Our COP28 round-up: TPNS events, presentations & media

Our COP28 round-up: TPNS events, presentations & media

This COP28 was the one that finally recognised fossil fuels as the primary culprit in the climate crisis. But it held back from calling for a phase-out, and instead called for a “transition away”. Not enough since the consensus at COP was this: we are headed for 2° Celsius or more of warming by 2100.

On climate finance the Loss and Damage fund was officially made operational, with $700m committed at COP28. The Green Climate Fund (GCF) received a boost to its second replenishment with six countries pledging new funding at COP28 with total pledges now standing at a record USD 12.8 billion from 31 countries, with further contributions expected. Eight donor governments announced new commitments to the Least Developed Countries Fund and Special Climate Change Fund totalling more than USD 174 million to date, while new pledges, totalling nearly USD 188 million so far, were made to the Adaptation Fund at COP28.

But these new climate finance numbers still pale into insignificance when compared to the $13trillion the big fossil fuel reliant militaries will receive between now and 2030 – the year when we must also hit 45% cuts to global annual GHG emissions.

As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine brought attention to this issue at COP27 in Egypt, so Israel’s bombardment of Gaza meant our message was loudly heard at COP28. The excessively funded fossil-fuel-reliant big militaries of the world – and the arms industry that supply them – are now in the climate change frame for all to see. As a result, COP28 saw the climate justice movement begin to include this issue in their broader analysis.

TPNS took its message to civil society, country delegates, UN departments and media. We built on our presence at COP27 as part of an ever growing civil society movement calling for this issue to be centre-stage. We look forward to building on both existing and new connections in our work to get military emissions and spending on the UNFCCC and climate finance agendas respectively.

We are indebted to the following for their support of our COP28 attendance: Jam Today, Movement for the Abolition of War, Quaker UN Office, Perspectives Climate Group.

Meantime, as the holiday season nears, we send you the very best Season’s Greetings and wish everyone a peaceful Christmas.

Deb, Ho-Chih, Dionne & all at TPNS.


COP28 ATTENDANCE 2nd-11th DECEMBER

SIDE EVENTS

December 4th  Official Side Event

Watch here. December 6th  Green x Digital Pavilion

Watch here.

December 10th Official Side Event

Watch here.

December 12th    SDGs Pavilion

Watch here.

COP28 Live Webinar
Hosted by IPB, TPNS, TNI, Scientists for Global Responsibility (SGR), Stop Wapenhandel, WILPF

Watch here.

MEDIA – CLIMATE CROSSFIRE REPORT & SIDE EVENTS

HIGHLIGHTS

Democracy Now with Amy Goodman at COP28

Guardian: Climate Crossfire Report and the 5% cut call
Divert military spending to fund climate aid, activists urge Cop28

Climate Home News
Wars are closing down the window for climate action (Op Ed)

Twitter
Our COP28 Feed https://twitter.com/TransformDef
UNCS News

Full media listing here.

COP28: Military Spending Enters the Climate Finance Debate

President Lula De Silva of Brazil

It is unacceptable that the promise of 100 billion dollars a year made by the developed countries will not come to fruition while, in 2021 alone, military spending reached 2 trillion and 200 billion dollars.

Climate Action Network COP28 Policy Document

“At the same time, it is important to point out that the world’s militaries contribute at least 5.5% of global emissions and reporting is voluntary and mostly lacking. We ask leaders to reduce and re-allocate military spending to reduce emissions and to provide adequate, scaled-up finance as this is a critical enabler of ambitious climate action.”

Mohamed Adow, director of Power Shift Africa, a Nairobi-based climate and energy think-tank.

The war on Gaza is also affecting how much funding can be diverted to climate initiatives. Adow says wars and conflict are using up much needed climate cash that could have otherwise been very useful to help protect vulnerable communities from climate disaster. He used the example of Ukraine, where he says trillions of dollars were sent at a time that the international community was struggling to mobilize a hundred billion for climate finance.“Demilitarization across the world must be a key component of climate justice,” Adow said.

Mitzi Jonelle Tan Convenor and international spokesperson of Youth Advocates for Climate Action Philippines (YACAP), the Fridays For Future (FFF) of the Philippines.  Mitzi has long pushed for the climate movement to address militarism. She co-ordinated this action at COP28 before heading over to join our 4 December official side event.

Yasmine Sherif, Executive Director of Education Cannot Wait, the UN global fund for education in emergencies

“Don’t tell me that there are no resources. If we took 5 per cent of military expenditures and move them towards a education and to address climate crisis… We would have $100 billion a year to address climate change. So, the message is that you need to start reprioritizing.”

COP28 – OUTCOMES

Below are links to various commentaries on COP28 conclusion.

COP28: Side Events + New Report & Webinar

COP28: Side Events + New Report & Webinar

TAKING MILITARY EMISSIONS & SPENDING
INTO THE BLUE ZONE AT COP28 UAE

Dear friends, supporters, colleagues,

As COP28 looms, despite some positive commentary (the recent Biden/XI meeting), the ever-rising sense that COP28 will not deliver the action we so urgently need is everywhere. Whether cuts to emissions, no new oil and a rapid move away from fossil fuels across all sectors, there is still so far to go if we are not to overshoot the 1.5 degrees of warming that will further accelerate runaway climate change.

And critically, governments also need to commit to massively scaling up climate finance to countries in the global south on the ever expanding frontline of climate change. Finance rich countries are legally bound to deliver.

Nevertheless, we feel it is right to attend COP28 because of the windows of opportunity to speak at official side events to delegates (UN, governments, media, NGOs) on the still relatively new topic of military emissions, linked to spending and climate finance and Loss and Damage.

And sadly, with this vital COP so close, the climate community is mourning the unexpected death of Professor Saleemul Huq – a driving force at every climate negotiation and the beating heart of the Loss and Damage movement. He was a brilliant, generous man. His support of our work on military emissions and spending was invaluable.  His spirit will be felt everywhere the loss and damage cause is debated and our side event on 6th December is dedicated to him.

