Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
welcome to the educational form
this program is brought to you by the Massachusetts school of law at Andover
here at the Massachusetts School of Law we held a conference to discuss some of the issues
facing our world in regard to global climate change
on this show we discuss the threats to national security
our panelists are
doctor John ackerman doctor ackerman is the research course director for the air command
and staff college department distance learning at maxwell air force base in alabama
prior to his appointment as director he was director of conferences and publications in
the deputy chairman of the department of international and
on national security studies
his research efforts of include exploration into the relationships between sustainability
and security
the international relations implications of global climate change
and the national security ramifications of global warming
The genesis of this effort came from review of our country quadrennial defense reviesw. Many of you
probably are know you would think that each
every four years
the governments asks the department of defense to produce a strategic planning document called
quadrennial defense review
and in the quadrennial defense review, I'll call it the QDR
what we're supposed to look for
five ten fifteen years and
try to determine what those threats will be to our national security
and what capabilities and planning must accomplish in order to protect our national security
interests
and so
%uh the QDR that recently came out the most recent one came out in two thousand six
and it had certain planning
of framework set I found work
potentially very
%uh it's significant in analyzing how climate change going to threaten our national security
and that was it that model that I use for my analysis
of climate change hands to see if that frame of was
applicable
and then what would we do if we had to design
I like what bring you a defense review that was focused primarily on climate change
now I'm going to give you a short review of what the QDR looks like what the
basic framework
and what the chapters that look like
and then I'll
on a tie that in its show you what a QDR would look like if it was based on climate
change
in order to do that I'll
extent it beyond operationalizing strategy as they put it in the document
on how climate change could be used to motivate and also to plan
%uh in case we have to %uh addresses
from manassas security standpoint
and then beyond that I will height
the national security strategy in two what what what I call a sustainable security strategy
for the future
that's probably where the focus of the department of defense for at least these last eight years
has been on terrorism
and we're very focused in on certain types of
Islamic terrorists
the more I did %uh extremist versions
and that has been and where most of the planning a most of the activity
has been in the department of defense
in order to meet this %uh
new threat we've had two we reorient how we do business and we've had two
make changes in the way we planned
and we've also had to change some of our capabilities and the way that we are prepare for the future
because this is up very much an asymetric threat
it runs counter to what we had been fighting for in the past
for instance was very focused on conventional threats
uh force on force operations
and now so we've had to onto a lot of soul-searching
and we thought had run it took quite a few problems and on the current planning in Iraq and
the counterinsurgency operations that are occurring there
are the result of a lot that soul-searching
it's not as though the department of defense hasn't encountered these types of threats before but
we don't do a very good job
%uh well
of remembering our history of times and looking back and seeing how we fought these types of
threats before
now we've had to recreate the will
we design our strategy for counterinsurgency
before I get started
these views are my views, they do not represent the views of the department of defense as a united states
air force I want to make sure that you understand that
but this is how I think not necessarily how the department of
defense thinks
though of
we have been trying to focus on that irregular type of war fare for now and
%uh the
strategy they're looking for is building partnerships with a lot of our allies around the the %uh
the world have done a very good job of that in the past few years
one of those ways of building partnerships is the capability we want to build up call
strategic communication and
I mean if you would probably call the propaganda
but it's a propaganda with the positive that it's propaganda that makes
people where of the things that the united states does
in a positive sense and deposits things are out there trying to accomplish
all in the past we've made mistakes and we have on used propaganda in negative ways
and we've been caught
doing that and %uh chastised for it
well hopefully in the future we can prevent those things from occurring again
but that that strategic communications that we look for strive to
let our friends our allies also adversaries understand that %uh
try to represent democracy as best we can a free society
and the freedoms that we enjoy we would like to other nations to enjoy to
and hopefully in the future we can do a better job of projecting that image
and building those partnerships with our allies
and one of the other
things that we found we were very weak it was a gathering intelligence
and we went into the Iraq war with a clear misunderstanding of what we're confronting
and therefore we had a lot of setbacks we did not understand the culture of Iraqi society
we did not understand the subcultures within Iraqi society
and it's cost us dearly in both political treasure over that time that we were there
and we continue to suffer from that problem and we still have those difficulties in Afghanistan
and around the world not understanding the cultures that we're dealing with
and so therefore it makes it of much more difficult to gather intelligence information
so that we can
accomplish our missions as as carefully and as bloodlessly as possible so
intelligence was one of those areas that we had to to improve upon in which we are still working on
within the QDR they identify force
primary priorities the defense strategies that we have to accomplish of course
defend
against those terrorist networks because
the the main threat of those tears that words is that one of those groups will acquire a
weapon of mass destruction of some form whether biological nuclear
chemical
and use that weapon against the united states on the homeland and so
that is a a serious focal point that we about
expanding our capabilities
%uh gathered intelligence and also working
more with the department of homeland security
and so the QDR trying to
find out how we can work better with other agencies around
%uh and within the united states and other agencies outside the united states it they
non-governmental or governmental
