During April 10 and11 2016, the G7 Foreign Ministers met at Hiroshima, Japan to discuss current international affairs in the run-up to the G7 Summit in May. In the final Joint Communiqué they once again took a strong stance on tackling climate-fragility risks collectively. They endorsed a quick entry into force of the Paris Agreement by all parties, while also emphasizing the role of the G7 in the prevention of climate fragility risks and the need to further consider these challenges as part of their foreign policies:
“We reiterate that climate change poses a serious threat to global security and economic prosperity and shared the view that foreign policy must contribute to addressing this challenge effectively. In this context, we welcome the report submitted to us by the G7 Working Group on Climate Change and Fragility, endorse its recommendations, and affirm the need to continue to work on the issues of the climate-fragility risks by aligning our efforts toward the common goal of increasing resilience and reducing fragility in the face of global climate change, including taking steps to integrate climate-fragility considerations across our national governments.”
This statement has been preceded by the Meeting of G7 Foreign Ministers in Lübeck a year ago, where the Ministers first announced their commitment on tackling climate-fragility risks after receiving and discussing the report A New Climate for Peace: Taking Action on Climate and Fragility Risks, which was conducted by an independent international consortium led by adelphi. As a consequence, the foreign ministers decided to set up a working group with the task to evaluate the report and work out recommendations regarding possible implementation in time for their 2016 meeting.
With their latest declaration, the foreign ministers substantiated their commitment to attend to the matter of climate and fragility risks as posed in the report.
With global climate action stagnating, sustained community-driven initiatives can fill the governance gap and also help mitigate climate-related security risks in South Asia.
The longstanding dispute over water rights among Egypt, Sudan and Ethiopia escalated in 2011 when Ethiopia began construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), in the absence of any agreement with downstream Egypt. The GERD dispute offers an alarming insight into just how dangerous future transboundary water disputes may become, particularly in the context of a changing climate.
Though focused on climate change, National Adaptation Plans offer important assessments of the risks a country faces and can be valuable in devising comprehensive pandemic response strategies.
Women in the region suffer disproportionately from climate impacts, but they also play an essential role in addressing climate change. With the right policy responses, it is possible to reduce security risks and empower women to better address the challenges they face.