
Several climate security studies have assessed the risks of climate change to security and examined potential foreign policy responses, but the connection between climate change and foreign policy remains underexplored. The new Climate Diplomacy Report of the German Foreign Office takes up the challenge.
There are probably hundreds of climate security studies out there to assess the risks that climate change poses to security and potential foreign policy responses for addressing them. There are not too many government strategy papers out there, defining what linking climate change and foreign policy actually means. One of the most in-depth approaches to date was the European Commission’ work back in 2008 and 2011 to examine the relevance of climate change for security and to outline how climate diplomacy could be further strengthened.
However, in December 2019, the German Federal Foreign Office produced a “Climate Diplomacy Report” outlining different elements that can and should characterise climate-related foreign policy. In light of the international climate negotiations having stalling once more at COP26 in Madrid, it is worth reading the introductory text that highlights why diplomats should pay more attention to the climate crisis. It states that foreign policy needs: “[..] to support other countries and international organisations in dealing with the impact of climate change and in the transformation towards a climate-neutral economy, thus injecting impetus into the entire spectrum of our bilateral and multilateral relations.”
This framing of the issue not only highlights the goals of the Paris Agreement; it pushes supporting other countries’ transformations towards carbon neutrality to the forefront of activities to promote a preventive climate diplomacy. This is the first of six areas described in the report – the others being more conventional topics related to climate and security, such as stabilisation, post-conflict peacebuilding and humanitarian assistance, along with the need to deal with the geopolitical shifts that will emerge due to both climate change and climate policy.
Reading through the report, three main observations come to mind:
The impact of climate change is posing a growing threat to peace and security. Germany is therefore putting climate and security on the Security Council’s agenda.
Russia’s economic development minister warned last week that the EU’s plans to deploy a carbon tax at the bloc’s borders will not be in line with World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules, just as Brussels doubled down on the idea of green tariffs.
Few places have suffered more from the COVID-19 pandemic than southern China, the region where the novel coronavirus was first detected in the city of Wuhan. But it turned out that the pandemic is not the only calamity to befall south China this year. The region has been inundated by heavy rainfall since late May, creating a risk of catastrophic flooding.
Natural resources-based conflicts are sometimes made complex by non-climate push and pull factors, like unemployment and political tension. These factors should be taken into account when developing and implementing a peacebuilding strategy, making sure all stakeholders are at the table – including those fueling the conflict. The online workshop ‘Integrating peacebuilding and climate change mitigation efforts in natural resource management’, organised by the European Peacebuilding Liaison Office (EPLO) and adelphi, looked into this complex issue.