they idea that we could shape the choices of our allies and our enemies it's been around
for awhile and it was part of the
strategic strategies that were implemented time that Clinton administration and before
but the
approach that we use to shape those strategies has changed somewhat
and has %uh at first was
more confrontational
and now hope we're working for more a collaborative approach
well we work with these
allies and also worked to shape their choices
and also will work to shake choices of those nations that may not
%um
%uh in
may not they agree with us in how of they see the future or
what our strategic interests are
and finally I I I touched upon the WMD and how important it is that we prevent
someone hostile from us acquiring a weapon of mass destruction because
the %uh the effects of that
upon the united states homeland and
my past career I was in an intercontinental ballistic missiles operation
and %uh
my job was to retaliate against the russians in case that they attack the united states
and
the
power and impact of a nuclear weapon
cannot be underestimated
so again the threat now had been identified terrorism and the focal points were
and continue to be Afghanistan and Iraq
but we also have to worry about states out there that are struggling to maintain the
basic
necessities of life for their citizens and the states that we call
week of failing states and there are a number of them out there that were very much worried
about
and we have
%uh a lot of efforts going on
to help those states
and has been a focal point of the QDR
how do you keep both states from failing how do you
keep those %uh nations
%uh from %uh abusing their population to the point where they might attempt to overthrow
the government
or are there
occasions where the government does need to be replaced
and how do you do that in an effective way
that suits the needs of the population there so
lot about lot of work needs to be outdone
now the term the long war has lost a lot of its resonance
my personal opinion of the term the long war was it was a sales point
it was the sales point for a lot of people who thought that the department of defense
and defense industry
needed something to replace communism the the big red threat
so we needed another new threat out there in the long war serve that purpose
keep people thinking that we should focus on spending more more money on our department
of defense and I'm not one of those
who believe that we're giving as much
from our department of defense says we should be
and I think it is one of the most all
bureaucratically bundled up
it is one of the most inefficient and also
one of those organizations that are ripe for improvements an opportunity for us to
do better
and so %uh
the long war I think was a propaganda tool to get to focus on
the fact that you might have to spend more more money on your
it's a tragic and reality
we walked spending that money very efficiently and we continue to not in a very efficient
so we can do better than and
not one of those lessons learned of those are a lot of opportunities for us
the would indicate yard there were four
planning parameters that the on
people who are
trapped in this document identify and the a
has specific categories it and the idea was to
to go where we are within these different challenges and
what do we need to be
under traditional press
%uh you probably can
I imagine what that would be like a confrontation for some force a conventional
type of activity of something probably similar to what happened in close to vote
or perhaps
%uh this scenario so we always worried about the most of was the Soviet union
busting through the fall the captain a germany and attacking the nato forces
so the commission attack on tanker aircraft lot of pressure punch it back up
%uh of us to take down
and that was the category that we prepare the most for the past
under regular unconventional methods that's what we're encountering today
also called a symmetrical affairs where you have a powerful
very traditionally focused force that goes up against a very unconventional force
and they used unconventional methods in order to fight against that forced and they don't
go head to take the don't go toe to toe and they do not try to
%uh to %uh have
%um
confrontations where they don't have the opportunity to hit-and-run so
well we see a lot of purring
and we if we focus our strategy toward of that counterinsurgency guerrilla warfare strategy
and
but having some success in Iraq but there's still a lot of work to be done
disrupted threats that's where we
the potential for that enemies of the united states require some sort of a you detect a
logical or biological chemical
something that
runs counter to our tracks trends
and using that to disrupt our society or disrupt our economy
so there's a lot of things that cup
back of fall into that category and find a catastrophic threat
you can see where that get the the out a possibility that
causing catch up
then she has faced a
of planners have to
have to prepare for that
planners and for the President I said
made up this way
and they of that step pretty well well we're going to stand
our defeat adversary prevent up
but this of mass destruction from had folded hands of
of people do not like us
and finally shaping their choices so
they think that pretty well but that was the weaknesses that were identified
and they worked out this what we're for
very much capable of doing the traditional type of up
of complications but we were very weak in the regular disrupted the catastrophic areas
so we knew we had a lot of work to do
and that work continues
but how would this plan a model work if we were to look at one particular threat that
has as you've heard from a lot of the speakers today
they've brought in global hype about
of challenge
I did with
the a treaty are I took it and I applied it against climate change and
in order to encompass a new national security strategy I call a sustainable security and
i'll explain what that means in just a second
but the out
focal point now become climate change and
again there are a lot of characteristics of climate change that we don't understand a
lot of those characteristics as a possibility for abrupt change
and that's something that we have to worry about and out
work that into
the discussion in just a second
in order to do that we have to change the way the DOD is focused behalf of of change
the way our forces are lying
how we what capabilities we have
and so would what we have to %uh emphasize well DOD as I've mention before needs to be
reformed are a lot of weaknesses and the way that we acquired things the way that we buy
things
and the way that we maintain things
so we'll have to reform the way we do business
and also
well with that focus on a regular fare have to continue but it has to change is focused
also
and i'll explain that minute
and finally strategic communication I think is important because we have to get out a
new message
and that's the said explains that united states is here to help nations prepare for climate
change
what helped to
at help you adapt a climate change or in this case of us have
