Climate Change and National and International Security

The United Nations Security Council has held two debates on climate change. The first in April 2007 was an open debate about the relationship between energy, climate, and security under the chairmanship of the United Kingdom. The second debate was held in July 2011 under German leadership. Both debates revealed contrasting opinions as to whether climate change should be regarded as a security threat, and the Council did not pass a resolution on either occasion. Nevertheless, a statement issued by the President of the Security Council in 2011 suggests that the Council may be edging closer to assuming a lead role in the global response to climate change.
This possibility raises several questions, which will be considered in turn. First, it must be determined whether climate change fits within the appropriate scope of subject matter of concern to the Council. Second, the type of action the Council might take if it were to make a decision must be considered. Third, it must be assessed whether a more decisive role for the Council in climate change governance would likely be effective in reducing the international security threat posed by global warming.

The aim of this study is to build upon and add to the growing literature concerning the securitization of climate change. As noted by previous studies, the existing literature lacks substantive comparative analyses of securitization discourses . Therefore, the study uses existing literature to apply the Copenhagen framework in a comparative analysis of two case studies: the United States (US) and the European Union (EU). The study examines securitization discourses in the 3-year period from January 2016 to August 2019. In order to understand the evolution of the securitization efforts over this time-frame, the author evaluates three (3) relevant discourses for each case as well as the role of public opinion in discourses. In the US case, on the national level, the author analyses the Trump administration’s efforts to re-politicize climate change as a whole and the introduction of the most recent attempt of national climate change legislation: The Green New Deal. On the International level the author evaluates the administration’s decision to withdraw from the 2016 Paris Climate Agreement. In the EU case the author analyses the role of the recent EU migration crisis in driving securitization discourses as well as the role of discursive entrepreneurs such as David Attenborough and Greta Thunberg in creating threat narratives. On the international level the author evaluates the presence of climate change securitization within the EU’s 2016 Global Strategy. The study concludes that since 2016, the US has seen a partial regression, and therefore a re-politicizing, of climate change securitization despite acknowledgement and warnings from the Department of Defense (DoD).  In the EU, climate change securitization discourses have largely remained in-alignment with the EU’s securitization logic, but recent activist movements have created a renewed sense of urgency and threat narratives. The study also affirms previously noted differences in securitization logics and discourses present between the US and EU.

Security implications of climate change have been highlighted by various political and advisory bodies, as well as non-governmental organizations (NGOs), in recent years. It is unclear, however, whether such a ‘securitization’ of climate change can also be found beyond institutionalized politics in the public realm, and beyond Western countries. This article addresses these questions by investigating mass media coverage in nine countries over a period of 15 years. Based on an analysis of more than 101,000 newspaper articles, it shows an increasing discussion of climate change in security terms, with diverging trends in the analysed countries. While Western, industrialized countries such as the USA, the UK or Australia display an increasing securitization of climate change, the amount of securitizing language has decreased in India and South Africa. Moreover, different countries refer to different security dimensions – with regard both to the subjects whose security is of concern (national security, human security) and to the type of resources that are discussed in security terms (energy security, water security, food security). While Western countries strongly focus on national security and energy security, emerging economies place greater emphasis on food and, less pronounced, on water security.

In this paper, I argue that a new principle of background justice should be added to Rawls’s Law of Peoples because climate change is an international and intergenerational problem that can destabilize the Society of Peoples and the well-ordered peoples therein.
I start with explaining the nature of my project and Rawls’s conception of stability. I argue that climate change poses a realistic threat to the stability of climate-vulnerable liberal peoples and as a result undermines international peace and security. Despite the uncertainties due to the complexity of the climate system and about the resilience of
liberal societies, liberal peoples’ fundamental interests in just basic institutions and national security call for the adoption of a precautionary principle. Rawls’s own principles are, I argue, inadequate to solve the stability problem from climate change. Still, his framework provides the theoretical resources to develop a new extension. I propose a new
Rawlsian principle of international, intergenerational justice that guarantees the environmental background conditions under which well-ordered peoples can sustain their basic structure over generations and sketch the principle’s institutional implementation. I conclude with the theoretical and practical significance of this extension of Rawls’s theory.