Below is our COP28 events listing plus news on our latest report & associated webinar. Also some thoughts on how the war on Gaza will impact COP28.  All official COP side events inside the Blue Zone are live-streamed on the UNFCCC youtube channel. Continue reading

Sharing MLK events + ID refresh

Sharing MLK events + ID refresh

Campaigning latest:
Sunday’s MLK event with Adjoa Andoh & Paterson Joseph
This coming Thursday’s film event
Who we are

MLK’s 1967 Christmas Sermon

Dear friends and supporters,

This Sunday we sat in the beautiful St. John’s Church Waterloo and listened to the words of Revd Dr Martin Luther King interpreted beautifully, sensitively and passionately by actors Adjoa Andoh and Paterson Joseph. The sermon was from Christmas Eve 1967, as bombs rained down on Vietnam and Dr. King’s commitment to the anti-Vietnam war movement was at its height.

MLK’s last Christmas sermon can be read here – it reads as if written for today, such is the brilliance of his mind. His writing, his empathy for all humanity and his consummate skill in framing contemporary concerns through the lens of his profound faith are peerless.

Both the performed reading and the brilliant discussion with Adjoa Andoh, Priya Lukka, Dionne Gravesande, Shanon Shah – chaired  by Canon Giles Goddard – were filmed and we will be sharing at Christmas time.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Continue reading

Media release: NATO 2% SPENDING GOAL COULD DIVERT $2.6 TRILLION FROM CLIMATE FINANCE BY 2028

Media release: NATO 2% SPENDING GOAL COULD DIVERT $2.6 TRILLION FROM CLIMATE FINANCE BY 2028

Embargoed: 00:01am CET, 17 October

NEW RESEARCH: NATO 2% SPENDING GOAL COULD DIVERT $2.6 TRILLION FROM CLIMATE FINANCE BY 2028 

NATO’s goal of 2% spending of GDP on the military will accelerate climate breakdown by diverting millions of dollars from climate finance and increasing greenhouse gas emissions, concludes a new report that urgently calls for a ‘climate dividend’ similar to the ‘peace dividend’ that was won with the end of the Cold War.

The report, Climate Crossfire, produced by Tipping Point North South (UK), together with Transnational Institute (International) and Stop Wapenhandel (Netherlands), estimates the likely financial implications as well as increased greenhouse gas emissions that would result if all NATO members meet their commitment to increase military spending to a minimum of 2% of GDP. 

The report finds that:

  • NATO’s military spending this year – $1.26 trillion-  would pay for 12 years of promised climate finance of $100 billion a year.
  • If all NATO members meet its 2% military spending targets, it would divert an estimated additional US$2.57 trillion by 2028 away from climate spending, enough to pay for climate adaptation costs for all low- and middle-income countries for seven years.
  • NATO’s estimated military carbon footprint this year – 205 million tCO2e – is comparable to the total annual greenhouse gas emissions of many countries. If NATO’s militaries were a country, it would rank 40th in the world in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.
  • If all NATO members meet its 2% military spending targets, this would lead to an estimated additional 467 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions.
  • NATO members export arms to 39 of the 40 most climate-vulnerable countries, fuelling conflict and repression at a dangerous moment of climate breakdown.

Continue reading

BHM October 22 and 26: MLK Events with Adjoa Andoh, Paterson Joseph, Robert Beckford and others

BHM October 22 and 26: MLK Events with Adjoa Andoh, Paterson Joseph, Robert Beckford and others

Join us for two special Black History Month events at
St. John’s Church Waterloo

We are delighted to be a part of the Black History Month Exploring Spirit programme at the stunning, newly renovated St. John’s Church in Waterloo.

We have two MLK focussed events and both events are free but booking is essential. The first event is MLK’s final Christmas Sermon, 1967. It’s relevance to the climate emergency, with war as a metaphor for climate chaos, is explored in our latest blog.

We hope you may be able to join us.

Dionne, Deb & Ho-Chih Continue reading

Anniversaries & films; talks & UN submissions

Anniversaries & films; talks & UN submissions

Dear friends, supporters and colleagues,

It hardly seems possible but it is 20 years since the world mobilised to speak out and tell their governments ‘Not in Our Name’ – no invasion of Iraq. Marches took place on every continent, including Antarctica.

Did it stop the war? No. Were the arguments made by those against the invasion proven right? Yes. Deborah Burton and Ho-Chih Lin have co-written a blog with Amir Amirani, director of We Are Many to mark this 20th anniversary. One of the core messages of the film – foreign and defence policy-making built upon lies and misinformation can only lead to long term often catastrophic consequences – now remains at the heart of our Transform Defence project.

BLOG: We Are Many – More Than Ever

Reflecting on 20 years since the global anti-Iraq war marches and the invasion that followed  

In the nine years of the Iraq War, according to the Costs of Wars Project, around 300,000 people (including civilians) were killed directly and many more killed indirectly. The invasion of Iraq by the United States-led coalition was estimated to have released around 250 million tCO2e. Despite this enormous climate impact, there is a shocking lack of transparency and accountability to the UNFCCC for this particular sector. Ever rising military budgets fund the big GHG emitting hardware. The richest countries are spending 30 times as much on their armed forces as they spend on providing climate finance for the world’s most vulnerable countries

Read the blog here.
Watch the film here.

TALK: Military Emissions, Military Spending and Climate Change, Drexel University USA

Post COP27 Deborah was invited to give a webinar as part of a series for Drexel University’s Green Infrastructure, Climate and Cities programme followed by a panel discussion with Prof Franco Montalto and Kristy Kelly PhD, a specialist in gender and development.

Watch the talk here.
Also delighted to have joined CODEPINK in the USA for a webinar on unpacking COP27 – the highs and the lows; what was achieved for the issue of military emissions and spending; and what we might expect from COP28 in Dubai.

FILM: MLK Global

MLK Day 16 January: To mark MLK Day our MLK Global team – Yolande Cadore in NYC, Dionne Gravesande and Deborah Burton – wrote this piece.

March 29th:  We look forward to returning to Union Chapel in Islington, north London, for another screening of the outstanding film: From Montgomery to Memphis. Check Union Chapel website for more information nearer the date.

