CLIMATE CHANGE AS A CATALYST FOR INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS: CURRENT AND FUTURE SCENARIOS

CLIMATE CHANGE AS A CATALYST FOR INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS:

CURRENT AND FUTURE SCENARIOS

Introduction

Climate change's intensifying impact on global security dynamics

The impact of the climate change's intensification on global security dynamics is

becoming an issue across the globe. If climate change continues, it will pose a growing threat to

international security through amplified scarcity of resources and migration pressures which

increase social-political tensions and the likelihood of conflict within and between nations; for

example, prolonged drought, desertification, and water shortage in weak states, especially in

Middle East, Africa, and South Asian countries, affect agricultural yields and food security, thus

eroding state‟s legitimacy and social order; where some groups struggle for resources,

Concurrently the global warming is also exposing the Arctic sea ice and glaciers and increasing

the sea level which is providing more access to new shipping channel and energy resource which

may put more militarization and geostrategic competition among the Arctic countries including

Russia, China, US, Canadian as the region is new boundary in exclusive economic zone;

Besides, due to climate change, the frequency and intensity of natural calamities is also

increasing which is challenging the disaster risk management

Interconnectedness of environmental degradation and geopolitical tensions

Pollution and conflict go hand in hand in that, resource and climatic change consequences

fuel the scramble for limited natural and arable land on earth. Intense heat, inadequate rainfall,

dry lands, water shortages and quality, reduced agricultural productivity, floods and other effects

of climate change are forcing people to move, deepening poverty and injustice, and putting

pressure on populations. This amplifies complaints and strains both at the intra and inters

individual and international level. These are issues such as availability of arable land, water and

food, which, by their scarcity, serve to fuel nationalism and conflicts over the right to ownership

of the same. For instance, glaciers are melting in the Himalayas, which mean that water flows to

the Ganges, Brahmaputra, and Indus Rivers will be affected and they are used by over a billion

people in countries such as India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and China. Dam construction activities

by upstream nations including China and India have led to tensions as downstream states face

water scarcity. Such migration also leads to resentment in the destination region when the

migrants are seen as a strong competition for jobs, land or cultural resources. There are

increasing demands for resources and decreasing availability, which trigger imperialism and

expansionism in the search for oil, minerals and land for economic support. Environmental

pressures may thus feed into issues of sovereignty like those in the South China Sea, which is

believed to be a source of plenty of fish and oil. Increasing climate risks, natural resource

scarcity, and consequent sociopolitical instability show that environmental resilience and

geostrategic stability are reciprocally related.

Urgent need for climate-conflict mitigation strategies

The victims of climatic change are also seen all over the world; losses such as heat

waves, prolonged dry spells that bring about droughts, fire outbreaks that engulf forests, storms,

and flooding that results in loss of property and food, water, and places of livelihood. The effects

of climate affect the sociopolitical systems since governments seek to solve the problem while

group struggle for the resources. As the empirical evidence increases, it becomes clearer how

climate change amplifies the factors that potentially lead to violent conflict at the first and

second levels within states and across borders. Some of the recent wars, such as in Syria, Yemen

or parts of Africa for example, are traced to climate change. The addressing and preventing of

climate related conflicts indeed call for increased efforts on individual, national and international

levels. They should enhance people‟s ability to cope with violence in the climate vulnerable

regions by enhancing the adaptive capacity and governance systems, ending socioeconomic

injustice, promoting fair distribution of water and other natural products, providing warning

systems as well as nonviolent avenues for aggression, and increasing support to the affected

regions. The UN Security Council has recently acknowledged climate as a threat to conflict but

lacks policies in preventing such issues. As global warming will likely increase the prospect of

climate conflict, policy makers must find ways to integrate climate adjustment as well as climate

stabilization into foreign policy, national security, and defense in order to prevent further loss of

lives and humanitarian crises associated with an unstable climate future.

Rising Sea Levels and Territorial Disputes

Disappearing coastlines redefining maritime boundaries and claims

Effects of climate change on seas are already leading to new boundaries and new sources

of conflict as countries that previously had clearly defined shores and borders lose their shores

altogether and have no clear maritime boundaries. Sea-level rise leads to changes in the

positional reference points that are used in determining the maritime zones, hence enabling states

to acquire more offshore space. It has done so already, which has created new conflicts and

tensions in the Arctic and South China Sea among others. For instance, as the polar ice cap thins,

such countries as Russia are staking their claims over the continental shelf and exclusive

economic zones in more accessible north as well as physically sowing flags on the sea floor.

These broadened assertions usually are in conflict with those of other countries in the region

such as Canada and the United States and hence fuel geopolitical tensions. Such situations are

present in the South China Sea where small islands and reefs enable surrounding territorial sea,

continental shelf, and exclusive economic zones to extend far into the sea. Sea levels are

gradually increasing, and some of these geographical markers are currently being submerged –

geographical landmarks that the countries are using to set their base line for the offshore zones.

