Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
not mean Arctic crop yield increases will compensate for losses in the south, or that
there will be a mass exodus to the far north that will still be an extremely harsh
place in which to live and survive. But the states on the Arctic rim will feel more
comfortable while others are under strain.
42
Arctic geopolitics are now on the front
line of international politics.
In short, uncertainty over the form that the shift to low carbon will take is likely
to ensure an extended period of
uid jostling for position between states and
between di
erent national companies. It is argued that observers missed just how
far the political impacts of climate change already engendered a
uidity of new
alliances at the Copenhagen summit in 2009. Groupings extended beyond simply
the rich West versus poor developing states; smaller groupings formed of Arctic
states, low-lying islands, unconventional oil states and others.
43
A
nal key change is that security will become about more speculative forms of
risk mitigation, less about reacting to traditional, substantiated material threats.
44
The over-riding e
ect may be that of uncertainty. Climate models devised so far
are relatively imprecise; we do not really know with certainty what impacts of a
warmer climate will be felt where. Feedback mechanisms are by de
cult
to predict. Preparedness and agility in security policy will be at more of a premium.
Nature is metastable: it retains stability in the face of multiple and grave disruptions,
until the moment when it does lose equilibrium in a really big way. One National
Intelligence Council-sponsored study of potential physical and political e
nition di
ects,
disaggregated to the country and regional level, concludes that
easy generalisations
about the security implications of climate change will be hard to come by
'
'
, and
that most stress may
ow from the expectation of impact rather than the actual
physical e
ects per se.
45
Many fearfully predict little but the unpredictable.
The doubts
While strong consensus now exists on all these likely political consequences, it is
not universally accepted that climate change will have a signi
cant impact on
global security. Some still doubt the conceptual validity of ranking climate change
alongside the more traditional threats to security.
Doubts come in various shades. Some of the most nuanced analysis has suggested
that climate change is indeed a security risk but one whose importance should not
be exaggerated. In his widely read dissection of the mounting risks to civilisation,
Martin Rees cautioned that climate change was a factor of concern but not one of
such magnitude that it should displace policy e
orts in other areas such as nuclear
non-proliferation, the vulnerabilities of technological dependency or uncontrolled
scienti
c advancement.
46
A general argument is that the links between climate
factors and security have not been demonstrated carefully enough; debates often list
