are so divergent that we seem to live on different planets<\/em>?\u201d My tentative answer followed Latour\u2019s previous insights on the art of diplomacy in the context of what he calls \u201cthe new climatic regime\u201d (Latour 2017, 2018), himself drawing on what Michael Mann has called \u201cthe climate wars\u201d (Mann 2013; see also Mann 2021).<\/p>\n\n\n\n If Clausewitz famously defined war as the continuation of politics by other means, he provided no clue as to the role of diplomacy, nor did Sun Tzu\u2019s Art of War<\/em> (\u5b6b\u5b50\u5175\u6cd5). But to put it simply, we can assume that a war starts where diplomacy ends\u2014when diplomatic talks turn into a clash and negotiations end. Once a war has started, diplomacy is suspended between the belligerents, until both sides consider going back to the negotiating table. In other words, diplomacy is an alternative to war, and vice versa.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Facing Gaia <\/em>(2017), Latour invites us to depart from the geopolitics of the Westphalian regime and bring geo<\/em> back to the center of geopolitics, or what he calls Gaia-politics. In Down to Earth<\/em> (2018, p. 8), he further notes that people usually feel bored if they are invited to defend Nature; but if one raises the issue of defending a territory, everybody gets suddenly much more excited. Indeed, the so-called \u201cenvironmental issues\u201d are always relegated to the periphery of politics, and hardly ever constitute the core of policy debate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Taiwan, over the past forty years, the environmental movement has greatly contributed to the democratization of the country, developing what I call \u201ca civic eco-nationalism,\u201d i.e., a national identity that includes a rather strong ecological mindset (Jobin 2021a). Despite many recent warning signs, such as a sudden decrease in rainfall, the climate emergency has not become a central issue. So far, the focus of Taiwan\u2019s geopolitics remains the traditional issues of cross-strait tensions with China, including the military and economic rivalry between China and the US. This is understandable, for it is indeed a serious issue, a matter of life and death for the people of Taiwan, and the potential trigger of another world war. But is it not possible for Taiwan and other nations to address the climate war with at least a similar level of concern?<\/p>\n\n\n\n A central part of Taipei Biennial 2020 was placed under the notion of the \u201cTerrestrial,\u201d which Latour introduced in Down to Earth<\/em> as the capacity for humans to be bound to the earth, i.e., to depart from satellite views of \u201cthe planet\u201d and look at \u201cenvironmental issues\u201d the other way around, from ground level. Among the five sections of the biennial, Planet Terrestrial<\/em> hosted the largest number of art works, most of them dealing with climate and environmental issues, in particular what geologists call \u201cthe Critical Zone\u201d (see Photos 1-3 for some examples of the exhibited artwork).[3]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Due to its unique geological and tropical characteristics, Taiwan offers geologists one of the best possible observatories of the Critical Zone (Jobin 2018). Two major geological plates\u2014the Philippine Sea Plate and the Eurasian Plate\u2014collide to the northeast and west of the island of Taiwan, provoking frequent earthquakes. Moreover, exposure to tropical storms and abundant rains cause recurrent landslides. The conjunction of all these factors explains why Taiwan has the world\u2019s fastest erosion rate, which is a key issue to understanding the Earth\u2019s carbon cycle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In other sections of the Taipei Biennial, such as Planet Security<\/em>, some of the exhibited artworks brought the climate wars closer to geopolitics in its ordinary definition. Given the constant and growing threat of a Chinese military invasion, from the traditional approach to geopolitics as well, Taiwan can be seen as a very sensitive \u201ccritical zone.\u201d[4]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n