Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
now insist that the EU is too unwieldy and that smaller groupings of states o
er the
only hope of advancing climate security strategy.
Coordination problems persist at the national level too. In Germany di
erences
between the di
erent parties forming the governing coalition have held back the
climate security agenda; prior to the September 2013 federal elections, the FDP led
through the German federal
ce, while CDU and CSU ministries
remained more ambivalent. In some member states, climate issues have palpably
slid down the list of priorities. Spain
foreign o
s main foreign policy strategy from 2011 failed
to make any mention of climate as a foreign policy challenge.
47
The annual review
of Spain
'
'
s foreign and security policy in 2012 made no mention of international
climate policy.
48
By the end of 2012, climate security was absent from the list of
Spanish security thematic priorities.
49
The new PP government that took o
ce at
the end of 2011 was not strongly committed; its leaders sometimes openly question
the priority attached to climate change.
50
European states organise their coverage of climate change in very di
erent ways.
France and the UK combine climate and energy policy; in the UK within their
own joint ministry, in France through jointly operated responsibilities of the min-
istries of ecology and of
nance. In Italy and in Spain, climate change departments
answer to overarching environment policy; in Italy the issue is dealt with in a
department that also includes renewable energy and sustainable development,
which in Spain are dealt with by the ministry of industry. In Germany, climate
change depends on the ministry of the environment, but its division also amalga-
mates international environmental cooperation. Sweden and Poland have both
climate change and international divisions within the ministries of the environ-
ment, but in a less consolidated fashion than in Germany. Of particular relevance
here,
it is striking to note that climate change
'
s inter-linkages with institutions
covering
nance, industry, energy, economy, transport and other aspects of envir-
onmental policies are rarely matched by formal connections with foreign or
defence ministries.
There is a common feature across member states
erent institutional set-ups:
the traditional community of security policy-makers remains relatively marginal.
Most member states
'
di
'
foreign ministries still have a limited involvement in climate
security; this partly explains Europe
uence over the way that climate
security is addressed by other powers around the world.
51
Environment ministries
may have adopted the discourse of
'
s limited in
'
geopolitical impact
'
but they have fought hard
to keep the security community at arm
s length. There remains a pressing need to
broaden decision-making out beyond energy and environmental ministries, who
have the incentive to present their own control of policy in this area as adequate.
52
For example, DG Energy o
'
cials admit in private that they have sought to avoid
the EAS gaining a prominent role in energy, as they fear that the foreign policy