%uh a %uh of massive storm or famine or something like that to combat climate change we're here
to help you deal with that
so that that will somewhere that in just a minute
and finally
%uh we have to change the focus from the war on terror which I thought was not
a very %uh descriptive way to describe what we're trying to do
to I don't use a stable security strategy a strategy that
puts us in a position to help our friends and allies and also
to up improve our image around the world
where would you
the threats that climate change can create where with those impact fall all that frame
work that I've mentioned before
for example the traditional threats well
larry I thought well we're pretty good heading for a droughts and floods that the way this
not as good as it could be that's kind of a traditional friendly house districts that
as for irregular threats at the ocean a certification that you heard about earlier
that's kind of irregular bank could be very disruptive
also if we have a massive famine do to find a change or we have the disease outbreaks
things like that
environmental refugees are going to be in a regular threat that we would have to deal
with them or not
well prepared for that
and something that was discussed too much today was to injure and that's that attempt
to fix our climate
and the weather modifications that were mentioned early before
maybe
may fall into those and on a massive scale for example seeing the ocean with a up huge
quantities of Iran so that
I don't think it will bloom so that they will consume massive quantities of carbon dioxide
might be one of those things that
somebody might convince world leaders is a good idea
another example might be
watching
huge quantities of of soul food particles into the atmosphere to help blocked the sun
another one is building giant
shadegg up in the atmosphere to to block sunlight from entering the atmosphere
where these will fall out in the future how these will play I don't know but I do know
that people do not understand all of the secondary tertiary effects of
of the seat
the socks that you engineering
%uh ideas so I think it would be very much in a regular threat to the united states
I just wrote the threat
and these are large massive scale famine fresh water scarcity and pandemics
no this type of things that while we have some success
and maybe countrywide or regional ida answers to these
right now we we don't do very well these things occur on a massive scale
or if they of for and multiple areas at the same time
and at that
%uh you know a pandemic in one area of war famine and other Al same time
and finally
the catastrophic angle
melting of the eyes up
caps of both love doctor can antarctic
well of several states failing at the same time
and mass extinctions up
that intricacies of our planet are well understood of powell much is supplied to us by
those different ecosystems out there we understand a little bit about how the assistant retire
they're a little bit about how
they too are trying to water and how they provide a lot of that national capital that
we did rely upon
but we're currently in a situation where consuming more that national capital that has produced
the producer
so we have some problems that that we have to worry about
and if we lose out of a large population of of certain species what will that do to those
ecosystem services I don't think we understand that
and by this energy is two things
all those many together to create the perfect storm very dangerous
so this is how a plot out on the committee are snapped
and in this area of multitude of these things happen at the same time
well we prepare for that
if we have a state failure if we have a fan and a pandemic
%uh a drought in the houston of western party I states of all these happen at the same time
we are prepared
we don't know what to do we don't know how to deal with it we don't have the force is
capable of dealing with that
well is what you need to do fifty five defense department is be reshaped we got out
though forces capable of of responded all these
and we have ten unit yet after not only within the department says but also with the other
departments that belong to the united states government
we did find it and so
%uh environmental issues of all often taking a back seat they are not of priorities that
they're not well understood and they're not one investigated
%uh the focal point of the department has been in the past on
pollution of prevention of pollution because there's regulations against it we don't want
to get arrested
or based clean up after we dumped out
%uh %uh different things into the water of columns and things like that so
we haven't done a very good job and continue to
%uh avoid some of our responsibilities about the only area of success that we can brag
the pot
is that some of these range is out there where the department that zones large areas of land
they are actually
biological islands out there of of
fraud diversity and they're fairly well protected and hopefully in the future we can do a better
job protecting them but
they are some of the only areas of the united states that you might find a huge
and robust degree of biological diversity so the range is
do you have some %uh benefits but again they still are not as well protected as they should
be drops out
as as we do a better job
%uh is part of a fanciful we've got to learn how to create sustainable markets and one
of those issues within a sustainable market his equity
we have to figure out how to do a better job of
not increasing income inequality when we do things
and when we go into of help other countries things
one of things we often forget about is that a lot of the problems within these countries
is caused by the large
%uh difference in income in inequality especially in Latin America and Africa nations like that
there are small release of control huge parties of the wealth of those
and we have in the past have very little to address those issues
and so that causes a lot of problems we go ahead
try to help them with a conflict and we leave and is the underlying conditions are still
there I would never addressed
can't go out
one of the areas we've been pushing heavily and part of our national security strategy
for the last oh ten fifteen years since the fall of the Soviet union
has been to spread democracy because there's the result they're within the political side
world
that says that nations that become democratic don't fight each other and that's probably
one of the strongest series of the political science is a democratic peace there is
is that it's democratic nations have too much in common that too much norms and values they
share and I'm not going to fight each other
so the idea was well we make more nations democratic will have more peace
and the world
get along with each other a lot better because will share of those are the values
well
we tried that in Iraq at the point of a gun that didn't work out too well so now we have
to learn to do a little bit better without using the point of a gun
and so %uh