Their provoking disappearance is gradually reducing and redesigning the sea borders of

neighboring countries, while increasing the races to seize whatever remaining portions of land

above the water exist. As coasts vanish and various characteristic features of the world‟s

geography disappear under water, countries are drawn into more frequent maritime

confrontations and sovereignty issues. Not only once-dominant coastal borders, but even more

recent sea borders have been discussed anew because modern water levels have left some of the

borders artistic. From fish stocks to oil reserves, from ability to regulate access to oil transport

routes, climate change determines the new political geography of the seas. It raises issues over

the extent to which sovereign rights can be maintained over what is, in essence, lost coastal and

terra firma as waters increase in level; questions that existing maritime law was not calibrated to

answer, again compounding regional disputes of offshore jurisdiction as new coastlines are

redrawn.

Island nations facing existential threats and migration

The small island states all over the world are experiencing vulnerability from the effects

of climate change such as; the rise in sea level, cyclones resulting to coastal erosion, fresh water

River and ground water Salinity, infrastructure damages and loss of land, which is making many

islanders to leave their countries in search of better shelter due to insecurity even as territorial

disputes remain unsettled which complicates political tensions. Lowlands Pacific and Indian

Ocean atolls with associated low-lying islands as well as Caribbean islands is most at risk to

climate change and indigenous people who have lived on those islands for generations are now

losing their homes and arable land in some cases as the sea encroaches on neighborhoods and the

beaches as fertile soil washes into the sea. This has resulted to conflicts on territorial waters and

inhabitable islands with many countries laying claims over the same reef or submerged or

shifting grounds since with the loss of territory comes the loss of exclusive economic zones

which have significant effects on rights to fish and exploit fossil fuels among other products. The

effects are highly volatile regional tensions as the islanders fight a loss of sovereignty. When

once stable villages sink or frequently flood, and villagers scramble to build new homes on

higher ground or move to other countries altogether, the loss of culture is also experienced since

land is not just a geographical place, but it is a social and therefore spiritual one. With climate

change and the rising sea level continuing its upward trend the shift in population will not only

persist but also increase in the following decades and that people who lost their homes to the sea

will have to rebuild their lives in new places while grieving for the places they once called home.

It was estimated that by 2050, close to 200 million people may be affected by climate change

through displacement. Host countries on the other hand will also experience pressures in

absorbing these migrant flows too which may fuel further conflicts. The gradual and continuous

process of the drowning and emptying of small island states and disputes over territories and

ownership in the process will present a major challenge to international relations in years to

come. Changing homeland hurt deeply for Pacific and Caribbean islands‟ people; thus, public

policy measures require understanding and subsidizing the psychological and social costs, not

only the geographical one, where islanders are relocated from their native territories due to rising

sea levels that make their islands uninhabitable. The phenomenon of climate-induced

displacement from sinking islands is only getting started but will increase further; this causes

important ethical dilemmas regarding justice and equity for the world.

Contested access to newly exposed Arctic resources

With the rise in global temperatures due to climate change, the Arctic sea ice is

increasingly unfreezing thereby providing new shipping lanes and access to the offshore oil and

gas reserves as well as fishing grounds and other resources; yet, the international law remains

ambiguous and contentious regarding ownership of these Arctic rights and passages among the

Arctic countries. The Arctic region was previously covered year-round by thick sea ice that

rendered the area unfit for commercial shipping or any resource extraction but summer sea ice

has reduced over 40% since 1979 and is expected to go almost completely in the coming few

decades there are emerging questions over access even as boundaries of the region shift, not

literally, but in terms of coastlines. Some of these claims are based on the United Nations

Convention on the Law of the Sea that permits exclusive economic zones to a distance of up to

200 nautical miles from the coastlines but as for the demarcation of maritime boundaries, it is

problematic because climate change is also changing the physical geography of the Arctic

coastline through melting of land ice and rise in sea levels. It also contains valuable deposits of

oil and gas, the right of possession of which, through the extension of continental shelves, is also

claimed by Russia, Canada, and Denmark. Anticipation of profits of up to 3-4 trillions of US

dollars has escalated the stakes and both the US and China has ramped up military presence and

drills in the area. The Arctic Council has mainly kept diplomatic discourse and efforts at conflict

resolution, yet active policy and sound conflict-solving measures are absent. The non- Arctic

countries such as china also wants to explore new economic opportunities even for no territorial

claims, adding complexities. Resource development also has to occur so that the people can

utilize the resources to enhance the standard of their living while at the same time conserving the

environment. In other words, it is a dynamic, insecure and a legal limbo of the Arctic, and

therefore, the economic opportunities which have countries staking their claims for access in the

Arctic region increases the likelihood of conflict even as probabilities for greater maritime

commerce, transportation, oil and gas exploration, fishing, minerals extraction and tourism opens

up across a warming Arctic which will be largely impacted for the foreseeable future by an ice-

free zone.