UN SUBMISSION: Missing Military Emissions

The Global Stocktake is a new UNFCCC process to gather information on GHG emissions with the results to be presented at COP28 this year in Dubai. The stocktake enables the assessment of global collective progress on mitigation, adaptation, means of implementation and support.

Critically, the process needs information about what is not being ‘counted’ and unreported military emissions are just that. We are working to get military emissions on the Global Stocktake and with seven other research and advocacy groups (Europe & USA) we have just made a joint submission based on the recommendations of our June 2022 report on military emissions reporting to the UNFCCC.

*************

Follow our various activities on social media

@_TPNS
@TransformDef
@MLK_Global

UNFCCC Global Stocktake Submission

UNFCCC Global Stocktake Submission

The Global Stocktake is a new UNFCCC process to gather information on GHG emissions. With seven other research and advocacy groups (Europe & USA), TPNS has made a joint submission for military emissions. 

Download ‘Submission to the UNFCCC Global Stocktake: Military and Conflict Emissions‘ [PDF]

WE ARE MANY – MORE THAN EVER

WE ARE MANY – MORE THAN EVER

Reflecting on twenty years since the historic global anti-Iraq war marches.

Amir Amirani, director of We Are Many , Deborah Burton & Ho-Chih Lin  

This 15 February 2023 marks the 20th anniversary of the unprecedented global anti-war protest against the US-led coalition invasion of Iraq. The story of this amazing day was retold in Amir Amirani’s highly acclaimed cinema documentary ‘We Are Many’ released in 2015 and a film for which Tipping Point North South was proud to have been an early funder through its Film Fund. We Are Many was an important film in many ways, not least in how it made clear the disastrous (and deceitful) USA and UK foreign policy decisions that have led to more than two decades of conflict in the region. And the film also makes clear how the war in Iraq was founded upon a lie – the lie that the US political class told their citizens: that Saddam Hussein was implicated in 9/11. He was not. As British journalist Peter Oborne says in the film, it was clear that those calling for no war in the UK (the peace movement and others) knew more than the foreign office and civil service, since those anti-war voices were utterly vindicated as the war took its toll.

Summary:

  • In the nine years of the Iraq War, according to the Costs of Wars Project, around 300,000 people (including civilians) were killed directly and many more killed indirectly.
  • The invasion of Iraq by the United States-led coalition was estimated to have released around 250 million tCO2e.
  • At COP27 in Sharm El-Sheikh it was revealed how significant military emissions in peacetime and war were, estimated to be 5% of global GHG emissions.
  • Despite this enormous climate impact, there is a shocking lack of transparency and accountability to the UNFCCC for this particular sector.
  • Ever rising military budgets fund the big GHG emitting hardware. The richest countries are spending 30 times as much on their armed forces as they spend on providing climate finance for the world’s most vulnerable countries.

IRAQ: THE CLIMATE IMPACTS OF WAR

The terrible and enormous human, economic and societal costs of the Iraq war and the conflicts that followed have combined to leave a scar on our global collective conscience. Yet those lessons have not been learned.

The global War on Terror is still ongoing, albeit to a much lesser degree since the end of the conflicts in both Afghanistan and Iraq and, as of February 2022, we saw the invasion of another sovereign country by a military superpower, namely the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Once again, the media has been broadcasting images and footage of the catastrophic toll on innocent children, women and men.

And the coverage of Ukraine has also been revealing something else – the toll on the environment, on our climate and in a way the Iraq war never did.

In the nine years of the Iraq War, according to the Costs of Wars Project, around 300,000 people (including civilians) were killed directly and many more killed indirectly. If all the wars in the US-led global War on Terror were considered, the total direct casualties would be estimated to be nearly 1 million and total US war spending between 2001 -2022, $8 trillion.

But there was one ‘cost’ that had neglected and it was the climate cost because military greenhouse gas emissions in war – at that time – was generally absent from both media coverage and climate policy-making.

The invasion of Iraq by the United States-led coalition was estimated to have released around 250 million tCO2e. Professor Neta Crawford estimates accumulated emissions of the USA military at 1.3 billion metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent for the war-intensive period 2001-2018, with war-related activities in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Syria responsible for 440 million tCO2e between 2001 and 2018.

The destruction during wars of natural or man-made carbon stocks such as forests, energy infrastructure and oil wells can also reach hundreds of millions tCO2e. The burning and reconstruction of cities during and after a country-wide conflict can readily release emissions on a similar scale.

Moreover, the disposal of rubble and rebuilding from infrastructure destruction is a long carbon intensive process. A UNEP programme manager said of the Iraq cleanup – ‘the amount of trucking and emissions that would be required to dispose of this debris is like travelling from the earth to the moon multiple times’.

And for Iraq you could read Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya, Syria, Palestine, Ukraine. The list is endless. We have no idea of the cumulative GHG emissions impact of these 21st century wars, let alone what went before in the wars of the 20th century.

UKRAINE: CLIMATE IMPACT OF WAR NOW ON THE AGENDA

Fast forward to 2022 and COP27 Sharm El-Sheikh where an official Blue Zone side event entitled ‘Dealing with military and conflict-related emissions under the UNFCCC’ was hosted by the Ukraine government and CAFOD, making a welcome change on this otherwise hidden issue.

The event had been the result of conversations developed as a result of Tipping Point North South’s June 2022 report by Axel Michaelowa et al., ‘Military and Conflict-Related Emissions: Kyoto to Glasgow and Beyond’ and presented at the COP27 event alongside a groundbreaking report by the Ukraine government ‘Climate damage caused by Russia’s war in Ukraine’. In producing the first country accounting of GHG emissions in conflict, the Ukraine report inevitably showed how much information is missing from other conflicts, past and present. It also highlighted another truth: there has not been anywhere near the same level of military emissions detail on Iraq or Syria or other conflicts. The Ukraine report also proved that if governments want to, and vitally, have the capacity to calculate emissions from war, it can be done.

At Sharm El-Sheikh it revealed just how significant military emissions are in peacetime and war.  Along with the supply chain – the makers of the jets, warships, missiles, bombs and bullets – and based on partial and patchy data (because reporting is voluntary) it’s estimated at 5.5% of global GHG emissions. Some 2,750 tCO2e estimated for the carbon footprint of the world’s militaries and associated military technology industry makes it comparable to the combined emissions of civilian aviation (2%) and civilian shipping (3%) sectors.