let's bring in democracy has to become something we learn how to do it a peaceful manner
but be the that forces of the department defense could help out because you have to have security
is it that way before you can have democracy
they and finally up
international organisations
we've been working against them in the past not utilizing their strengths
and and I think we could do a lot better if there's a lot of organizations out there had
expertise that the department this doesn't happen
and could you tell us
and that those relationships build
of social political environment security so we've got to do a better job of of of doing
that
and so we did a part of that we got locked up to to we waste and connected to a tune
that's unbelievable
we've got a huge budget over six hundred billion dollars
and a lot of times we don't know where the money's going
if you ask the department that's right now
to tell you that they can balance the budget they can
they they cannot tell you where a lot of the money is gone
a recent GAO study found that about forty percent of the large ticket programs
acquisitions program
over budget
not by a few million dollars about billions of dollars we are not spending your tax dollars
very well
and we could do a lot better
and so to do that we got it right in our research and development we got quite a while the past
and
well we've got to find ways to use renewables better and that the parties to a pretty good
job there
%uh the air force particulars by and about that forty percent of the renewable energy
that the entire government buys
we've got to a solar power plants out in the west that we got when
and and the west and where of building more facilities with solar power on top of them
and look at other ways to his renewable so we're doing okay but not great
we don't understand what great of the cradle means in the air force or in the in that part
of the fence is a new concept that day
we have no idea what it means
if we phrase this out
that you would have thought tanker set about to go off line nobody has an idea what that
did go to do it and they're going to take 'em out to the desert of Arizona and those
that they're and maybe they'll consumed part of them for
for spare parts but the the most of the taxes to sit there
why don't we have a process where we take that tanker back Boeing owns it now after
we're done with that and Boeing
I have to take it apart music
nobody
thinks about the stuff like that so we do you think about that
also within our defense were the largest producer of greenhouse gases within the government
so we need a cap and trade or when you tax
the most efficient
and at times to tell you this is attacks
nobody's talking about a tax out there on the political scene but it is the most efficient
at that
my proposal would be that you tax the base commander
at base commanders come almost like a dictator base commander can do just about anything
they want on that case
all you have to sign a piece of paper
and if you want you to come in to work at six o'clock you come into work at six o'clock
if you want to stop driving your car he can stop you from driving a car
he owns the place where she owns the place
so a base commander to set up a tax lawyer
the base commander to be taxed
where he get certain sentence
and the for every up
%uh amount of greenhouse gas he refuses on his buttocks
and there's ways to measure that there's a software out there that you confirm exactly
how much
greenhouse gases be produced on your case
%uh %uh a base commander be a perfect person just test that out
we could test new technologies new month
now if this new processes and policies on these bases to see what works
and then applied to the general public
and finally out
we do a lot of polluting %uh if we were taxed on that or if we were of force to
a counselor better they would stop doing it
against those areas where
people have to use the excuse that in the name of national security week
shouldn't have to do this so we should have to do that
the sea argument of well if it's a national security what are you protecting if you're
putting it orchard and egypt
so finally we have set the example that the of the has a huge opportunity we have a lot
of control over what we do how we do it what we stand for
how we spend it but
we're not taking that a charge on right now
and so the forcible force has to be reconfigured and we got to get those out sustainable security
skills in up
we've got to get into the information age has is a lot of technology
all day today people mentioned different web sites that you could go to to help you out
does it I think that we have to have
more information technology
well one thing they didn't mention what was it two ways that are have been recognize that
way to
but our climate change adaptation of mitigation
I think those are two strategies that we can design or plan surrounding the department
of finance
an occasion is that
accepting that there's some things that we're probably not going to build six
and mitigation is there some things that maybe we can minimize the impact of
and so if we could find a way around those things but outpatient mitigation
I think there should be a focal point in the department that
so right now process
tops
he weighs flooding
with me to react to those were pretty good shape we can have a month
the majority those if they if they don't happen to too often
we're not very good at helping overseas but I think we can do better and it from confederate
forces promptly we can help those nations pair
and be ready for that
so for example going to a country like contours of these we prepare them for
on top of the songs that might arise
we helped in the capital the mitigating damage
then we said a better image for ourselves and this country's realize we're there to
help them and we're not there to
%uh to %uh destroy the country or not there to take over the country
the united states improves their image abroad
this was a difficult one because of what the science is still behind
well
what will happen all the tortures sector effects we don't know about
and it's refugees are very very difficult
to control
%uh it's one of those areas so that we will play a huge role as primarily with the refugees
and we've got to do a better job of dealing with those
and of there's a lot of nations out there that
have of pretty good understanding of how to do peacekeeping to peacemaking
within with refugees candidate particular
we have a lot to learn from how they do their business and I think because the
we can learn a lot from them
and the first war security pandemics %uh
again the it
potential for these two happened concurrently of for a and a variety of places around the
world is huge
and of we've got a fine
how to how to deal with these on a large scale
you know it was just a few outbreak in united states was a lot of stress on our health system
what would happen if you have a few throughout break into the three countries
on a massive scale
well we prepare for that now
could we
we can mobilize and said hospitals around the world right now
on a small scale