Water Scarcity and Transboundary River Conflicts

Reduced river flows straining international water agreements

Climate change, construction of dams, and water diversions that have led to decreased

river flows are posing significant pressure to international water sharing agreements of countries

within a basin or those sharing an aquifer. As water demand increases and climate change

decreases the availability of freshwater in many of the world‟s river basins, it is the existing

water contracts that are under pressure as countries find it difficult to acquire enough water. This

can lead to anxiety on the utilization of water resources and more so in areas that have scanty

water supply such as the Middle East and Central Asia. For instance, the riparian states of the

Euphrates and Tigris river basin have a water sharing treaty that allows Turkey, Syria, and Iraq.

However, low water flows due to drought and constructions of dams in Turkey and Syria often

limit the quantity of water reaching Iraq, which affects their treaty relations. Disputes are also

present between Egypt and Ethiopia in terms of controlling the water flows in the Nile River

sharing. Ethiopia is constructing the large Grand Renaissance Dam which when filled could for a

time reduce the flow of water downstream almost to half. Egypt has regretted that this would be

inconsistent with its historical rights thereto as provided by the past treaties. To solve such a

transboundary water conflict, it is necessary to modify the international agreements and move

from a fixed water distribution system to a more suitable dynamic system to accommodate the

fluctuating water flow in the rivers. It also implies that internal water management within the

riparian countries has to enhance in the current status. Reducing food wastage and water usage in

Agricultural activities, halting desertification and well digging especially by unauthorized people

would ensure that available water resources are utilized to the maximum to meet consumption

demands. Also, providing hydrological and water use data allows the countries to coordinate in

estimating the years of low flow and the measures that should be taken through the systems of

warnings. Countries should also search for other chances where they can cooperate, for instance,

in providing sources of financing activities that would provide both nations with water for

example the efficiency of the production of electric power. As with the extreme situations such

as drought or failure of the infrastructure there should always be an agreed pre-arranged

procedure on how to make the necessary cut in water usage and prepare notifications.

Agricultural competition intensifying over limited water resources

With water reserves shrinking worldwide, the agricultural sector competes with other

sectors in its demand for water for its crops; this competition leads to increased tension over

cross-boundary water resources that span political and geographic boundaries; this agriculture

demand for water takes place in a world where 70% of the world‟s water usage is in agriculture

even as water available for use in agriculture shrinks because of climate change and over

pumping of aquifers while at the same time Upstream infrastructure development of dams

reduces water flow downstream to other countries for water consumption to grow crops and this

has caused conflicts over water sharing as seen in Africa on the Nile conflict between Egypt

Sudan and Ethiopia regarding the construction of the Grand Renaissance Dam that hinders water

flow to Egypt and Sudan their major source of water for crops thereby causing military

confrontation as countries seek to protect their water resources. In the same way, along the Syr

Darya river between Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan‟s management of the Toktogul

Dam hampers critical irrigation water access for Uzbekistan‟s cotton crops during the planting

seasons; the conflict over this important water irrigation supply channel to Uzbekistan‟s

economically vital crop increases cross-border tensions between the two countries. As it is

evident, when water transfers borders between nations that depend on transboundary rivers or

groundwater, which is asymmetric in power and control over the water, this opens water conflict

further intensified by agricultural demand in a scenario where hydro-political tension and water

scarcity risks are increasing in transboundary basins around the world namely in Asia, Africa and

the Americas where competition for agricultural water risk is rising due to hydroclimatic

pressures and other demographics that increase as agriculture remains a critical user of water

consuming large proportions of the world‟s water use, it is imperative to develop coherent

institutional arrangements within which cooperative framework for management of

transboundary water resources is to be established between riparian states to meet basic human

needs such as sustainable irrigation based agricultural business in the context of the actual and

potential water sharing within the limits of the carrying capacities of the water courses and

aquifers shared between the riparians.