Notably, this figure does not yet include conflict-related sources, including emissions from infrastructure or landscape fires, the degradation of carbon sinks, post-conflict reconstruction and healthcare for victims. Yet given this enormous climate impact, there is a shocking lack of transparency and accountability for this particular sector.

Just the first seven months of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has been estimated to be responsible for at least 100 million tCO2e. For comparison, Ukraine’s total CO2 emissions in 2021 (prior to the invasion in 2022) was 185 million tonnes. Conflict-related emissions are substantial, even before we take account of the human suffering and the long-term environmental degradation and pollution.

INDIVISIBLE: MILITARY EMISSIONS AND MILITARY SPENDING

And the other side of the coin is this: ever rising  military budgets fund the big GHG emitting hardware. Tipping Point North South took a second report to COP27 – ‘Climate Collateral: How military spending is accelerating climate breakdown’ where we joined with the Transnational Institute and Stop Wappenhandel (Netherlands) to connect the dots between military emissions, military spending and climate finance and revealed that the richest countries (categorised as Annex II in the UN climate talks) are spending 30 times as much on their armed forces as they spend on providing climate finance for the world’s most vulnerable countries, which they are legally bound to do. And just one year’s military spending by the top 10 military spenders would pay for promised international climate finance for 15 years (at $100bn a year).

The possibility of keeping global temperature change below 1.5°C is rapidly receding, with global heating on track for the calamitous 3°C. At this late stage, every single effort to reduce emissions matters and this is especially true when it relates to such a major sectoral emitter, and a source – conflicts – whose emissions dynamics have historically been ignored.

To reduce military emissions we have to start by reducing excessive military spending – there is no way round it. Simply put, fossil fuels are the lifeblood of modern militaries, more military spending directly leads to more military emissions. The War on Terror, especially the Iraq War,  kick-started the dramatic decades-long growth in military spending, with the United States spending more than the next top 10 military spenders combined. Where the US leads, the rest follow – global military spending is now more than $2 trillion a year, much more than what we spent during the Cold War.

Meantime, Loss and Damage needs major funding commitment and climate finance for developing countries needs to have the $100bn annual commitment made real not least for the peoples of the many post 9/11 conflicts so hard hit by 20 years of conflict, and who themselves now live with the terrible impacts of climate change.

The big military spending nations are not only up to their eyes in that post 9/11 catastrophe, their militaries also contributed to climate change itself as a result of their military activities there. We need look no further for Loss and Damage funding than inside the insane levels of spending on weaponry, all useless in the face of the greatest threat to our collective safety: climate chaos.

Amir Amirani, Producer/Director, We Are Many

Deborah Burton, Tipping Point North South, and Executive Producer, We Are Many

Dr. Ho-Chih Lin, Transform Defence Project, and Associate Producer, We Are Many

COP27 Attendance and Progress

COP27 Attendance and Progress

COP27, SHARM EL-SHEIKH, 6-18 November 2022

MILITARY EMISSIONS & SPENDING SUCCESSFULLY MOVED UP THE AGENDA

Like thousands of others at Sharm El-Sheikh we too applauded the victory of those who finally managed to get Loss and Damage across the line. After years of digging in their heels, rich countries were finally shamed into creating a fund for Loss and Damage finance, realising they could no longer kick the L&D ‘can’ down road.  But in so many other ways, Egypt’s COP was an abject failure. As one UN official said, COP is ‘at a crossroads’. As others have described it, it has become ‘a bloated travelling circus’. Attending for the first time, it was clear to see: the trade show element is unnecessary with big country pavilions, private sector stands, fossil fuel lobby presence. COP needs paring right back and replaced with a meaningful global civil society presence.

On our topic, some good news.  COP27 proved to be really productive for Tipping Point North South (TPNS), with a major side event on emissions as well as a publication launch on military spending, Climate Collateral. Our Transform Defence twitter account has comprehensive coverage of COP27-related military emissions and spending; here is Deb’s side event presentation  and all media coverage is here. The side event ended up being a major story for Guardian, Bloomberg and AFP, leading to 450 downloads of our Perspectives/TPNS June military emissions report during COP itself, bringing a total of 1240 downloads since publication. Continue reading

Media Release: Richest Nations Spending 30 Times as Much on Military as Climate Finance

Media Release: Richest Nations Spending 30 Times as Much on Military as Climate Finance

14/11/2022

As the world’s climate negotiators gather in Egypt for the 27th annual climate talks, a new report reveals that military spending is deepening the climate crisis by increasing emissions, diverting money and fuelling conflict in the most climate-vulnerable countries.

The report, Climate Collateral, produced by the international research organisation, Transnational Institute, together with Stop Wapenhandel (Netherlands) and Tipping Point North South (UK) examines the impact of rising global military spending on the climate crisis. It finds that:

  • The richest nations (known as ‘Annex 2’ countries in UN climate negotiations) are spending 30 times as much on military as on climate finance 
  • The increase in military spending has led to rises in military greenhouse gas emissions, calculated to currently make up 5.5% of total greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Rather than providing climate finance, Annex 2 countries are selling arms to 40 of the most climate-vulnerable nations fuelling conflict and instability as the climate crisis deepens

Continue reading

10 Talking Points for a Difficult Conversation 

10 Talking Points for a Difficult Conversation 

To mark UN International Day of Peace TPNS is releasing its latest publication How to Transform Defence for Sustainable Human Safety: 10 Talking Points for a Difficult Conversation.

It is an attempt to offer up a framework that tries to envision how we get a much better deal for the world’s citizens from the abject failure of past and current foreign and defence policies that sees us stagger from one war to the next; the world carved up according to spheres of influence; stupid narrow mindsets prevailing over catastrophic climate change and more than 6 million dead due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

It is an attempt to think through the ‘how, what and why’ of a difficult conversation – the move from 19th and 20th century framing of foreign and defence policy such that it really is fit for purpose in a 21st and 22nd century climate changed world, all the time fully recognising that every person, community, society, nation, region needs protection from aggressors and terrorists and it is the job of government to defend its citizens from such threats.