but could be mobilizes soon
large scale operations
two different countries
on a on a board massive scale
we could if we won it in
the finest a failure in extensions and the ice caps
%um
preparation for those the %uh
has to be long term it is planning
we have to be all
hi missus of what it takes for state to fail
one of the pressures that causes it to fail
and then how do you recall stick to it that state
and we've got new doctrine out stability operations not true that just got produced from the Iraq
war
that looks at how do you resist abolition a new government in the country
that did not have a government that was functioning
and and that's a difficult process and and people say oh I tell you he's going to be
a at some elections and yeah I
jet the economy not to go
well Iraq proves it's a lot harder than that
and the problem with Iraq right now is that while we have a
a massive success on the military side
the political success is lagging behind and we're not making progress in that area and
until we make progress on the political side
there will be no stability and security in Iraq
you have to have both
afghanistan's parliament to a problem right now
and far that problem is because that
military sites not being able to cope with those of political problems
corruption
the lack of control of of regions
the poppy trade
all these areas in all these areas we don't understand the implications of cultural significance
and we have to do better at that
%uh may be second on the floor of things that we have to do great that sustainable security
of understand how democracy works working better with international organizations
and one of the things that happen in this time slot is the power of free markets to
help us
well a market that when I say free markets on a market that goes wild it does whatever
it was
the free market that has regulations an oversight
but also a market that's the minutes innovation
and technologies new technology that can help us in I think there's a lot of opportunity
there
and the for organizations that would work with
within this up page you'll see that hi
I broke out
the have with a sustainable security there's a common paradigm call the three he said
economics of our men and equity
and wrong that type of concept to include
environmental security
at social and acting environmental Justice
the outcomes about ecological economics
so I applied out a little bit thinner a feisty these two that we can understand better and
apply them to defer agencies organizations that work with us in the department fence
improve our capabilities
and finally the democratic peace there is based on three pair types of democracy international
organizations
and free markets
well you make all of those six things together
that would equate to what I think would be a strong argument for sustainable security
and at this and with how it worked
of depicted a graphically
and up
I think that a sustainable security is something that we need to be working toward
as opposed to of regime change or preemptive strikes or any other type of doctor that you've
heard about in the past
I think work
there's some
movement within the department offense but I don't know how far how long
%uh where it's at right now
doctor to make you
is professor of political science at the university of north Carolina at chapel hill
his research and teaching focus on their national politics especially the politics of international
economic relations
the influence of economic forces on US foreign policy
in the micro structure
of foreign policy decision making
he was cloaked in fear of the March two thousand seven conference on the national security
implications
of global climate change held in chapel hill north Carolina
good afternoon
it's good to be here
the the conference heard a lot of interesting things
I'm going to speak first about the social impacts
of climate change and in particular the comparative social impacts
%uh from a national security standpoint
were of course concerned about
damaging absolute sense that our nation might suffer or additional threats that might have
to face
from a national security standpoint were also used to the fact
then a lot of
how would you analyze threats
it's on a comparative basis
we're particularly concerned not merely that we suffer some kind of
damage that that perhaps be suffer much more damage
than someone else
and if that were to occur we would be and the relatively weaker position compared to
those nations
that Iran is heavily damaged as we are so it's
hardly
the consideration of this standard
impacts in the absolute sense but there's also
%uh a comparative element to it that we need to talk about
the third thing I want to talk about is essentially
how US national security planners
have assessed the threat
of climate change what they thought
it brings us
in national security terms in this kind of language
and the kind of concept that you use
to understand the security impacts
of climate change
and the final topic that we should talk about this Monday night and originally planned to
cover
given what's been said
today I think we need to spend a little time on and that is
what I call the information processing pathologies
decision-making regarding
%uh climate change and climate change and national security in particular up
there's basically street pass it because in effect
in terms of security that we can talk about
first the linkage between climate change
and how were shortfall
we haven't spent any time talking about that today and I think
that's probably
for the best because detect concerned it's relatively remote from the policy questions
that you or I could face
but there are of course people
in the military to do worry about this and think about it a lot and some of these
I I think are accessible to the public for example the melting of the
arctic ice cap would drastically affected nature of naval warfare particularly
naval warfare in northern waters
between Russia and other countries for example
there are other impacts the conduit for example the melting of permafrost
the changes in person dictation rainfall
the dates of first frost all those have
fairly obvious and fairly strong operational three impacts
secondly and this is something that you just heard a fair amount about
climate change the facts
the non-combat operations
that the department of defense and other
government agencies engagement and some of those
non combat operations are attempts to mitigate it and others are attempts
to adapt to it
finally and this is the one I'm going to spend the most time on
I want to talk of climate change needs to societal changes
and how those societal changes and heard
the security environment
that the united states faces
so
having mentioned the first in the second they are just that
going to gracefully big way
and now we're going to concentrate on the third
we've talked a lot about what climate change brings in terms of the the by a physical and
pacs and I'm going to restrain these rather quickly because
many of these for items that we've ever talked about
hi
