Possible Military Responses to the Climate-Security Nexus
The consequences of climate change can be widely felt around the globe. Frequent spells of extreme weather cause substantial damage to people, infrastructure, economy, and nature. Diseases traditionally contained to certain regions are now spreading. Biodiversity, which is much-needed for a balanced ecosystem, is decreasing. With life becoming tougher, people suffering, and nations struggling to guarantee prosperity, it is prudent to assume that global, regional, and national security will be under pressure. This may lead to tension in a variety of shapes and sizes. We have already witnessed an increase in the number of disasters that call for humanitarian assistance. Elsewhere, along the biggest rivers around the globe, upstream countries have built dams to ascertain the availability of much-needed water supplies, leaving downstream countries dry and desperate. Closer to home, both geopolitically and geographically, the melting of ice caps and thawing permafrost in the Arctic have different consequences for different global powers, fuelling global strategic competition.
It is clear that climate change has an immense impact on local, national, and global security; however, the position of armed forces in a changing climate still has yet to take form. The time has arrived for militaries around the world to engage in the climate-security nexus through immediately creating climate strategies and implementing actions. NATO can initiate a transition to develop armed forces from climate-action laggards into climate-action leaders. The Canadian proposal for a Climate and Security Centre of Excellence (CASCOE) can act as a platform for NATO allies and their armed forces to adopt three roles: climate change mitigator, climate security operator, and climate-proof organisation. This paper is structured similar to how militaries could structure their engagement in the climate-security nexus: first, start with understanding the climate-security nexus, then identify action possibilities, and lastly, find synergies with the broader climate and security sector. At the end of this paper, a schematic overview of the climate-security nexus as explained in this paper is given.
Understanding the climate-security nexus
When proposing possible roles for armed forces in the climate-security nexus, it is first important to understand how an increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations in the atmosphere will impact militaries around the world. The relationship between climate change and security is complex, as there are numerous different climate impacts that influence security, that are interlinked, and that are reinforcing each other. To simplify the climate-security nexus, it is possible to identify four impact levels: the climate system, the eco-socio-economic level, the security level, and the military level.
Climate system
The leading cause of climate change is an increase in GHG concentrations in the atmosphere that have resulted from human activity: in particular, the use of fossil fuels. The increase in GHG concentrations in the atmosphere leads to various changes in the climate system on Earth, which can be identified as drivers of the first order of climate insecurity. The most prominent changes in the natural system that drive climate insecurity are rising temperatures, sea level rise, and extreme weather events.[i]
Eco-socio-economic level
The identified changes in the climate system have direct and indirect effects on ecological, social, and economic systems. In numerous regions multiple changes in the climate system can strike simultaneously, reinforcing each other and amplifying their impact. Melting glaciers, faster snowmelt, and more frequent heavy rains, for example, all contribute to increased flooding, because glacial lakes and river systems cannot discharge such enormous amounts of water. Another example of the complexity of the implications for the eco-socio-economic level can be seen when examining water availability, in which temperature increase and sea level rise are first order drivers. Global temperature increase results in higher evaporation rates, accelerated desertification, prolonged periods of droughts, and more extreme heatwaves, resulting in decreasing water quality and quantity around the world. Next, sea level rise will lead to the salinization of groundwater, resulting in large areas becoming useless for agriculture and drinking water extraction; various important groundwater reservoirs around the globe are positioned in coastal areas and thus vulnerable to salinization.[ii] The decrease in water quantity and quality can directly threaten agricultural yields and increase the prevalence of diarrhoeal diseases, leading to food insecurities and human health risks. For agriculture the additional pressures induced by climate change include the expected increase in the number and size of wildfires, which destroy harvests and damage soil.[iii] Soil damaged by wildfires is mostly rendered water repellent, leading to higher water surface runoff, which in turn increases the chance of floods and decreases the inflow of water into the ground, leading to water scarcity. It may be obvious that identifying climate impacts is not an easy task, and that to determine their exact root causes is difficult. However, a simple set of six implications can already explain to a large extent how climate change impacts ecological, social, and economic systems, eventually leading to implications for armed forces: floods, water scarcity, degradation of natural resources, public health risks, food insecurity, and economic damage.