Hydropower projects sparking tensions between riparian states

In the last few years, water management has become one of the critical issues affecting

riparian states as the scarcity of water resources increases, population growth and energy

demands enhance competition in the use of water sources through hydropower projects on

Transboundary Rivers. Downstream states argue that upstream states use their strategic position

and advantage along the river systems by individually initiating construction of dams/

hydropower projects that provide them the authority to control the flow of trans-boundary rivers

for instance storing the water for the purpose of irrigation and electricity production. Some of

these projects deprive downstream states of water and quality water resources that have negative

effects on fishing and farming, forcefully displacing some communities and even compromising

water security. For instance, Ethiopia is currently constructing the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance

Dam on the Blue Nile leading to tensions with downstream countries such as Egypt and Sudan

which rely on the Nile water. While Ethiopia sees the dam as an essential part of its development

and electricity, Egypt threatens a “water war” over what it believes will be the reduction in flow

from the Nile River. In a similar way, Turkey‟s construction of dams on the Tigris Euphrates

basin has been a source of tension with downstream neighbors – Syria and Iraq – due to the

decrease in water flow. India and Pakistan also dispute the sharing of the hydropower resources

generated from the Indus tributaries. The following are examples of unilateral developments

which violate the tenets of reasonable and equitable use provided by the current international

laws on transboundary water resources. However, as the protocol lacks legally binding measures,

cooperation is based on the goodwill of the riparian states. Fresh water stress is usually at the

root of the emerging conflicts over the utilization of hydropower resources in the riparian states.

Climate change and pollution, bad water management, expanding uses due to high populations

and food demands all push in the direction of creating scarcity in this important shared resource.

Since more than 60% of the world‟s freshwater resources originate from transboundary basins,

the consequences of water scarcity are becoming more and more international oriented. Hence,

guaranteeing national water interests through the built-up dams is even more attractive for the

riparian state. However, for a long time, no basin-wide cooperative mechanisms based on

reasonable use, mutual benefit and sustainable development principles are in place to coordinate

hydropower development on SRBS and the result is an increasing tension between riparian states

competing for water security.

Climate-Induced Migration and Social Instability

Mass displacement from climate-vulnerable regions to cities due to insecurity

Climate change is; drought, desertification, sea level change, natural disasters,

displacement of large populace from rural areas as well as coastal areas to urban areas thus

leading overcrowding and competition for resources and social unrest. This movement of people

to other already congested areas that cannot support the population, often due to climatic factors,

is called climate-induced migration. Researchers predict that by 2050 there could be between 100

and 144 million people worldwide who are internally displaced and this will make pressure on

food, water, health, and accommodation in urban areas in Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and

Latin American even bigger. As people migrate to urban centers, cities experience challenges in

meeting the basic needs and providing employment opportunities which may cause social tension

due to the exponential rise in the inequality. Migrants are usually unemployed or are struggling

for employment and are considered a threat to the local people by taking up the limited

employment opportunities and subsidies. If nothing is done, the affected groups who may

relocate to the periphery of cities may be exposed to negative emulation, health risks, culture and

human rights violations. This may also lead to more radicalization of the youths in relevant

countries experiencing high unemployment rates thus resulting in extremism and conflicts. Thus,

there is a paramount importance of the planning and support service for safe cities expecting the

arrival of groups to ensure the development of a strong and sustainable society. This migration

needs to be addressed as an adaptation measure and governments have to ease the restrictions on

legal status, rights and services for migrants who move because of climate risks. Increase in

investments should be made in improving data base of migration, provision of habitation and

other basic structures which can be flexibly developed to accommodate migrants and on the

development of employment avenues in an endeavor to effectively assimilate migrants in the

city. Mainstreaming can also be supported through specialized counseling in languages, local

governments, communities, NGOs, and the private sector, and fight against discrimination. Such

solutions concerning social stability are crucial because according to some research, more than

one billion people could become climate refugees in the upcoming decades, and most of them

will likely move to urban environments, which if not solved, can deepen the existing inequalities

and vulnerabilities in the world.

Cross-border migration pressures fueling xenophobic political movements and conflicts

Due to climate change which results in occurrences of disasters such as droughts,

desertification, and sea level rise among other things around the world, migration pressures are

accumulating in climate vulnerable areas. This is already happening in part of Central America

and in the Sahel region of Africa due to drought and crop failure which have led to increased

people movement in the last few years. In the last few decades, migration has been a significant

issue with climatologists projecting a significant rise in cross-border migration in the next few

decades as global temperatures rise. This means that the countries in the receiving end within the

Global North are likely to experience more migration pressures hence the political movements,

social tensions and violent conflicts. These dynamics are evidentially not unique to the current

era and are mirrored in earlier instances of a mass migration event. While those whose quality of

life becomes unsustainable are forced to find refuge elsewhere due to a lack of legal options,

they are forced to travel through illegitimate means, thereby making them vulnerable to

exploitation, or exacerbating animosity towards immigrants. It means that such groups have also

capitalized on the arrival of migrants and refugees in the past few years to advocate for ultra-

conservative, white nationalist agendas that place limits on immigration and asylum. Such forces

will probably go on to use alarms of climate migration to threaten the nation and present

immigrants as potential security threats or economic rivals for scarce resources and employment

opportunities. Even though there may be social tensions surrounding migration, it is up to