typhoons hurricanes think loans
higher average temperature levels
Harry average precipitation levels in some places
sailing intrusion into areas that were
formerly fresh water if you're wearing
what I want to spend more time thinking about
kinds of variables mediate between those by a physical changes
and the social dislocation
that come through climate change
one thing we already know
and it's parent from events such as katrina for example
the impacts of abrupt climate change
the cans critically
on the population density in the area of the suffering change
if you have
very large
and from medical whether it ends or other large
change is due to changes in climate if things happening in under unpopulated area
they may create a lot of by a physical damage but their social impacts are going to be relatively
modest
secondly the impact is also needed all right
probably in is being used
particularly way and that's
in flood-prone areas that might be affected by storm surge replied
access precipitation
thirdly it's affected of course by things like preparations for floods
of what kinds of
congratulations plans you have what kind of like these you have
more generally what
are the institutional capacities
governmental organizations
the deal with this location
that climate change might bring
we tend to think that there is no actually in terms of
feel are like response is having to do with
emergency disaster relief and getting trailers up for people
fleeing hurricanes and of course that's all
but there is a large part of it
that if we have rallied large population movements
of the size that we haven't seen
in this country probably since the nineteen thirties
the whole host of other governmental institutions are going to be engaged by this
and their services are going to be required
and frankly we're not
at the point where we're ready to really talk about that as a society
climate change will probably bring economic dislocation and it will probably bring
a certain degree of economic decline
if current economic arrangements were disrupted
it almost certainly will result in declining economic activity
toby refugees created by
economic collapse over and above what they're for consequences stand
from a direct response to whether employment
public health has been mentioned the debt
in general we can expect public health to teach your ear eight
as climate change becomes more pronounced
novel diseases that here or and perhaps not an awful but they're novel and
the geographic location where they appear
there might be combinations of
public health threats that we've not had to deal with before
we're not probably well prepared to deal with all of those we probably can anticipate meaning
of this
there probably will be large still population movements of the size that we haven't seen
in some time
coastal areas are when harvey is candidate for that as people
phooey to safer
higher land
higher ground
but other areas to can suffer from this I think one of the problems with
the popular conception of climate change is set
it tends to concentrate too much on the coasts in a sense
and it neglects the fact that a lot of serious sin tax serious social impacts
will occur in line and
that's certainly the case in the united states it's also the case in many other countries
that will mention in a minute
governments are going to be taxed by climate change
they're going to have to adapt
in many different ways and means different dimensions
practically simultaneously
and
if you look at for example debates within the united states were now going through an
election
there's an unusually
large amount of public discussion of public issues
but just think
of all of the discussions
within the presidential campaign that you've heard it
or of Senator rio or congressional campaigns that you've heard
how much of that discussion
has been about climate change
and of that discussion about climate change
how much of it has been about have to respond to it
and how to prepare for it
maybe if I get a biased sample living in north Carolina
but I've heard almost nothing about the first
and nothing at all about the second
and if we can't as society
have a discussion about this
at a relatively calm moment
before we really have to wrestle with these impacts
we will sooner or later have to respond to them as best we can
I would seem to me to be more intelligent
to have the prepared response
then and unprepared for sports
some of the suffering mentioned the economic dislocation and decline the population movements
distrust in government services here and we can't force
which is what we may call could treat it like defense
sudden very spectacular very disastrous
storms
other kinds of relatively accused impacts
that tax
the capacity of existing social systems not just government the non-governmental as well
to respond to those
there is a scheduling problem here of course and that is has
the effects of climate change become more pronounced
the probability of more of these events
case to increase
and that also implies that
the simultaneous the students begins to become
a serious possibility
to the extent that
the united states or other countries
have preparations for disasters
those preparations and the resources that are devoted to them are typically size
so it's a candle maybe one or two relatively large
disasters at the time
if they had to handle five or six or nine or ten
pretty obvious that they would be able to cope with that and that
the response but probably be inadequate in most cases
well when you do now
his talk a little bit about how the situation plays out differently in different parts of
the world
I'm the comparisons and enough to give you are
just from one study and it's certainly not an authoritative study
and
chart probably in parts of false sense of certainty about these impacts and I guess
I should say at the outset that that's not the way you should read it
%uh this is one reasonably intelligent assessment
but it's hardly the only one that you could generate and different people generate assessments
like this
the come up with a very different conclusions
so I'm not
offering this to you as gospel but
rather it's sort of it
but school to get you thinking about the fact that
we not only care about climate change
in some parts of that's ourselves or the global system
we also care about climate change because it creates
differential strategic advantage is
and different a strategic decision it teaches
rational
security plan you're sitting in the country
will take note of that and make their plans accordingly
the start with Russia
%uh these impacts or forty two of the three dimensions
the coastal impact
the implant impact and finally impact on
care and public health
Russia is assigned a medium impact category because
but the close Clinton and impacts are thought to be
sort of me doing
%uh the health impact is generally huge as less in Russia than it is in a lot of other
places
so it's
it comes through this particular assessment looking not great but okay compared to some
other situations
China is a little bit more pronounced of those the disaster generated this