Security level
In many areas around the globe, life will become tougher due to the impact of climate change on ecological, social, and economic systems. As a result, labour productivity will fall, and economic growth will slow. The economic struggles of families living in areas vulnerable to climate change are likely to increase, which may prevent more and more children from attending school as they are forced to contribute to household income. Finally, as youth unemployment is likely to rise due to climate change, the lack of opportunities for young people has the potential to undermine a country’s social fabric and security, creating a fertile field for radicalisation.[iv] Radicalisation is therefore widely accepted as a security implication of climate change; however, again, the implications are interlinked and reinforce each other. Another option that people have when economic struggles increase is to migrate. The deterioration of people’s livelihoods can act as a push factor for out-migration, especially if areas become uninhabitable (for example, as a result of extreme temperatures and frequent/permanent flooding). In this, climate change can be seen as an important factor in people’s decisions to migrate.[v] Next, with a decrease in water availability and the degradation of natural ecosystems, rivalry over natural resources may become commonplace for an increasing amount of people and states around the world. The increase in instability caused by changes in ecological, social, and economic systems can eventually even trigger and prolong conflicts.[vi] Also, in terms of security, the direct and indirect impacts of climate change are difficult to identify. However, there are four important ones that are easy to identify: increased radicalisation of people, an increase in migration flows, rivalry over natural resources, and more frequent and diverse (armed) conflicts.
Military level
Climate insecurity drivers of the first order (climate system) and second order (eco-socio-economic level) eventually have direct implications for the military. The physical implications for militaries include floods, extreme weather, health risks, etc. For example, military bases will suffer in the future more under extreme storms, sea level rise, and temperature increases, leading to damaged infrastructure, power failures, health risks, and lowered military readiness. Climate impacts can reshape the security domain in such a way that militaries will have to transform their operations. Climate change has the potential to cause shifts in geopolitics. For example, as the melting of the Artic region results in the accessibility of new sea lanes and resources, this may lead to new power relationships on the global stage. Furthermore, more extreme weather events are likely to lead to an increase in Humanitarian Aid and Disaster Relief (HADR) requests for militaries.
The military as …
The four levels in the climate-security nexus can be used to identify possible roles the armed forces could adopt in response to climate change.
Climate change mitigator
The current climate crisis is a result of human activity producing excess GHG emissions, which are partly emitted by militaries. Militaries’ emissions therefore contribute to the global security implications of climate change. It is only logical that the first role of militaries is to reduce their GHG emissions and therewith stop contributing to global climate change. In this, the energy transition should be the most important pillar, focusing on renewable energy technologies and energy efficiency. When armed forces have achieved net-zero emissions, they stop being part of the climate problem and simultaneously obtain the advantages of having an independent energy supply powered by renewable energy technologies.
Climate security operator: Conflict prevention and resolution through climate measures
The climate is changing, and the future impacts of climate change will undeniably manifest in more extreme forms than we are already experiencing today. Militaries will have to transform in order to remain credible operators that can react to the new and more diverse security implications induced by climate change. It is only wise to investigate how militaries can help to prevent these changes in the climate system, which will become eco-socio-economic and, eventually, security implications. Therefore, the military should act as a climate security operator, in which military operations incorporate climate aspects on the eco-socio-economic and security level.
Firstly, as a reaction to the eco-socio-economic level of the climate-security nexus, armed forces can enhance environmental stability through strengthening climate adaptation and resilience measures in areas vulnerable to climate change. Militaries could incorporate climate change-related challenges in their operations, for example, aiding water management and the prepositioning of supplies. Armed forces can play an important role in conflict prevention through climate-proofing the development of fragile states. This should be the top priority. Military assistance to vulnerable areas could aim at challenges such as disaster preparedness, water security, food security, as well as efforts that encourage independent energy supplies and adaptive capacities.
Secondly, as a reaction to the security level of the climate-security nexus, armed forces could focus on conflict resolution through climate-related measures. The first step is to better understand and acknowledge the impact of climate change on certain security implications. Climate change is likely to lead to more frequent and diverse conflicts; yet, how this will manifest and how this will change existing military operational doctrines has yet to be better understood. For example, only after understanding how the rivalry over natural resources is caused can a strategy be made to solve this.
Climate-proof organisation
The last level of the climate-security nexus is the direct implications on armed forces themselves. To minimize the impact of climate impacts, nations must create climate-proof armed forces through adaptation and resilience. Well-thought strategies can lead to decreased vulnerability of extreme weather events, temperature increase, and sea level rise. For example, to prevent the potential impacts of climate change on military bases, there is a need to increase cooling in buildings, improve water drainage and retainment, and change the location of vital systems, such as relocating power generation systems to high ground, to minimize the impact of floods. Next, climate circumstances during military deployments will become more extreme, requiring new military material and equipment. For example, more extreme temperatures and prolonged heat waves will demand a change in personal equipment to prevent heat injury. Next, combat systems will have to operate under more extreme weather circumstances; a climate-proof organisation will need to consider climate change when procuring new material. Lastly, a climate-proof organisation will have to invest in a stable energy supply that is largely resilient to extreme climate circumstances.