‘From Pleistocene to Anthropocene: When Rain Dancing and Fire of Agni are Just Not Enough’ The Exhaustive Research Proposal Draft for the 2020 Grant Application for  the VU Distinguished Visiting Fellow in Ethics of the Anthropocene; Religion, Ethics, and Global Environmental Change –‘Geoengineering of Human Death in Asia’: Explorations from the Ancient Human Desire for the Control of Nature to the Present Threat of a Monsoon Breakdown in Asia and the Risk of a Near Future Nuclear Apocalypse No One had Wanted but May Now Have to Face. Includes the Cover Letter Submission from Veli Albert Kallio to Detail Research Interests and Plans for the Fellowship. (The detailed draft of my research proposal [Section 2] has finally uploaded to the Academia.edu web site. Further sections for the proposed research will follow in due course. Overall, the research is still largely a work in progress -  seeking for grants to its various elements - but there are already some important insights that may offer valuable avenues for further investigations from the sections available on this study of Ethnoclimatology, ethics from the past to the present.)

In one of the first efforts in the social sciences to explore the political and economic as well as natural causes of climate change policy ambition, this article assesses nations' climate change policies by using ratings of the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) pledges made at the 2015 Paris meeting of the United Nations. Our exploratory analysis shows that some domestic determinants of NDCs address political interests rather than strictly responding to mitigation needs. Key policy insights include the following: 1) nations subsidizing energy have less ambitious NDCs, implying that more effort may be needed to diminish direct effects of energy lobbies on climate policy; 2) vulnerability measured as economic damage and human loss caused by extreme weather events correlates only weakly with NDC ambition, meaning that greater government responsiveness to extreme weather vulnerability may be necessary in setting the scope of climate change policy; and 3) higher carbon emissions intensity is actually associated with less ambitious mitigation pledges. In other words, high emitter nations are actually doing less than low emitters. We conclude that if nations are left to their own devices, more ambitious NDCs are less likely to emerge from more fossil fuel-dominated, higher emitter nations and that true mitigation of climate change effects requires stronger and more enforceable national actions.

The unmanaged march of climate change poses a serious danger to United States national security, global geopolitical stability, and human welfare. The U.S. Military and Intelligence communities take climate change as a reality and are preparing accordingly, despite inaction and political resistance at the legislative level of government. National security, climate change, and energy are inextricably connected, and this paper seeks to answer the questions: how do climate threat multipliers jeopardize U.S. national security (using the Philippines as a case study), and is the U.S. military effectively preparing for a climate change future? The conclusion finds that the threat multiplier realities of climate change demand that the United States utilize every possible resource to analyze, prevent, and manage these dynamic dangers, or risk jeopardizing the country’s national security and human welfare. No competent military commander would ever knowingly ignore the warnings of scouts or allow the fog of war to cloud his or her capabilities and preparations, especially if the ability to anticipate dangers exists.

Yale College Senior Thesis, 2012

The aim of the article is to analyse the role Germany plays in international efforts to prevent climate change. The article examines the origin of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s governmental activities during the Germany’s G7 and G20 presidency and during her term as Chancellor (2013–2017). The article considers how external pressure – international action on climate change – affects Government policy. Examples from Germany’s presidency in G7 and G20 indicated that dynamics of these consultations create opportunities for Germany to accelerate progress through the creation of cooperation networks, building platforms and the establishment of working teams and other forms of cooperation. Furthermore, high-level diplomatic meetings and accompanying events allowed Germany to promote its own interests and ideas. This enabled Germany to gain support globally, increases the prospects of actively influencing the direction of international environmental debate, waht ultimately strengthening the internal policy of ecological transformation.

Celem artykułu jest analiza roli, jaką Niemcy odgrywają w ramach międzynarodowych działań na rzecz ochrony klimatu. Została ona zbadana na podstawie aktywności rządu kanclerz Angeli Merkel w ramach przewodnictwa w grupie G7 i G20 oraz na tle uwarunkowań wewnętrznych i oceny roli samej kanclerz w latach 2013–2017. W artykule rozważano, na ile presja zewnętrzna – międzynarodowe działania w sprawie zmian klimatu – wpływa na politykę rządu. Przykłady G7 i G20 wskazują, że dynamika tych konsultacji stymuluje Niemcy do nowych działań poprzez tworzenie sieci współpracy, platform, zespołów roboczych i innych form kooperacji. Z drugiej strony organizacja dyplomatycznych spotkań wysokiego szczebla oraz towarzyszących im eventów jest szansą promocji własnych interesów oraz idei. Pozwala pozyskać zwolenników globalnie i zwiększa możliwość kształtowania kierunków i obszarów międzynarodowej debaty środowiskowej, co przekłada się na wzmocnienie wewnętrznej polityki transformacji ekologicznej.

