Climate Change and Security

18/5-2009 Javier Solana

Nevertheless, climate change will not be addressed by international agreements alone, important as these will be. The issues run much deeper than that. This is a man-made problem which puts our very way of life in question. Formulating a response requires many actors to come together - not just politicians and diplomats, but scientists, business people, ecologists, and leaders in many other fields.

In recent years, those of us concerned with international security have increasingly understood that climate change carries implications for our work as well. In April 2007, on a UK initiative, the UN Security Council held a first debate on this subject. A year ago, following a call by European leaders, I presented, together with the European Commission, a report to the European Council on Climate Change and International Security. In December, I delivered a follow-up paper, which analyses the issues for particular regions, and outlines more detailed policy recommendations.

Our report drew three main conclusions. Firstly, that climate change can act as a threat multiplier, by increasing the pressure on other drivers of conflict and instability, through reduced resources, desertification, migration, natural disasters and changes to coastlines, among others. Developed societies, with resources to handle these tensions, are better equipped to respond. But states that are already weak can be tipped over the edge, with consequences that are exported outside their borders.

Secondly, the report stressed that the European Union is already alert to this problem. The European Security Strategy, adopted in December 2003, stated that " competition for natural resources – notably water – will be aggravated by global warming over the next decades and is likely to create further turbulence and migratory movements in various regions. " We now know even more than we did five years ago. The challenge is to translate these insights into concrete policy measures. For this reason, the recent Review on Implementation of the European Security Strategy, which I presented to the European Council last December, highlighted how the security challenges from climate change and energy supply have become more pressing since 2003, and laid out the main elements which should guide our response.

Lastly, our response must cover foreign and security as well as environmental policies. The EU is committed to mitigating climate change, through reductions in greenhouse gases, and by helping countries to adapt to what's inevitable. Our ambition is to reduce our emissions by 20 per cent in 2020, or by 30 per cent as part of an international agreement.

At the same time, raising the linkage between climate change and security has encouraged us to take a new look at how we forge our foreign and security policy. Without "securitising" the debate, we believe that the military and security establishment has insights and a way of thinking that can bring real value: on mobilising large technological research projects; or planning against potentially low-risk but high-impact events. Equally, environmentalists have an important contribution to make to the foreign policy establishment, in helping us to think about a wider range of causes behind conflict, and how we can use new kinds of data, including climatic, to improve our capacity to spot potential instability ahead of time. For these reasons, it is important that this process stimulates more research. This is why, within Brussels, we are conducting further analysis region-by-region, both to improve our own understanding of the likely issues, and to support a serious dialogue with those countries who will be most affected.

The European Union is well-placed to work with countries in responding to these challenges, through the full range of our diplomatic, economic, development and security policies. In response to that changing security environment, we continue to support an effective multilateral system. This is a global challenge, requiring global action. Strengthening global governance, and working with a shifting global order, is essential. Pursuing agreement on a sustainable successor to Kyoto will be a critical part of that.

Our report was meant to be a starting point for a new way of thinking. I think that this is an important part of establishing the context for Copenhagen. Talking about security appeals to national interests in a very direct way. We know, for instance, that the melting of glaciers in the Himalayas and rising sea levels will pose very serious challenges for China, at a time when the Chinese authorities are in any case seeking to manage the social consequences of rapid economic growth and population movements. That should be a powerful additional argument for China to work towards a new agreement on curbing emissions.

We are all a product of our environment. A changing planet creates serious new challenges for societies around the world. If we mishandle these changes, we risk increasing the threat that climate change will drive greater instability in the future. Since the presentation of our report we have come closer to identifying solutions, and putting them into practice. Ultimately, our goal is no less than to change the way that people think both about security, and about environmental policy. In a changing world, each has profound implications for the other. We cannot pursue either in isolation.

Javier Solana is the High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the Secretary-General of both the Council of the European Union (EU) and the Western European Union (WEU).