also could at this as a medium impact country
you know the coastal impact in China is greater
%uh which
isn't much of a surprise given the importance of
Chinese coast and the amount of population that was on that list
%uh the in manufactured you just less of a problem
the public health impacts argue this crater
park police that's not that partly that's because
although the weather isn't necessarily going to be a very much different
the kind of public health system in the past to cope with it
is different
and the the ancestors to
generated this assessment thought that
the Russian public health system would probably better who with
the impact that Russia will face then that comparable Chinese system
will cope with the impact
the China things
germany I think because it's a western European countries high the debt fell out
it's an important US ally
and it also suffers from some pretty secure
climate change and tax
but also in Pakistan great the baltic the area countries in this model
typically don't have really pronounce negative postpone impact
the indians in packs in germany were thought to be extreme
primarily because of the fact that one person petition and
and snow falling snow pack
finally germany has a very good public health system so the health impacts
first up to the bottom
purcell
it's an example of one of the powerful new
industrialized countries are sometimes called the the brick countries if you like that terminology
which stands for
brazil Russia India China
China and Russia are already represented I thought it would be brizill to sort of round
out the set
results
counted as a high impact country
and again that's not
just because of the climate and whether it would experience
that because
it's public health system is really
not well equipped to cope
with the sin city and threats
and the deterioration public health
in a country like brazil
if it had the same level of of public health to pass the business now
but probably be pretty substantial
the US saying missus keen is coded
but having extreme impact
they're hundred seventy nine countries the terrain in this particular situation
the US and he comes out at one seventy four
there are five worse
porcelain tax are high that probably isn't very surprising to see she think in terms
of
coastal storms in particular hurricanes
in mind in packs
are actually works in this particular simulation
because the fact of
drought and flooding on the demands of the united states would be quite severe in fact
we're already seeing some evidence
that this is happening
already if you think back to the floods that occurred
in the midwest in in nineteen eighty three
and last year
if you think about the extent of forest fires
last year and Indian years previous to that and how
united it returned
the stanley increasing
we have a more intuitive sense of what the reading on that dimension is so extreme
finally health impacts a role to the floor because the united states again compared to
a country like personal
has a relatively good
health care system had we all know
from our personal experience is of the essence serious deficiencies
but again this is a relative
and not been absolutely rating
howell this all this translate into conflict it's important to remember
the just because people are impoverished
and miserable
and and
driven from their homes
that by itself does not necessarily generate
but noticeable political impact
the history of family was a is an unfortunate
%uh or rather unhappy simple as that
the world has seen lots of fans
and at least instead
eighteenth century we have a reasonably good
historical record of what happens in families
lots of bad things happen in families but one thing that often does not happen the people
expect
but which does not occur
his large-scale political violence
political revolution
we tend to think that that kind of extreme deprivation might view so she did
with either one of those out times
but those are actually fairly uncommon
as products of famine
there are other population affects those that do lead to conflict and it's those kinds of
things but of the population size
they'll spend the most time
thought there was a study done by political scientist at MIT me now is the shoe prints
the write a book
and population dynamics an international conflict is sort of an instant classic
she analyzed as best he could
all the case then the literature on
international conflicts where there seemed to be
a population resource component
to the conflict
as he found it
these kinds of factors which we sort of conventionally associate
with a lot of political violence
in reality don't pick
as significant figures more than a minority a relatively small minority the morning
population distribution
that is to say
not the sheer numbers of people or they increases for in decreases in the numbers
I read in their distribution over space
that is a more significant trigger
of international conflict
as his population movements which is of course highly relevant point
population composition
which shows up here is being
by far the most politically for art
variable of all by composition we need things like
the age distribution of the population the sex distribution of the population
the ethnic or religious distribution of the population
we know for example
the refugee populations
tin to have young adult males over representative them
and young adult males are of course the demographic group that most commonly is recruited for
army's
for guerrilla warfare
or terrorist operations
were any kind of violent activity
so there's an unfortunate affinity between
who is displaced
and who is likely to give a violent response
said that despite
how your planners think the problem with this what I want to do is talk about what national
security tax called the clear its foreign policy and declared foreign policy is exactly
what it implies
what we say
we're doing what we say were about what we say we care about it
it's how we talk about the world
either amongst ourselves
or to the public
formal statements either public or private
the SS threats opportunities
and how to respond to them
operational policy about what I'm going to say next to nothing
is actions taken
to retain chosen objectives
and sometimes
to fulfill declared foreign policy
but but the sometimes in there because I think it's important to remember
they're optimistic yeah
between declared foreign policy
an operational policy and that's something you should not
next item
what is our declared foreign policy
US policy has long recognized the role
of environmental factors
in US national security and we had this wonderful statement
that's twenty years old
the dangers depletion or contamination of natural comments of some nations
will create potential threats to the peace
and prosperity
that are in our national interest
as well as the interest of the affected nations
and of course
that came that's a quote from a noted environmentalist
named Ronald Reagan
this wasn't a presidential statement
from nineteen fifty eight
clearly
I mean the intellectual level or the son of for political