In this article we examine the role of climate change and climate hazards, their attendant impacts on water and food security in the Arab world, and the inability or unwillingness of governments to cope with these forces in the years leading up to, and during, the Arab uprisings. In one case study we investigate how long-term drought in Syria, large-scale human displacement, and the lack of an effective government response, may have contributed to social and political unrest in Syria, fueling a conflict with significant national, regional and international security dimensions. In a second case study, we explore the phenomenon of hazard globalization, whereby climate hazards have serious implications for food and water security far from the event epicenter. Specifically, we examine how drought in China and Russia may have influenced the rebellion in Egypt.

Global Political Chaos and War Possible from Massive Climate Change
Author: Fareed Khan
Date: February 19, 2013

http://theviewfromhere-fareedkhan.blogspot.ca/2013/02/global-political-chaos-and-war-possible.html

Climate Change, Climate Crisis, Climate Security, Conflict, Extreme Weather, Glacier Loss, Global Warming, National Security, Political Instability, Thermohaline Circulation, Water Shortage, Public Policy

This is an analytical essay, which answers the question of 'With close reference to empirical examples, identify the principal security issues raised by climate change and assess how successfully these are being addressed.' We live in a world where climate change is predominantly a broader subject in everyday life both in the news and social media. Especially in recent years, climate change has been a worrying circumstance which has ultimately resulted in security issues being heightened. Some of the security issues raised are local resource competition, livelihood uncertainty and migration, transboundary water management and natural disasters which may have unintended consequences.

The Model Pacific Climate Treaty presented in this report is a draft model treaty for the Pacific region aimed at averting the multiple threats posed by climate change. The initiative of a Pacific Climate Treaty builds on the momentum of the Paris Agreement adopted under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Although the adoption of this new international climate change treaty marks a major breakthrough in international diplomacy, the advances made with the Paris Agreement are mainly procedural. In contrast, the Model Pacific Climate Treaty contains substantive regional targets that combine climate, development and human rights objectives. For example, the Treaty provides a bold example of the region’s commitment to keeping global temperature rise well below 1.5°C by banning new coal or fossil fuel mines in the territories of State parties. The Model Treaty also contains a clause aimed at securing the perpetual sovereignty and rights of Pacific Island peoples and their territories, in the face of the existential threats posed by climate change to many Pacific Island nations and communities. As for institutions, the Treaty sets up a Pacific Islands Climate Commission to further enhance regional cooperation and promote Pacific leadership in meeting the challenges posed by climate change, and a Pacific Islands Climate Compensation Fund to help facilitate compensation for Pacific Island communities and nations affected by climate change from actors with significant historical responsibility for climate change. Overall, the Treaty is aimed at filling glaring gaps in the protection of those who are most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, while inspiring more ambitious action in other regions and at the global level.

The common refrain repeated from foreign government offices to global talk shows is that the United States is being derelict of its duties in the geopolitical landscape. It is imperative that the U.S. creates an appropriate and translatable strategy for international affairs. To this end, an overarching foreign policy rooted in environmentalism provides the chance for massive gains with limited risk while allowing the America to reassert global leadership. Given the realities of the present and scientific predictions for the planet’s future, it is evident that a new grand strategy that incorporates sustainability as a key component will enable America to meet this challenge.

The effects of climate change will increasingly shape our security in the coming years. The environment is now in a state of flux, posing significant challenges to how societies function. This may have serious economic, social and political consequences for entire regions. adelphi and its partners formed an alliance with the German Federal Foreign Office and have played a central role in the process of analysing the international debates on climate diplomacy and security, while developing key narratives, contributing to awareness raising and capacity building efforts, and supporting international and regional dialogues on this topic around the world. In this publication, we seek to illustrate the rationale and results of adelphi’s engagement in climate diplomacy activities – efforts undertaken to help foster a response to climate change that is commensurate with its status as one of the key foreign policy challenges of the 21st century.