But change it must. Continue reading

Open Letter to UN Sec General as we enter 6th month of Russia’s invasion

Open Letter to UN Sec General as we enter 6th month of Russia’s invasion

As we enter the sixth month of the Russian invasion of Ukraine TPNS has written an Open Letter to Antonio Guterres. It calls on him to consider concrete proposals that address runaway military spending and excess profits by defence companies.

Is excessive military spending coupled with defence industry excess profits a legitimate source to tap for climate finance?  Has the time come to think about the concept of Carbon Neutral Peace and Defence?

Read the open letter here.

Military Emissions in Peace and War – Pushing it up the UN’s Climate Agenda

Military Emissions in Peace and War – Pushing it up the UN’s Climate Agenda

Military emissions in peacetime and war  getting this onto the UNFCCC agenda

Dear friends, colleagues and supporters,

The TV pictures of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – tanks, jets, missiles and smashed up infrastructure – has meant that the world is now, finally and belatedly, looking at war and conflict through the climate change lens. It is doing so in a way it never did for Afghanistan or Iraq or Syria or any other conflict in recent times.

World leaders will have to finally deal with the climate impact of conflict as they head into the G7 summit in Germany.

To coincide with the G7 Summit in Germany 26-28 June, a new technical report with a companion advocacy briefing, commissioned by Tipping Point North South and written by Perspectives Climate Group (Germany), explores the military emissions ‘reporting gap’, both in peacetime and war. Military and conflict-related emissions: Kyoto to Glasgow and beyond offers a much needed robust set of proposals to address this within the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

The report is covered here in Deutsche Welle, published today. Continue reading

Stockholm+50 and Global Military Emissions: Ideas for Discussion

Stockholm+50 and Global Military Emissions: Ideas for Discussion

To mark the UN gathering Stockholm+50, Transform Defence has published its briefing Stockholm+50 and Global Military Emissions: Ideas for Discussion. We are honoured to have the foreword written by Professor Saleemul Huq , Chair of the Expert Advisory Panel for the Climate Vulnerable Forum. Continue reading

Today marks UN International Peace Day

Today marks UN International Peace Day

To coincide with this and the UN General Assembly meeting September 14-27, Tipping Point North South’s Transform Defence project publishes its updated briefing:

‘Reset for the 21st century’: The Global Military and the United Nations

We are in the midst of the sixth mass extinction yet the foreign and defence policies of nations around the world – especially the top 20 nations which allocate large sums to defence spending – are preoccupied with a plethora of adversarial and conventional threats on land, air, sea and space as well as with nuclear weapons, cyber weaponry and AI.

Meantime, climate change and pandemic are laying bare the magnitude and depth of the desperate state we are in. The post-pandemic global economy, coming not so long after the 2008 crash, will further compound this with ever greater poverty and inequality.

Alongside all past and present wars and conflicts, it seems we have also collectively declared war on ourselves and our planet. But no F-35 will stop New York City, Alexandria, Shanghai, Amsterdam, Rio de Janeiro, Tokyo, Venice, Bangkok, Mumbai and London going under water; no nuclear warhead will solve India and Pakistan’s disappearing water-table; no anti-terror AI will stop West Africa’s growing desertification.

The briefing pulls together the various ways in which the global military as whole- primarily the top 20 spenders and arms sellers- impact on the SDGs; on climate change itself;  and the intersection of both.

It explores:

  • Why the impact of the global military on climate change demands much more attention and scrutiny at UN level
  • Why we need to divert runaway military spending to make up the SDGs funding shortfall
  • How a wider debate on definitions of ‘security’ and ‘defence’ is of benefit to the UN and citizens of the world
  • Why a Security Council high level open debate is needed to bring all these inter-related issues together in order to frame an urgent new 21st century paradigm for security – that of ‘sustainable human safety’.

In light of the UN Secretary General’s call to ‘launch a reset for the 21st century,’ five recommendations are offered up as a way to explore a reset in relation to this much overlooked issue and in turn raise ever greater awareness, debate and action:

  • Apply rigorous evidence-based value-for-money approaches to military spending
  • Part-fund the $2-4 trillion SDGs 2021-2030 funding gap from escalating military budgets 2023-30 and beyond
  • Create a new UNFCCC TOPIC ‘Carbon Neutral Peace and Defence’ and fill the ‘Knowledge Gap’ across UN and national processes on the global military’s greatly under-estimated carbon bootprint
  • Make SDG 16 ‘Peaceful Societies’ much more challenging in its remit in relation to the global military and spending
  • Hold a Security Council high-level open debate on the impact of the global military on climate change and under-development and the concept of ‘Carbon Neutral Peace and Defence

In 2020, the UN issued a report on the occasion of the UN’s 75th anniversary, in September 2020. In the Declaration (A/RES/75/1), Member States recognize that while there have been many achievements in the past 75 years, the world envisaged by the UN’s founders 75 years ago has not yet been realized: it is plagued by growing inequality, poverty, hunger, armed conflicts, terrorism, insecurity, climate change, and pandemics; people are forced to make dangerous journeys in search of refuge and safety; the LDCs are falling behind; and complete decolonization has not been achieved.

In 2021, the UN has mapped out how to take this forward with key proposals across the 12 commitments.

Recommendations from ‘Reset for the 21st century’: The Global Military and the United Nations connect with a number of items within the 12 proposals including:

  1. PROTECT OUR PLANET
    • Commit to the 1.5-degree Celsius goal and net zero emissions by 2050 or sooner
    • Package of support to developing countries
  1. PROMOTE PEACE AND PREVENT CONFLICTS
    • New agenda for peace
      • Invest in prevention and peacebuilding, including Peacebuilding Fund and Peacebuilding Commission
  1. ENSURE SUSTAINABLE FINANCING
    • Support a Sustainable Development Goal investment boost, including through a last-mile alliance to reach those furthest behind
  1. LISTEN TO AND WORK WITH YOUTH
    • Future generations
      • Summit of the Future in 2023
      • Ensure long-term thinking, including through a United Nations Futures Lab
  1. BE PREPARED
    • On global public health
      • Empowered WHO
      • Stronger global health security and preparedness

**********************************

Climate change is increasingly a part of UN Security Council debates and publications and while it may not be accepted by all nations, the time is already upon us to up-end our 19th and 20th century models of security thinking.