policymakers to design well-controlled and fair migration systems; otherwise, the social tension

might generate more discrimination against migrants, hate crimes, or political instabilities. More

ambitious strategies for states and international organizations might include establishing

sustainable resettlement programs, increasing temporary worker schemes, and aiding both the

main countries of origin and destination through foreign aid and climate finance transfers could

help to mitigate migration pressures and halt the growth of xenophobia. A significant

commitment to cooperation and funding from the international community will be required. If

climate vulnerable nations are not supported by the wealthier nations or the latter wants to just

close borders then this would further increase humanitarian crises, social unrest, recruitment for

armed groups, and irregular migration with less safe routes, which means that ensuring that

stability is achieved, therefore, requires developing sensible, rights-based polices on migration.

Competition for resources between host and refugee leading to insecurities

Since the effects of climate change are increasingly manifesting themselves through

gradual diminishment of the quality of the environment and more frequent occurrence of severe

weather conditions, global climatic change is leading to increased levels of forced migration.

This has escalated threats of competition between migrants and host communities for these

dwindling resources such as food, water, healthcare, and social amenities, land, housing, and

employment opportunities aggravating existing vulnerabilities and socioeconomic issues. For

example, the increase in population pressure resulting from cross-border migration from

Myanmar that started in September 2017 and settled in the southeastern part of Bangladesh in

Cox‟s Bazar district has caused deforestation, loss of bio-diversity, soil erosion, water pollution,

skyrocketing prices of consumer goods and even a collapse of law and order in the area. In the

same way, unplanned migrations of the pastoralist and farmer people in East Africa due to

drought, desertification and flash floods evident in successive years have escalated resource-

based conflicts among them as they move to inhospitable areas in Kenya, Ethiopia and Somalia

unable to accommodate such a large number of migrants. Subsequently, climate-induced

migration outstrips the bearing capacity of other ecosystems and structures in the host countries

without sufficient policies‟ deployments. This leads to the destruction of even more ecology and

results in new social conflicts, because the basic needs of deprived groups such as women,

children, elderly and disabled migrants are discriminated when it comes to shortage of resources.

Where conflicts between the migrants in the climate affected areas and the host communities

escalate, it can result in ethnic/religious groups‟ violence and human rights abuses as well as act

as fertile ground for developing radicalism top on fragility threats and human securitization.

Hence, there is a need for the implementation of area-based, socially inclusionary, adaptation

measures that will decrease the disaster risk of climate migrant groups, enhance the protection of

environmental rights and promote better governance of increased resource demands in climate

sensitive hotspots while improving coordination and cooperation between the migrant-origin and

migrant-destination communities to create resilience and stability.

Extreme Weather Events and Global Economic Disruptions Causing International Security

issues

Supply chain vulnerabilities exposed by climate disasters

The assorted acts of aggression due to global warming and climatic change are now

posing a big threat to the disruption of supply chain in regions deemed crucial in economic and

national security. Seasonal changes, such as heat, floods, hurricanes and such other natural

calamities are causing havoc at major production centers and transport networks globally. For

instance, the floods that occurred in Thailand in 2011 resulted in the shutdown of more than

14500 factories and manufacturing units which led to a stoppage of production of auto parts and

other electronic equipments. Publicized automotive manufacturers lost about billion in their

revenues. A winter storm in Texas last year which occurred in February also shut down power

grids and interrupted operations of oil refineries, petrochemical plants, and semiconductor

factories for weeks showing how extreme cold weather could also severely impact energy-heavy

sectors. Once again the auto industry was hit by parts scarcities and manufacturing disruptions.

Apart from the direct impact on structures, the disasters disrupt port, airport, road, and rail

operations, halting movements within various zones of the globe. Damage to industrial and

agricultural commodity export infrastructure was incurred when Hurricane Ida hit Louisiana in

August 2021. With the changes and uncertainty of the supply chain in the global context, there is

an emerging fear that climate change could bring about conflict across national borders due to

disruption of various needs. The major economies have also been keen on attaining self-

sufficiency in semiconductor production, minerals, medicine and other products rather than

depending on other countries for the products. However, such deglobalization process will take a

long time; it will be expensive, and it is likely to raise controversies.

Today supply chains have extended their reach across so many countries, and a disruption

in one country results in lack of supply in several others. For instance, India and the Southeast

Asia region have emerged as primary suppliers of pharmaceutical ingredients, thus making the

global drug supply system highly sensitive to storms in its coastal manufacturing centers. The

current weather patterns appear set to become far more erratic in the decades to come, with

threats piling on threats and snowballing across highly complex and increasingly interlinked

global logistics chains. Unfortunately, there are no straightforward ways of eliminating this

systematic risk, but all the parties involved in the supply process, both public and private, will be

forced to improve the bulletproofed infrastructure, increase the transparency level, diversify the

sources, and develop special emergency measures that would safeguard the national interests

during the climate breakdown.