our government seems to understand
environmental circumstances
directly translate
into threats to the national interest and to the the national interest of other countries
as well
but no more
details are more concrete level
what is our government be doing to think about this
the first formal assessment
then i'd been able to find any documentation on
of help
whether or
or climate might affect national security
this performed by the central intelligence agency
in a national intelligence assessment that was performed in nineteen seventy four
as the title of it and they
the designation of the are given
you can probably find it on the internet somewhere
it was the classified in nineteen seventy six and there are ways to find
hard copies of it as well
it's mostly in historical curiosity point
but it's interesting because it shows that even
a generation ago
there was some awareness of the connection between
environmental circumstances
and the kinds of difficulties security threats the country might face
it might seem a bit me on using tell us now to know that
at that time
when they assess climate change they thought that the threat was not global warming but
global cooling
and they're very concerned about how global clothing would affect the security environment
of the united states
of course
that was based on a scientific understanding of the late nineteen sixties and early nineteen
seventies
and of course is the accumulated
that understanding was relatively rapidly shed
but at least it shows that the CIA and was partaking of the science they were paying
attention to the science
they were thinking about what the society mean
for how we do our jobs in terms of protecting the interests
but the united states
more recently
we have to study
that was alluded to the sporting it was actually August two thousand three and not two thousand
four but you were very close
this is a very interesting document
it's entitlement right
pointing Mary ellin implications for national security
when you read it
as I'm sure you will if you have it
keep in mind a couple of things
scenario analyses like this
our kind of the bread and butter activity
of national security
imports they do them for all kinds of situations
and they typically don't worry a lot about the probability that the scenario will move
to realize
because that's not really there to active
what they're doing in a sense is what some people cloak really call worst-case analysis
perhaps a better way to talk about it would be to say
we take situations that we don't know what the nazi and difficult
because if we can figure out a way to respond to the messy and difficult ones we could probably
do the easier ones too
so they concoct a scenario based upon their understandings of the day
it seems to tend to be plausible
then they basically
think through
what might be the social consequences of those find the defense and then how might the US
particularly US national security forces
have to respond to those social events
and it makes
for very intriguing reading
%uh the temptation is too
sort of wave it around as a sort of
we really see a political bad things can get
and I think you should restrain yourself from doing that partly because
when you do that people will inevitably raise the question of is this really very likely
in this is really based on
the best science we can
and the answer to that most of those is probably no
%uh although it can probably say be said for any scenario that you create like this
that at this point it's a low probability scenario we don't know what the high probability
scenarios are faring well
particularly the more exotic plants
the study was produced
%uh in two thousand seven that was actually begun during the Clinton era
%uh from a advisory group within the department of defense is made up of retired generals
and admirals
or ask to basically
look at that
the available scientific information
look at how the Pentagon was responding to it
they come up their own conception of what the security risks word
their conclusion
it was said it was a sizable risk and that's it
the post says climate change national security
an interdependence are related said
of global scale
there was a national intelligence assessment done in two thousand seven
of climate change
and national security
it's classified as far as I know
but we do know at what the general topics covered were and this is a list of the topics
so you can get a sense
what the government is thinking about climate change in how their trains leading it
in the security terms
this is an informal assessment from the capitol conference which I think
pretty well summarize the sense of needing so that's why I included that
we are representing the security community and we are convinced that we're facing an
imminent threat
and we need to be prepared
to deal with this threat
that's unusually blunt and direct but I think the sense that meeting was that this
pretty much what we things
climate change affects US reputation because of our
the past year in capacity to deal with that
if it appears we're dealing with it well
but first the goes up here is we're not her the and
the most immediate effect of course
on first each would be its effect on Islamic extremists or so of view is
it would have little effect on US prestige to swell the most immediate impact
that's for scene
on a national security level
is the need to deal with more
katrina white disasters during katrina we had to mobilize
seventy thousand troops to deal with the dislocation
that's an awful lot of people for trying to fight
two other wars that distinct mind
the immediate future that that suggests is is a difficult one
%uh in the nineteen nineties
almost two hundred million people
were affected by natural disasters and that's six times the number of people
that were affected by balkan wars fought during that decade
so it's not terribly surprising that when national security planners look at that
they decided
the way we use our forces needs to be adjusted to face that fact of life
one case
that they often mentioned because it has further hopeful implications or or
it could be greatest have the hope of occasions
if the two thousand four agency nominee and the US response to that
%uh from within the national security community
that's viewed as large in a success story partly because the response
was relatively prompt ineffective
but even more so because
other nations appreciated the US response
and it led to an improvement in the US image in the region
that was it
so with that I think
but talking about specifics and maybe we can handle someone the question and answer
as the Barack Obama explains
we're seeing that climate change is about more than a few unseasonably mild winters
war hot summers
it's about the chain of natural catastrophes and devastating weather patterns that global
warming is beginning to set off around the world
the frequency and intensity of which
are breaking records
thousands of years old
thank you for joining us today and we hope
you will seriously consider the issue of global warming going forward