The Vicious Cycle of War and Climate Change
Climate change and armed conflicts are two pressing global issues that have become intricately intertwined. On one hand, the impacts of climate change can escalate existing tensions and potentially trigger armed conflicts. On the other hand, war and armed conflicts intensify climate change, exacerbating environmental degradation and hindering sustainable development. Understanding this vicious cycle is crucial for addressing these challenges and working towards a sustainable and peaceful future.
Climate change as a driver for armed conflicts
Throughout ancient and modern history, warfare has been an unfortunate companion, influencing our societies and changing countries and borders as we know them today. Despite the horrors war brings over everyone, voluntarily or involuntarily, involved in these conflicts, the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights counts over 110 armed conflicts in 2023. Wars are not a relic from the dark Middle Ages and the beginning of the 20th century, wars are still a constant in many people’s life. As conflicts keep unfolding on a global stage, researchers are trying to understand how another global challenge that humanity is facing contributes to the emergence of wars.
Climate change has the potential to act as a catalyst for armed conflicts by exacerbating social, political, and economic tensions. As the Earth’s climate continues to warm, the consequences are far-reaching, affecting vulnerable communities and straining limited resources. And while researchers are struggling to find a consensus on the implications of climate on triggering wars, there are some factors which can be seen as threat multipliers to conflicts that will be enhanced by climate change.
Changes in rainfall patterns, the melting of glaciers and heatwaves pose significant challenges to water availability. The ongoing dispute between India and Pakistan over shared water resources from the Indus River is a stark example. As glacier melt decreases the water flow, tensions between the two nuclear-armed nations escalate, highlighting the potential for climate-related conflicts. Another example is the water shortage in Iraq’s large rivers, Tigris and Euphrat, due to dams built upriver in countries such as Turkey, Syria and Iran. Since the 1970s, the flow of water into Iraq more than halved. And while we haven’t seen wars breaking out over water in these particular cases, the Pacific Institute collected data from over 1200 water conflicts, ranging from ancient times to the Ukrainian war.
Climate change can lead to increased competition for scarce natural resources, such as water, land, and minerals, which in turn can contribute to armed conflicts. A UNEP study found that between 1990 and 2009 at least eighteen conflicts can be connected to the exploitation of natural resources. Naturally, climate change and the control of resources are not the only drivers in these complex conflicts. But civil wars in parts of Africa, e.g., Liberia, Angola and Congo have been centred around the control of minerals, gold and oil. Other conflicts, such as in Sudan, have centred around fruitful land, livestock migration routes and water resources. The new fighting in Sudan is making the situation even worse for many people as it is causing them to flee to bordering countries like Egypt, leading to further scarcity of food in the border regions. Never mind the social implications of migration and displacement.
War’s impact on climate change
War and armed conflicts not only have devastating consequences for human lives and societies but also significantly contribute to environmental degradation and the exacerbation of climate change. The environmental impact of warfare is multifaceted, encompassing both direct and indirect effects.
While ground research in war-torn areas is understandably difficult, researchers from Lebanon, the Netherlands and the UK used satellite images to examine the impacts of the long-lasting conflicts in Lebanon on land degradation. It doesn’t come as a surprise that the use of explosives, landmines, and heavy machinery in warfare causes soil erosion and contamination, rendering land less fertile for future agricultural use. Soil degradation decreases agricultural productivity and undermines local food systems, exacerbating food insecurity and reliance on external aid, which can have long-lasting consequences for both the environment and the well-being of affected populations.
But it’s not only the direct consequences of fighting such as oil spills and destroyed infrastructure that harm humanity and the environment. Researchers from Durham and Lancaster University analysed the greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from the US military. They found that if only considering the fuel usage, the US military would still be the 47th largest emitter of GHG in the world if the military was a country. Add to this the emissions from producing weapons and vehicles and then add all the other militaries around the world.
Even if countries are not actively partaking in warfare, they might still be directly influenced by rising energy or food prices, as can be seen, for example, by the impact on grain exports from Ukraine.
To a peaceful and sustainable future
As humanity, we should strive for a peaceful coexistence. Even without considering climate change, measured in terms of the sheer human suffering, we should not be fighting wars.
To cite Neville Chamberlain “In war, whichever side may call itself the victor, there are no winners, but all are losers”.
And even though the intricate relationship between climate change and armed conflicts highlights the interconnectedness of global challenges and the urgent need for comprehensive solutions, armed conflicts and global disputes are still part of our existence.
Understanding these dynamics is crucial for addressing the root causes of conflicts and charting a path towards a more peaceful and sustainable future. Proactive measures are needed to mitigate the impacts of climate change, promote sustainable resource management, and build resilience in vulnerable communities. International cooperation, peacebuilding efforts, and equitable distribution of resources can play significant roles in preventing conflicts and fostering stability in the face of environmental challenges.
As individuals, we can also contribute by advocating for policies that prioritise conflict resolution and climate change. Supporting initiatives that address the underlying social and economic drivers of armed conflicts, as well as investing in sustainable practices and community resilience, are crucial steps towards breaking the cycle of war.