NATO as climate-action leader
NATO can choose to become a climate-action leader. If NATO chooses to declare war against climate change, a holistic strategy that seeks to mitigate all the impacts of the climate-security nexus will need to be formulated. The NATO summit in Madrid this year can be used to make agreements amongst NATO allies to all become change mitigators, climate security operators, and climate-proof organisations. Furthermore, there are two pillars NATO must support in order to become a climate-action leader.
Awareness and understanding of the climate system is fundamental
The climate system is very complex. The impacts of climate change are often interlinked and reciprocal, with cascading effects on the security level. Awareness and understanding of the climate-security nexus is the foundation for successful climate action. When militaries choose to incorporate climate aspects in future operations and initiate adaptation and resilience measures in fragile areas, a sound understanding of the climate system and its dynamics is important. When there is a lack of understanding and awareness about climate security, this could even lead to increased security implications. For example, military forces can place additional pressure on scarce water and food resources in the climate-vulnerable regions where they operate.[vii] NATO allies can increase their understanding of the climate system by incorporating climate aspects in their operations, for example, through gathering intelligence from local communities on their vulnerability to climate change. The NATO Climate and Security Centre of Excellence, initiated by Canada, could then be used as a knowledge platform for NATO allies to share climate-related intelligence.
NATO as a catalyser for civil climate action
Given recent warnings and increased understanding about the catastrophic security implications of climate change, security institutions around the globe can act as leading voices pushing civil mitigation, adaptation, and resilience strategies. As the most fundamental response to climate change is reducing GHG emissions, militaries would profit from enhanced civil mitigation efforts. In this sense, NATO can act as a credible voice to make people and organisations more aware of the severe security implications of climate change. For this, NATO can use its network of partners across the globe and relationships with other organisations such as the United Nations and the European Union. Next, NATO can prompt member countries to use innovative capabilities from their own militaries to accelerate green technologies that could also be used for civil mitigation, adaptation, and resilience measures.
Conclusion
Climate change will pose many new challenges and strengthen existing one for local, national, and global security. The importance of militaries to react to climate change can therefore not be stressed enough. As militaries until now have lagged on taking major climate actions, it is important to promptly build a holistic international-oriented military climate action strategy. NATO can play an important role in this through promoting armed forces to develop from climate-action laggards into climate-action leaders. Through the proposed NATO Climate and Security Centre of Excellence, NATO allies can work together and respond to the climate-security nexus in three ways: (1) climate change mitigator, reducing greenhouse gas emissions; (2) climate security operator, creating climate resilience in vulnerable areas through military operations; (3) climate-proof organisation, creating militaries that are less vulnerable to climate change. Overall, NATO should stress the importance of awareness and understanding of the climate system and how militaries could be a catalyser for civil climate action.
Notes
[i] For example, J. T. Mathews, ‘Redefining security’, Foreign Affairs 68: 2, 1989, pp. 162–77; B. Rodal, ‘The environment and changing concepts of security’, Canadian Security Intelligence Service Commentary 47, 1994; M. A. Levy, ‘Is the environment a national security issue?’, International Security 20, 1995, pp. 35-62.
[ii] François Gemenne, Bastien Alex and Alice Baillat, Implications of Climate Change on Defence and Security in the South Pacific by 2030, Observatory on Defence and Climate, May 2019, p. 9.
[iii] ‘California fires are raging: Get the facts on wildfires’, National Geographic, Washington DC, 2019, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/natural-disasters/wildfires/ (accessed November 2019).
[iv] T. Middendorp and R. Bergema, The Warning Signs are Flashing Red, Planetary Security Initiative and ICCT, 2019
[v] L. van Schaik and T. Bakker, Climate-Migration-Security: A contested relationship, Clingendael Institute for International Relations, November 2017; G.J. Abel, M. Brottrager, J. Crespo Cuaresma and R. Muttarak, ‘Climate, conflict and forced migration’, Global Environmental Change, vol. 54 (January 2019), pp. 239-249; C. Kohler, C. Denner Dos Santos and M. Bursztyn, Understanding environmental terrorism in times of climate change: implications for asylum seekers in Germany, Planetary Security Initiative, November 2019.
[vi] Clingendael, ready for take off
[vii] https://www.clingendael.org/sites/default/files/2020-03/Report_Military_...
Image: https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2022/02/01/nato-an-unexpected-...