Agricultural yield fluctuations impacting food security worldwide

Agricultural productivity and food security has other implications which include; changes

in vulnerability of crops to climatic shocks, changes in world economy. Infectious diseases,

frequent and severe dryness and wetness, and alterations of precipitation related to climate

change are threatening crops and livestock in crop producing countries of the northern and the

southern hemisphere including North America, South America, Australia, and South –East Asia.

Similarly, is increased energy costs and shortages due to COVID-19 and the Ukraine war have

cut off the access to fertilizer and fuel and has brought down the productivity levels. This

combination of climate and economic crises has pushed staple food prices even higher and

according to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization food price index, it has risen

by 14% in the year 2021. Global cereal stocks were already low at the start of 2022, and due to

these prices, the importing nations in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia have been left with little

capacity to import them, and food insecurity has skyrocketed. Protests associated with high bread

prices have taken place in countries such as Sri Lanka, Peru, and Iran in view of increasing

inflation, and any discontent is usually followed by political and humanitarian implications. If

immediate preparatory measures are not undertaken to strengthen the food systems against

weather shocks and to protect them against economic risks, then agricultural insecurity will

remain a constant menace to lives and means of living while potentially catalyzing social

upheaval and mass migration. Increasing the climate resilience of infrastructure, developing crop

insurance, enhancing the global coordination on agricultural trade and providing food aid to the

most vulnerable countries are some of the measures which need to be adopted if volatility is

rising. As climate change is expected to amplify fluctuations in crop yields and given the

emergence of different new supply chain disruptions globally food system resilience should be at

the top of the international community‟s agenda or else the world will face severe humanitarian,

political and security consequences in the next decade.

Insurance and financial markets destabilized by climatic and how it affects global security

Climate change is disrupting insurance and financial markets through raising the intensity

and frequency of cyclones, floods, droughts, and heat waves, all which inflict heavy economic

losses and disturbances globally; the extent of recent climatic catastrophes threatens to

overwhelm disaster relief budgets, thus leading to rising insurance premiums and product

shortages that incite social unrest and conflict. Climate change has reared its head again;

according to the UN recent report, there has been a five-fold increase of weather related disasters

over the past fifty years, which reinsurer Munich Re have said that the future may bring places

that are „uninsurable‟. Higher temperatures are likely to cost the global economy over $ 22

percent of the globe‟s gross income by 2100, and imperil the lives of hundreds of millions of

people. Food shortage and migration have been cited as causes for civil wars in Syria and Sudan;

there was drought and crop failure. Sea level rises pose the risks to large Asian coastal mega-

cities, widespread contamination of aquifers for irrigation with salt water, and up to 143 million

climate refugees. Climate change is a problem that gives the United States „catastrophic‟

existence threats according to the US National Security Strategy as it leads to resource scarcity,

diseases, and fragile states. Climate change is a concern as it continues to affect infrastructures

such as food and water production, shelter, electricity and supply chain such as shipping fleets,

roads, rail, and airport globally which are essential for the economy. Global warming affects the

commodity prices in terms of increase, affects the trade flows and depresses the asset prices, and

brings in uncertainty in the sense that it reduces the investments and in turn hampers the

economic growth at a time when more resources are required to steer up the failing health,

infrastructure and disaster management systems. The IMF predicted that the cost of adaptation

will rise to 0 billion by 2030 and straining the current public and private financial structures to

the limits outcompeting the capacity, budget and risk models established on the assumption of

climate stability. New forms of risk-pooling and climate-proof infrastructure to secure against

climate risks are required on a global scale, as risks vary around the world.

Geoengineering Attempts and International Governance Challenges to curb resource-

related conflicts

Unilateral climate interventions risking unintended regional consequences

Climate engineering has proposed to slow down climate change by assigning large-scale

interventions into the Earth‟s natural systems like the Stratospheric aerosol injection to cool the

planet or the ocean iron fertilization to extract carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and its

application can lead to unintended negative effects if it is done without international approval.

The potential adverse effects on regional climates and ecosystems further add that a single

country or group of countries may choose to conduct field tests or adopt these technologies for

wider use that may have adverse environmental consequences on other states even though they

did not give their consent. For instance, there are modeling exercises that show that the practice

of injecting aerosols in the stratosphere which could help reduce global warming but at the same

time would adversely affect monsoons in Asia and Africa which are major contributors to

agriculture where millions of people depend on. Likewise, using iron-enrichment to oceans in

order to stimulate phytoplankton, which in turn removes CO2 from the atmosphere is as follows:

The climate system is transboundary and coupled across the globe, which implies that even local

attempts at CE may have nonlinear feedbacks across the globe that are difficult to model. Hence,

any climate interventions that may entail some cross-country impacts must be regulated through

international agreements and ought to be consented to by all nations, as unilateral action by any

state – no matter how powerful – will be a violation of sovereignty and environmental rights of

other states.

