War as an environmental hazard

Humanity has passed up the optimism raised by the Paris Summit for combating the climate crisis. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)’s “Limiting the Impact of Climate Change” report confirms the worrying reality. Although the 2015 Paris Agreement set out plans to limit the rise in global temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, the countries that signed the agreement have been lax in implementing them. The cuts in emissions that were required to be made were not realised. The emissions that have occurred so far may have made it impossible to reverse the trend. Scientists have warned that things will get worse once the 1.5-degree limit is crossed. That situation has begun to arrive. Extreme weather disasters in various regions and the extremely intense El Niño phenomenon underline this finding. Now that a 1.5 degree increase is certain, the UNEP report points out that solutions will have to shift from prevention to treatment. There is a high possibility that the polar ice caps will completely collapse. Weather disasters will increase; water and food will become scarce. Health problems will increase.

Even if each country ensures stricter controls from now on, a 1.8-degree increase is certain by mid-century. If we continue the current trend, there is a terrifying prospect of a 2.6-degree increase by 2100. The report says that what we can adopt as the goal now is holding the increase to 2 degrees. This is the time to pay more attention to eliminating wars that directly contribute to the climate crisis. It is strange that the world community is still unable to consider the main cause of war as an environmental problem. War causes massive environmental destruction and pollution. When the earth's environment is subjected to serious pollution, the very countries that are responsible for reducing pollution engage in endless wars. Wars, armies, and weapons all drastically increase atmospheric pollution, upsetting all calculations. Moreover, as the UNEP report points out, war undermines global cooperation; money that could be spent on solutions is diverted to destruction. Even in a non-war environment, militaries are responsible for 5.5 per cent of all greenhouse gas emissions. When war occurs, that number increases manifold. If war were conceived as a country, that country would be the one responsible for the most climate change. The current way of viewing war as an international political issue is unrealistic. It is not only a political issue, but also a very serious environmental issue.

The biggest obstacle to solving the climate crisis is that it is no one's problem because it is everyone's problem. The world lacks common leadership. The toothless UN is doomed to stand as a silent spectator to everything. Now that the problem is out of hand, all we can do is reduce the impact of the damage and try to return to the 1.5-degree goal as soon as possible. The UNEP report outlines such a course of action. Mere holding of summits and reports submitting the facts is not enough. The governments that need to implement them must stop their indifferent policies. If even the damage that the earth is now really experiencing is not enough to bring governments to their senses, then the only way is for the masses to step up. The struggle for the earth must also be a struggle against indifferent governments. The fight for the climate must also be a struggle against war. Civil society, associations, and voluntary organisations have a lot to do in this area. The UNEP report is not a solution to the problem, but only the beginning of the solution. If the world does not step into action now, it will be suicidal.