The water wars are coming:
Civilization will never survive
climate calamity
By Michael Klare
Delegates from 200 nations are convening in Paris for a
climate summit. It should be treated as a peace conference
At the end of November, delegations from nearly 200
countries will convene in Paris for what is billed as the most important
climate meeting ever held. Officially
known as the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP-21) of the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (the 1992 treaty that designated that
phenomenon a threat to planetary health and human survival), the Paris summit
will be focused on the adoption of measures that would limit global warming to
less than catastrophic levels. If it fails, world temperatures in the coming
decades are likely to exceed 2 degrees Celsius (3.5 degrees Fahrenheit), the
maximum amount most scientists believe the Earth can endure without
experiencing irreversible climate shocks, including soaring temperatures and a
substantial rise in global sea levels.
A failure to cap carbon emissions guarantees another result
as well, though one far less discussed.
It will, in the long run, bring on not just climate shocks, but also
worldwide instability, insurrection, and warfare. In this sense, COP-21 should be considered
not just a climate summit but a peace conference — perhaps the most significant
peace convocation in history.
To grasp why, consider the latest scientific findings on the
likely impacts of global warming, especially the 2014 report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). When
first published, that report attracted worldwide media coverage for predicting
that unchecked climate change will result in severe droughts, intense storms,
oppressive heat waves, recurring crop failures, and coastal flooding, all
leading to widespread death and deprivation.
Recent events, including a punishing drought in California and crippling
heat waves in Europe and Asia, have focused more attention on just such impacts. The IPCC report, however, suggested that
global warming would have devastating impacts of a social and political nature
as well, including economic decline, state collapse, civil strife, mass
migrations, and sooner or later resource wars.
These predictions have received far less attention, and yet
the possibility of such a future should be obvious enough since human
institutions, like natural systems, are vulnerable to climate change. Economies are going to suffer when key
commodities — crops, timber, fish, livestock — grow scarcer, are destroyed, or
fail. Societies will begin to buckle
under the strain of economic decline and massive refugee flows. Armed conflict
may not be the most immediate consequence of these developments, the IPCC
notes, but combine the effects of climate change with already existing poverty,
hunger, resource scarcity, incompetent and corrupt governance, and ethnic,
religious, or national resentments, and you’re likely to end up with bitter
conflicts over access to food, water, land, and other necessities of life.
The Coming of Climate Civil Wars
Such wars would not arise in a vacuum. Already existing stresses and grievances
would be heightened, enflamed undoubtedly by provocative acts and the
exhortations of demagogic leaders. Think
of the current outbreak of violence in Israel and the Palestinian territories,
touched off by clashes over access to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem (also known
as the Noble Sanctuary) and the inflammatory rhetoric of assorted leaders.
Combine economic and resource deprivation with such situations and you have a
perfect recipe for war.
The necessities of life are already unevenly distributed
across the planet. Often the divide between those with access to adequate
supplies of vital resources and those lacking them coincides with long-term schisms
along racial, ethnic, religious, or linguistic lines. The Israelis and Palestinians, for example,
harbor deep-seated ethnic and religious hostilities but also experience vastly
different possibilities when it comes to access to land and water. Add the stresses of climate change to such
situations and you can naturally expect passions to boil over.
Climate change will degrade or destroy many natural systems,
often already under stress, on which humans rely for their survival. Some areas that now support agriculture or
animal husbandry may become uninhabitable or capable only of providing for
greatly diminished populations. Under
the pressure of rising temperatures and increasingly fierce droughts, the
southern fringe of the Sahara desert, for example, is now being transformed
from grasslands capable of sustaining nomadic herders into an empty wasteland,
forcing local nomads off their ancestral lands. Many existing farmlands in
Africa, Asia, and the Middle East will suffer a similar fate. Rivers that once supplied water year-round
will run only sporadically or dry up altogether, again leaving populations with
unpalatable choices.
As the IPCC report points out, enormous pressure will be put
upon often weak state institutions to adjust to climate change and aid those in
desperate need of emergency food, shelter, and other necessities. “Increased
human insecurity,” the report says, “may coincide with a decline in the
capacity of states to conduct effective adaptation efforts, thus creating the
circumstances in which there is greater potential for violent conflict.”
A good example of this peril is provided by the outbreak of
civil war in Syria and the subsequent collapse of that country in a welter of
fighting and a wave of refugees of a sort that hasn’t been seen since World War
II. Between 2006 and 2010, Syria
experienced a devastating drought in which climate change is believed to have
been a factor, turning nearly 60% of the country into desert. Crops failed and most of the country’s
livestock perished, forcing millions of farmers into penury. Desperate and unable to live on their land
any longer, they moved into Syria’s major cities in search of work, often
facing extreme hardship as well as hostility from well-connected urban elites.
Had Syrian autocrat Bashar al-Assad responded with an
emergency program of jobs and housing for those displaced, perhaps conflict
could have been averted. Instead, he cut
food and fuel subsidies, adding to the misery of the migrants and fanning the
flames of revolt. In the view of several
prominent scholars, “the rapidly growing urban peripheries of Syria, marked by
illegal settlements, overcrowding, poor infrastructure, unemployment, and
crime, were neglected by the Assad government and became the heart of the
developing unrest.”
A similar picture has unfolded in the Sahel region of
Africa, the southern fringe of the Sahara, where severe drought has combined
with habitat decline and government neglect to provoke armed violence. The area has faced many such periods in the
past, but now, thanks to climate change, there is less time between the
droughts. “Instead of 10 years apart,
they became five years apart, and now only a couple years apart,” observes
Robert Piper, the United Nations regional humanitarian coordinator for the
Sahel. “And that, in turn, is putting
enormous stresses on what is already an incredibly fragile environment and a
highly vulnerable population.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please leave a comment.