The attempt to implement a well-designed system of international climate management

for climate interventions appears to be quite strenuous since the various countries reveal different

attitudes, worries, and vulnerability of the universal climate impacts. Some of the states are

afraid of negative effects or manipulation of climate under the pretext of geoengineering in their

region. The other states are concerned that the research and testing bans would get in the way of

the quest for technologies that may provide a warranty against climatic disaster. It still remains

difficult to seek the middle ground between the global North and the southern part of the world

because, on one hand, there is the focus on the source of the problem, which is cutting emissions,

while on the other hand, the heads of developed countries would always prefer technology. The

next major step has to be to unite states involved in geoengineering decisions and establish

global authoritative rules and regulation to conduct tests and use geoengineering solutions in a

regional climate system that is becoming increasingly interconnected, rule out the risks of the

unilateral action and unintended consequences. Synchronizing climate interventions to avert

making the situation worse either in terms of resource competition or insecurity is equally

important to ensure that none of the interventions escalates conflict or pose disruption or

spillover effects that harm people in affected countries.

Competing interests in solar radiation management technologies

Solar radiation management technologies, which may seem to be effective to mitigate the

effects of climate change or even reduce their occurrence, have other issues and concerns to

address due to various interest groups with regard to the development and possible usage of these

technologies. Technological provocations into the climate system have been suggested as a type

of solar geoengineering to deliberately thicken the Earth‟s atmosphere; however, there is

substantial ambiguity regarding their regional impacts. Schemes that are technically still in their

experimental stages, such as stratospheric aerosol injection, marine cloud brightening, and cirrus

cloud thinning, may endanger regional climatic balance, thus affecting susceptible populations

with events like droughts or floods, despite the purpose being to reduce global temperature.

Unfortunately, it is extremely challenging to ascertain how the rewards and risks attendant on

solar radiation management deployment might be apportioned across borders and time. This is

because the atmosphere and oceans are global commons and therefore they are not bounded by

the territories of sovereign states. For such proposals, there are currently no policy frameworks

or institutions, with an oversight function as noted above. As simple as they may seem, basic

questions are rife with similar questions such as which countries should decide whether, when, or

how SRM technologies are being experimented or applied? Regarding potential harms that may

or may not happen for some regions or population groups, what risks or responsibilities are there

in case the harms actually occur? And how will nations affected balance their deals with other

nations and also balance their efforts for a particular nation with efforts for the common good of

the world? SRM governance links profoundly with issues of justice concerning intergenerational

obligation and the past failings. Future generations, including many that have not yet been born,

can in no way decide to change the planet they are going to receive.

Discussions of governance seek to contain conflict of views in light of scientific, ethical,

legal, policy and diplomatic considerations; debates remain graciously contentious. For instance,

climate models offer only a few specific regional and local scenarios regarding the use of SRM.

There are still controversies in ethical issues that include, such as opting for the lesser evil for the

greater good since all the choices available present certain dangers. The issue of uncertainty is

rooted in the difficulty of comparing known and unknown probabilities when modeling such a

system as the global climate that inevitably includes certain levels of limitations and

imperfection. It is equally important to note that any geoengineering activity by one actor risks

leading to significant harm to international peace and security. It has also not been possible to

achieve within existing geoengineering research activities and would be even more challenging

for any actual use. The ability to maintain balance in this landscape of clashing stakeholders has

thus remained key though incredibly difficult.

Lack of regulatory frameworks for atmospheric modification

The absence of regulations of atmospheric alteration technologies regarding

geoengineering endeavors raises profound diplomatic challenges over how to restrain resource-

related conflict as there is emerging calls for the climate engineering to mitigate global warming

and climate change, though the technical, political, and moral consequences of intentional

massive manipulation of planetary systems remain unidentified. International regulation and risk

assessment frameworks are now desperately required, as uncoordinated geoengineering projects

from one state can lead to negative externalities in other states, but here progress has been quite

slow to set legal standards in this very heavily disputed though needed field which utilizes very

contentious technologies with cross-jurisdictional impacts. Techniques like SAI which reduces

temperatures by reflecting sunlight and CDR strategies that remove CO2 from the atmosphere

directly are advantageous in terms of climate remediation but have downsides with respect to

climate altering effects that may cause further social instabilities in already volatile regions due

to competition over resources, food and water. Even the small-scale outdoor experiments on

climate systems are rather sensitive from the political standpoint in terms of the international

consensus and permitting. Criticism is present from many governments and civil society actors,

who have voiced concern that reliance on such speculative technologies would shift attention

away from more pressing mitigation measures. Pervasive international collaboration to make

innovation decisions based on those assessments is necessary to avoid reckless pathways and to

actively work on the right set of policies suitable in this field full of intricate technical and

ethical choices on how climate can be managed, yet distinct regulatory frameworks may take

years if not decades to emerge since the global political consensus on the maximum permissible

levels of greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change effects and resource depletion

remains absent.