We have to acknowledge climate change, global health, inequality/poverty reduction and conflict prevention as top priority, inter-related hard defence issues. We must call time on the ‘Cinderella’ status of these extreme threats to our collective human safety.

The IPCC’s ‘Code Red for Humanity’ speaks to this. The time has come to transform defence for sustainable human safety in the 21st century. The UN, in all its diversity, through all its departments, is at the heart of this much needed transformation

Open Letter to UK hosted G7 meeting. Military emissions, climate change and net zero

Open Letter to UK hosted G7 meeting. Military emissions, climate change and net zero

Ahead of the G7 meeting in Cornwall, TPNS/Transform Defence published an Open Letter to PM Boris Johnson. The 26 (international) supporting signatories are seniors figures from science/academia, development and environment NGOs, activism and the arts.

The open letter called for G7 militaries to come clean on their carbon emissions and absence of any meaningful path to get to net zero, ahead of COP 26 in Glasgow. The letter provided four concrete recommendations. Open letter & signatories below

Transform Defence was also covered in a recent article for German public media broadcaster and publisher Deutsche Welle: Scorched Earth: The Climate Impact of Conflict by Stuart Braun.


Open Letter

Prime Minister Boris Johnson

United Kingdom Presidency of the G7 Summit, 2021

Dear Prime Minister,

The global military: clock is ticking on fulfilling its responsibility in reaching net-zero

The world must cut global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by at least 50% by 2030 if we are to limit the global temperature rise to 1.5˚C – we have less than nine years.[1] While all aspects of human activity are required to urgently decarbonise, one sector remains out of view: the global military.

The global military is currently exempt from compulsory reporting of GHG emissions to the UN/IPCC. Some countries, including the USA, the UK and Germany, voluntarily report, but this is a bare-minimum disclosure as the IPCC template and codes have only a handful of items mentioning domestic military-related activities.

This means the public and policy makers are unable to obtain an accurate picture of the global military’s overall contribution to climate heating ― from its massive fossil fuel consumption both domestically and overseas to its military exercises and expeditions; from the impacts of conflict and war to GHG emissions arising from post-conflict reconstruction or nation re-building.[2]

As a result, the global military, a significant contributor to climate change over decades, continues to carry out its business as usual. Its emissions are estimated to be several percent of total global carbon emissions and are comparable with the carbon emissions of civilian aviation.[3] Military organizations’ efforts to use renewable energy for installations and achieve greater efficiencies in operations are a start, but as yet insufficient and do not address the root cause — namely, modern militaries are completely dependent on fossil fuels and are among the biggest institutional consumers of oil in the world, with no sign of realistic or practical net-zero plans to offset their carbon emissions.

Dr Hoesung Lee, Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and Dr Fatih Birol, Executive Director of the International Energy Agency[4] have said: “Decarbonising entire economies means tackling sectors where emissions are especially difficult to reduce, such as shipping, trucks, aviation, heavy industries like steel, cement and chemicals, and agriculture.”

The global military must be added to this list.

As part of climate change-related discussions in Cornwall and, critically, in advance of the UK hosting the COP26 UN Climate Conference in November, the time has come for the world’s leading military spending nations to acknowledge the deliberate omission of full compulsory military emissions reporting, the consequential knowledge gap, and the imperative for the world’s militaries to transform themselves and help the world reach net-zero.

The G7 countries (UK, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the USA) are all in the top 20 military spending nations.

To fully comply with the urgent need to reach net-zero, we call upon the G7 nations to support:

    1. AN IPCC TASK FORCE FOR DECARBONISATION OF MILITARIES AND MILITARY TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRIES. This task force should investigate the climate impact of the military/military technology sectors and devise proposals to address existing (and prevent further) damage. The task force should explore options and recommend solutions to fully decarbonise the world’s militaries and military technology industries without resorting to solutions that have other adverse environmental and social impacts (eg nuclear power and biofuels). Among these solutions should be proposals to transform military assets into climate-resilience hubs in vulnerable communities and countries, explore demilitarisation options, and enhance sustainable human security as defined by the United Nations.
    2. AN IPCC SPECIAL REPORT on the role of the global militaries and military technology industries in contributing to climate change, assessing existing and future social and environmental impacts and exploring response options.
    3. COMPULSORY SUBMISSIONS TO THE IPCC/UNFCCC OF FULL GHG MILITARY EMISSIONS REPORTING BY ALL NATIONS. Nations’ militaries, military industries, and attendant conflicts and wars must be included in their GHG emission reporting and carbon-reduction targets. This reporting must also include emissions incurred overseas, especially for nations with overseas bases. The Task Force on National GHG Inventories must look into how to incorporate these into the next Refinement to the IPCC Guidelines for National GHG Inventories.
    4. NATIONALLY DETERMINED CONTRIBUTIONS (NDCs): ALL COUNTRIES TO INCLUDE THEIR MILITARIES AND MILITARY TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRIES IN THEIR GHG EMISSION REDUCTION PLANS AND TARGETS, taking into account total carbon bootprints of their militaries and military technology industries. Governments and militaries to publish their plans to decarbonise to meet the net-zero goal: simple technical measures (e.g. solar panels on military bases or electric killer drones) are not adequate and cannot be substitutes for serious demilitarisation options.

Critical relationship to the SDGs

Calculating and addressing the carbon burden of conflict and war means acknowledging the impact of military activity on conflict-driven poverty and displacement. It also means addressing the untold billions of dollars in military spending that is spent unnecessarily — as a consequence of waste, fraud and abuse — on many nations’ military spending and which should now be part of all discussions concerning funding sources to plug the significant SDGs funding gap.

The eyes of the world are on the UK for this hugely important G7 meeting. The climate change related concerns of civil society must not be side-lined. In a climate-changed world that urgently needs to get to net-zero, this is yet one more challenging social and environmental justice issue for the G7 of 2021 which can no longer be swept under the carpet.

