Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
the International Organization for Migration, as many as 200 million refugees could be displaced
by climate change by 2050 in the South Pacific and Indian Ocean regions (MacFarquhar 2009).
The impact on nearby nation-states of an influx of so many persons seems likely to destabilize
some governments in these regions, including Bangladesh and perhaps Australia.
Recognition that environmental factors such as climate change may have national security
costs and entail issues requiring particular attention by the U.S. Department of Defense is found
in the most recent
Quadrennial Defense Review
:
Assessments conducted by the intelligence community indicate that climate change could have
significant geopolitical impacts around the world, contributing to poverty, environmental deg-
radation, and the further weakening of fragile governments. Climate change will contribute to
food and water scarcity, will increase the spread of disease, and may spur or exacerbate mass
migration.
As climate science advances, the Department will regularly reevaluate climate change risks and
opportunities in order to develop policies and plans to manage its effects on the Department's
operating environment, missions, and facilities. Managing the national security effects of climate
change will require DOD to work collaboratively, through a whole-of-government approach,
with both traditional allies and new partners. (USDOD 2010, 85, 86-87)
Moreover, as Admiral Michael G. Mullen, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote in 2011 in
Joint Force Quarterly
,
The impending scarcity of resources compounded by an influx of refugees if coastal lands disap-
pear not only could produce a humanitarian crisis, but also could generate conditions that could
lead to failed states and make populations more vulnerable to radicalization. These troubling
challenges highlight the systemic implications—and multiple-order effects—inherent in energy
security and climate change. (2-3)
Consequently, it seems appropriate to include environmental factors such as climate change as
national security costs in a conceptual framework for evaluation of energy policy choices.
After a ten-year drought, severe wildlife decline, killer heat waves in the south, and monsoon
flooding in the north, Australia's agricultural economy collapsed in 2009; its tourist economy may
be next, and there is widespread belief it may be one of the early casualties of climate change
(Cart 2009). Large, continental nation-states such as the United States have not until recently
perceived the difficulties of small island states as sufficiently important to warrant changes in
domestic energy policy, but actions that affect key allies like Indonesia, Australia, and Egypt, or
key rivals such as China, may reasonably be expected to have some impact on U.S. foreign policy
and national security. Although the moral argument has never been a particularly strong force
in international relations, to the extent other nation-states may be reluctant to contribute to the
extinction of “endangered nation-states,” large-scale reliance on fossil fuels may threaten their
freedom of action in foreign affairs and may limit their choices in use of energy technologies for
domestic purposes.
Historically, discussions of “energy security” have been couched largely in terms of concern
for oil prices, with only occasional mention of possible supply disruptions (Barton et al. 2004;
Copaken 2003; USGAO 1993). These discussions were shaped historically by the Organization
of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) cartel strategy of influencing the international price
Search WWH ::
Custom Search