Conclusion

Urgent need for collaborative climate adaptation strategies

Climate change impacts are already manifested in the form of frequent attacks of extreme

weather conditions heat wave, sea level rise, temperature rise, and other natural disasters such as

drought, floods, and wildfires. Such effects call for the promotion of synergy on climate change

framework and Partnership among; and between the actors including the national governments,

business world, non-governmental actors and the community. Large scale interventions such as

SRM or CDR that comprise the bulk of Geoengineering ideas and strategies have several

international governance problems, especially in the following; transparency; consensus; rule-

making; oversight; public participation; and managing clash of interest or capability between

states. The technological, political, ethical, and environmental risks and uncertainties of such

attempts are still higher than the reported advantages at the current global stage. At the same

time climate change is enhancing resource competition and conflict hence perpetuating and in

some occasions instigating conflicts. This is because the climate adaptation partnership means

that the states will be able to obtain resiliency into the contentious areas with the help of carrying

out the proper improved cooperation in, and building of confidence within, the use of rivers and

forests. This is in relation to comprehending climate and conflict, incorporating adaptation to

development cooperation and peace agendas, enhancing accountability in the utilization of funds

for between riparian nations, strengthening the nature resource management for sub national

decision making and enhancing the involvement of the communities in the management of

adaption. Adaptation actions are required and on the local level as mitigation actions for

constructing climate resilience and stability for all nations.

Importance of integrating climate science into conflict resolution

With respect to this, climate change challenges conflict transformation by aggravating the

accessibility of resources for human want and sustenance where there is already more extensive

economic and, probably, the political unpredictability. Methods that can be used in future to

prevent disagreements include the strategies of the climate science on mediation. Studies prove

that the intensity and frequency of heat waves, droughts and other, argue that the Greenhouse gas

concentrations in the 21 century are largely responsible for climate change. Some of these

occurrences diminish renewable sources of freshwater, reduce crop yields, destroy structures and

force vulnerable groups of people to relocate. It can be seen that the competition for the limited

natural resources is bound to translate into tension of social and political sorts. It is essential to

note that conflict resolution policies and agreements cannot afford to be dropped or developed

without taking into consideration scientifically predicted climate projections regarding these

critical resources such as water and food. These aspects can help in addressing fairness issues on

resource distribution such as water sharing agreements, for instance solving conflict that may

arise from use of waters of shared lakes, rivers, and aquifers. Adaptive land management for

pragmatic land use and climate-change crops are possible to improve food production in the

agricultural systems subjected to climate change. In the same respect, targeting vulnerable

groups within the society also creates stability in the strategies of adaptation. The consideration

of predictive climate risk assessment into the systems of mediation in disputes will become

progressively essential in preventing climate-induced resource disputes at the regional level in

the present and future decades.

Strengthening international institutions to address climate-security nexus

Global warming when combined with over demands for essential resources and social

instabilities poses layers of threats to global security and there is a call for more commitments in

endeavor to enhance the capacity of the institutions of international relations in order to

effectively address this climate-security nexus. International organizations such as the UN

Security Council cannot continue to consider climate change as an environmental matter that can

be dealt with later, but it is a genuine security issue that can cause insecurity among

communities, and lead to conflict. Addressing this involves affirming international commitments

that are based on climate equity that provides support for societies that are vulnerable and

significantly reducing emissions by a fair amount and in a fast manner through transition. In this

regard, solar geoengineering is seen as a tool to artificially maintain the climate steadiness and

counterbalance some climate consequences while its consequences are still unknown. It appears

as a quicker and cheaper solution, but it does not focus on cause; there are also cross-

jurisdictional concerns with possible unintended consequences. It thus calls for diplomacy and

policy dialogue at the international level in order to deliberate on its options carefully. However,

it is self-evident that adaptation and resilience strengthening for regions and communities at risk

will be needed side by side with aggressive global mitigation efforts. The approaches should also

address stagnated and inadaptable models of development and resource utilization which are root

causes of climatic changes. Global institutions have the primary concern of facilitating

cooperation, monitoring, and support activities that address different aspects of climate security,

in a precautionary, ethical manner, with justice for climate at the center.

CLIMATE CHANGE AS A CATALYST FOR INTERNATIONAL CONFLICTS: CURRENT AND FUTURE SCENARIOS

Students also viewed