Yours sincerely,

Deborah Burton, Kevin McCullough

Co-Founders Tipping Point North South/Transform Defence Project

Supporting Signatories

Christine Allen Executive Director, CAFOD (UK/Int’l)
Amir Amirani Documentary Filmmaker (UK)
Nick Buxton Future Labs Co-ordinator, The Transnational Institute (Netherlands/Int’l)
Linsey Cottrell Environmental Policy Officer, The Conflict and Environment Observatory (UK/Europe)
Dr Neta C. Crawford Professor and Chair of the Department Political Science, Boston University and Co‑Director of the Costs of War Project. (USA)
Nick Dearden Director, Global Justice Now (UK)
Fiona Dove Executive Director, The Transnational Institute (Netherlands/Int’l)
Martin Drewry CEO Health Poverty Action (UK/Int’l)
Brian Eno Musician (UK)
Andrew Feinstein Author, former ANC MP, Executive Director Shadow World Investigations (UK/Int’l)
Pat Gaffney Vice President Pax Christi (UK)
Jeff Halper Author, Founder Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (Israel)
Dr Jason Hickel Senior Lecturer, Goldsmiths University of London; Visiting Senior Fellow, International Inequalities Institute at LSE (UK/Eswatini)
Charles Kenny Author, Economist (USA)
Dr Ho-Chih Lin Lead Researcher, Tipping Point North South / Transform Defence (UK)
Tamara Lorincz Author, PhD candidate in Global Governance at the Balsillie School for International Affairs (Canada)
Caroline Lucas Green Party MP (UK)
Priya Lukka Visiting Fellow Goldsmiths University of London, International Development Economist (UK)
Linda Melvern Author, Journalist (UK)
Pablo Navarrete Journalist, Documentary Filmmaker (UK/Chile)
Dr Benjamin Neimark Senior Lecturer at the Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University (UK)
Dr Stuart Parkinson Executive Director, Scientists for Global Responsibility (UK)
Dr. Samuel Perlo‑Freeman Research Coordinator, Campaign Against Arms Trade (UK)
Prof Paul Rogers
John Sauven Executive Director, Greenpeace UK
Andrew Simms Co-director New Weather Institute, Co-ordinator Rapid Transition Alliance (UK)
Fionna Smyth Head of Global Policy and Advocacy, Christian Aid (UK/Int’l)

References

[1] https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/

[2] Ho-Chih Lin and Deborah Burton, ‘Indefensible: The true cost of the global military to our climate and human security,’ Transform Defence, 2020, https://transformdefence.org/publication/indefensible/; Neta C. Crawford, “Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of War,” Costs of War Project, 2019, https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/papers/ClimateChangeandCostofWar; Oliver Belcher, Patrick Bigger, Ben Neimark, and Cara Kennelly, “Hidden Carbon Costs of the ‘everywhere war’: Logistics, Geopolitical Ecology, and the Carbon Boot-print of the US Military,” 2019, https://rgs-ibg.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tran.12319; Various reports by Stuart Parkinson and colleagues, Scientists for Global Responsibility, https://www.sgr.org.uk/projects/climate-change-military-main-outputs.

[3] Ho-Chih Lin and Deborah Burton, ‘Indefensible: The true cost of the global military to our climate and human security,’ Transform Defence, 2020, https://transformdefence.org/publication/indefensible/; Various reports by Stuart Parkinson and colleagues, Scientists for Global Responsibility, https://www.sgr.org.uk/projects/climate-change-military-main-outputs.

[4] https://www.ipcc.ch/2020/07/31/energy-climatechallenge/

TPNS new initiative launched with two new reports and a call to ‘Transform Defence’ on 5th anniversary of Paris Climate Agreement

TPNS new initiative launched with two new reports and a call to ‘Transform Defence’ on 5th anniversary of Paris Climate Agreement

Tipping Point North South has pulled together its various military spending strands under one new banner: Transform Defence for Sustainable Human Safety is a project comprising a number of elements including the Five Percent Proposal and the case that military spending is an urgent international development issue; the global military’s impact on climate change and human insecurity; the absence in UN processes of the global military’s emissions accounting; and its Green New Deal Plus.

Transform Defence for Sustainable Human Safety ​describes the paradigm shift we need for all defence, security​, foreign and international development​ policies​ in a climate changed, post-pandemic world. It challenges NGOs and policy-makers alike to undertake brave discussion about redefining and re-making foreign and defence policy.

The two reports detail the staggering cost of military spending to people and the planet.

The first report, Indefensible: The true cost of the global military to our climate and human security assesses the impact of the global military on climate change, human security and development. The second report Global military spending, sustainable human safety and value for money makes the case for modernising defence and security thinking and spending in order to effectively deal with the biggest threats to our collective safety: climate change and pandemic.[1]

Together, the reports argue that the US$1.9 trillion[2] spent globally each year on the world’s military delivers nothing to defend citizens facing these twin threats. Five years after the Paris Climate Conference, it is time to add the global military’s carbon footprint to the ‘net zero’ debate. The reports call for an assessment of the accountability, efficacy, relevance and value for money of our global military to the threats we face could not be more timely as lives and livelihoods worldwide are destroyed by a foreseen yet completely unaddressed ‘Tier 1’ security threat – pandemic.

For example, Indefensible: The true cost of the global military to our climate and human security estimates that if the world’s militaries were combined together as a single country, they would be the 29th biggest oil consumer in the world, just ahead of Belgium or South Africa. To put it another way, this is half the oil consumption of the world’s 5th biggest economy, the UK. Runaway global military spending enables the world’s militaries to remain the biggest institutional users of fossil fuels in the world and to be major driver for climate change. A carbon-neutral world demands we fully decarbonise our militaries.

“[This report] is an important addition to the growing evidence on the significant role of military emissions in causing climate change. Using a novel methodology, it widens the analysis to all the world’s militaries… it connects the dots between military fuel use, military spending, war, and the burden of climate change on development,” says Neta C. Crawford, Professor and Chair of Political Science Boston University and Co-Director of the Costs of War Project. “… it [also] offers important solutions. It is essential reading for all those concerned with climate change and the path to a sustainable and secure future.”

And as nations update their 2020 Nationally Determined Contributions,[3] the Transform Defence reports call for NGOs and policy-makers alike to undertake a practical, imaginative, brave discussion about redefining and re-making defence policy so it is truly fit-for-purpose and accords the same level of attention, urgency and resources to pandemic and climate change as is granted to conventional security threats.

“[TPNS’s] Global military spending, sustainable human safety and value for money report … demonstrates how deeply inadequate the concept of ‘national security’ is in light of the ongoing pandemic and the rapidly unfolding threats of climate change,” says Jen Maman, Senior Peace Adviser, Greenpeace International. “It asks what we can learn by looking at the policy and spending priorities of governments, and argues that, unquestioned and at our peril, governments are massively outspending on weaponry compared to the climate emergency or global health protection.’’

As we end this very difficult year and look ahead to 2021, we very much hope this new project can add value to the post-Covid recovery debate and in tandem with the discussions leading up to the Glasgow hosted COP in 2021, make the case that the time has come to transform defence for sustainable human security.

Twitter: @TransformDef

Facebook: facebook.com/transformdefence

Notes:

In 2016, total public expenditures on climate change (international and domestic) amounted to US$141 billion while global military expenditures was US$1.7 trillion.[4] On average, the expenditure of national governments on climate change amounted to 8.5% of what they spent on defence, a ratio of 12:1.[5] Since 2016, global military spending has gone up significantly.

Indefensible: The true cost of the global military to our climate and human security also estimates that the global military and defence industry combined accounts for at least 1% of total global greenhouse gas emissions. This is larger than the annual greenhouse gas emissions of the entire country of Italy and not much smaller than the total GHG emissions of the UK and France respectively.

For comparison, international civil aviation is responsible for around 1.3% of global GHG emissions and is a climate change focus of public and political attention. Meanwhile, the global military-industrial complex accounts for a similar  amount of greenhouse gas emissions as civil aviation but it receives no such scrutiny.

Global military spending, sustainable human safety and value for money report uses the F35 fighter jet as a case study to illustrate this imbalance. Had the US$2 trillion estimated global total lifetime cost of F-35 programme been applied to the activities/areas/agencies below this is what the global community would be receiving instead:

  • Climate finance for 20 years
  • UN disaster response for the next 400 years
  • UN disaster risk reduction for the next 4,000 years
  • Global biodiversity conservation at US$100bn per annum for the next 20 years
  • WHO at US$2bn per annum for the next 1,000 years
  • WHO’s COVID-19 Solidarity Response Fund for 2,963 years
  • Global pandemic surveillance and control at US$8bn per annum for the next 250 years
  • UN peacekeeping operations at current US$5bn per annum for the next 444 years
  • UN peacekeeping at US$15bn per annum for the next 133 years

References

[1] Both reports build on major work published earlier: the USA Pentagon emissions report “Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of War,” by Professor Neta Crawford of the Costs of War Project; UK military emissions “The Environmental Impacts of the UK Military Sector,” by Dr. Stuart Parkinson, Scientists for Global Responsibility; and “Hidden Carbon Costs of the ‘everywhere war’: Logistics, Geopolitical Ecology, and the Carbon Boot-print of the US Military,” by Oliver Belcher, Patrick Bigger, Ben Neimark, and Cara Kennelly.

[2] Trends In World Military Expenditure, 2019, SIPRI. https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2020-04/fs_2020_04_milex_0.pdf

[3] See https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement/nationally-determined-contributions-ndcs

[4] https://climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/2017-Global-Landscape-of-Climate-Finance.pdf

[5] https://www.oxfordresearchgroup.org.uk/a-tale-of-two-puzzles-accounting-for-military-and-climate-change-expenditures

Dr Strangelove warned the oil industry about global warming 60 years ago

Four others joined Dunlop at the podium that day, one of whom had made the journey from California – and Hungary before that. The nuclear weapons physicist Edward Teller had, by 1959, become ostracized by the scientific community for betraying his colleague J. Robert Oppenheimer, but he retained the embrace of industry and government. Teller’s task that November fourth was to address the crowd on “energy patterns of the future,” and his words carried an unexpected warning:

Ladies and gentlemen, I am to talk to you about energy in the future. I will start by telling you why I believe that the energy resources of the past must be supplemented. First of all, these energy resources will run short as we use more and more of the fossil fuels. But I would […] like to mention another reason why we probably have to look for additional fuel supplies. And this, strangely, is the question of contaminating the atmosphere. [….] Whenever you burn conventional fuel, you create carbon dioxide. [….] The carbon dioxide is invisible, it is transparent, you can’t smell it, it is not dangerous to health, so why should one worry about it?

Carbon dioxide has a strange property. It transmits visible light but it absorbs the infrared radiation which is emitted from the earth. Its presence in the atmosphere causes a greenhouse effect [….] It has been calculated that a temperature rise corresponding to a 10 per cent increase in carbon dioxide will be sufficient to melt the icecap and submerge New York. All the coastal cities would be covered, and since a considerable percentage of the human race lives in coastal regions, I think that this chemical contamination is more serious than most people tend to believe.

Continue reading

Look back, not forward, to connect with conservatives

The scientists theorize that “future framing” may contribute to conservative cynicism, especially “when year after year, we don’t seem to get that close to death,” Baldwin said. “Conservatives might become rather skeptical of the science that led us to the conclusion that we are in trouble. Perhaps focusing on the possible negative future doesn’t drive home the fact that our Earth really has changed a lot.”

This strategy might also counter the argument often invoked by conservatives that today’s global warming is just another example of natural climate variations that have occurred historically. …

In one of the study’s experiments, “We show people pictures of environmental change — for example, an image of a lake full of water, right next to an image of that same lake totally dried up,” he said. “Conservatives really respond to these images of drastic change from the more ‘perfect’ past. I can imagine doing something similar with extreme weather events as the focus. Following a large hurricane, for example, we could focus on how the planet in the past did not experience such events, and then create a contrast by saying something like, ‘Shouldn’t we work hard to return to a state of the planet where we don’t have to experience them anymore?’

Continue reading