Climate Crisis and Conflict: How NATO's Rearmament Intensifies the Catastrophe
- By John Doe**
- 5 Min
The Impact of NATO's Arms Buildup on the Environment - Military Equipment's Impact on the Environment by NATO
As the world grapples with the consequences of human-induced climate change, an unexpected villain has emerged from the shadows. Wars, particularly those fueled by NATO's rearmament, have become significant contributors to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, posing a grave threat to efforts aimed at mitigating the climate crisis.
In the aftermath of the Paris Climate Agreement, nations pledged to make considerable emission reductions. The goal is for most countries to become climate-neutral by 2050. Since then, strict documentation of every emitted tonne of carbon has been upheld. However, these meticulous calculations seem meaningless if key drivers of global warming are absent from the equation, such as conflicts perpetuated by NATO rearmament.
Over the past few years, the number of conflicts around the globe has been on the rise. The latest include Putin's invasion of Ukraine, the war in Gaza, and Israel's aggression against Iran. These conflicts have not only released millions of tonnes of carbon but also sparked an arms race that exacerbates emissions even further.
Precise measurements are challenging due to the secrecy surrounding military data, but estimates suggest that the world's armed forces are responsible for roughly 5-6% of global emissions. In the case of NATO alone, the alliance's emissions are so high that, if treated as a sovereign nation, it would rank among the upper third internationally, according to calculations by a non-governmental organization[1].
Studies conducted by a team including the Transnational Institute, Tipping Point North South, and IPPNW have once again evaluated the environmental impact of global military competition at a time when tensions in the Middle East persist and preparations for COP30, the climate summit in Brazil, are underway.
A Looming Climate Catastrophe with Increased Military Spending
- Rising Emissions from NATO: Since implementing the 2% target, NATO has witnessed a staggering 25% increase in military spending in recent years. Alongside this growth comes an escalation in emissions as well - by approximately 40%. If NATO member countries continue adhering to the 2% target, annual emissions could potentially quadruple in the coming years. These estimates remain relatively modest, with some studies pointing to much higher emission values[5]. As it stands, NATO has essentially abandoned the 2% target[1].
The EU needs to reduce its emissions by 134 million tonnes of CO2 annually by 2030 to halve its emissions in comparison to 1990 in order to meet its climate goals. "Current military spending undermines our climate goals, and escalations can only make our climate enemy bigger," says Laura Smith, an expert on climate justice and global health at IPPNW[1].
Despite this, NATO has reaffirmed its commitment to addressing the issue, announcing a plan of action to reduce and report greenhouse gas emissions more stringently[1]. Threatened by growing international conflicts, however, this objective seems increasingly elusive. In late June, NATO is expected to decide the next armament goal, with member states committing to spend 3.5% of their gross domestic product (GDP) on the military[1].
- ** escalating militarization**: In an attempt to meet these ambitious goals, nations are taking numerous measures. For example, Germany is contemplating borrowing funds for military spending. The extent to which the German government will provide the required finances is yet to be determined, with estimates of more than 70 billion euros being discussed for the current year[1]. The United Kingdom and Spain have agreed to boost their spending as well, with Europe arguing that self-defense necessitates protecting itself from military enemies. The unfortunate truth, however, is that increasing military expenditure only adds fuel to the climate catastrophe in numerous scenarios.
A Cash Drought Caused by Military Spending
Scientists predict that the modernization of NATO over the next five years will require approximately 13.4 trillion US dollars[1]. This investment could be used to facilitate a complete global transition to climate-neutral power generation or to finance climate protection measures in developing countries for three years[1]. Yet, EU countries have not yet publicly declared that they will divert funds from climate initiatives and development aid to military spending.
NATO: A Climate Antagonist that Refuses to Disarm
- The Unseen Costs of Military Conflicts: The estimated emissions from the production and supply chains of military equipment only represent a fraction of the total environmental damage caused by militarized conflicts. When also factoring in the emissions generated by the actual use of equipment, the actual emission values significantly increase. For instance, the environmental destruction caused by Putin's attack on Ukraine has already emitted an estimated 230 million tons of CO2, equivalent to Spain's annual emissions[1].
The Gaza War in the first two months generated around 281,000 tons of carbon dioxide, while the climate damage from Israel's campaign against Iran remains unquantified. Furthermore, indirect greenhouse gas emissions due to rerouted air traffic as a result of closed airspaces and the rebuilding of destroyed areas add to the total. As a result, the authors of the study and the peace organization IPPNW advocate for the immediate disarmament of NATO. Given the deteriorating global security situation, however, this demand appears more than unrealistic.
- NATO
- Climate Change
- Vladimir Putin
- Ukraine
- Disarmament
- Gaza Strip
Enrichment Data:
Overview:
NATO's recent increase in military spending has resulted in a significant surge in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, posing a considerable challenge to both climate policy and the European Union's (EU) climate goals.
NATO Military Spending and Associated Emissions:
- Rising Emissions from NATO: Following a 25% surge in combined defense budgets since 2021, NATO's estimated carbon footprint has grown by nearly 40%, from 196 million metric tons of CO_{2} equivalent (MtCO_{2}e) to 273 MtCO_{2}e[2].
- Projected New Emissions: Based on research, NATO rearmament could potentially contribute an additional 200 million tonnes of CO_{2} per year if spending targets are further increased[3][5]. Precise estimates indicate that a 2% increase in military spending as a share of GDP could raise CO_{2} emissions by 87 to 194 megatons annually across the bloc (excluding the USA in some analyses)[1][5].
- Associated Climate Damage Cost: The yearly climate damage caused by increased NATO spending is estimated to amount to $119-264 billion given the social cost of carbon[1][5].
Impact on EU Climate Goals:
- Diverted Resources for Military Action: The rapid escalation in military budgets is steering both financial resources and political focus away from climate initiatives. European nations have partially funded heightened military spending by reducing foreign aid budgets, including climate finance[5].
- Undermining SDG 13: The increase in military expenditure directly threatens Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 13 on climate action, as national and international emissions continue to climb, and less funding becomes available for mitigation and adaptation efforts[1][4].
- Policy Trade-offs: The EU's 'ReArm Europe Plan/Readiness 2030' proposes an €800 billion boost to military budgets over four years. If fully implemented, this could increase military spending to around 3.5% of GDP for some states, causing a military spending shock of 2% above 2019 levels. Each percentage point increase in military spending as a share of GDP is associated with a 0.9–2.0% rise in overall national emissions[1][5].
- Diverted Trillions: If NATO adopts a new target of 3.5% of GDP, cumulative military emissions would potentially rise sharply, potentially diverting trillions from clean-energy investment, making it increasingly challenging for the EU to meet its net-zero ambitions[3].
Summary Table:
| Aspect | Impact/Estimate ||---------------------------|-------------------------------------|| NATO military emissions | 273 MtCO_{2}e/year (after 40% surge)[2]|| Potential new emissions | 87–200 MtCO_{2}e/year with increased spending[3][5]|| Climate damage cost | $119–264 billion/year[1][5] || EU climate goals impact | Undermines SDG 13, diverts funds from climate[1][4]|
- The ongoing conflicts, particularly those fueled by NATO's rearmament, contribute significantly to greenhouse gas emissions, posing a significant threat to efforts aimed at mitigating the climate crisis, as stated in John Doe's article, "Climate Crisis and Conflict: How NATO's Rearmament Intensifies the Catastrophe."
- Studies conducted by organizations such as the Transnational Institute, Tipping Point North South, and IPPNW have evaluated the environmental impact of global military competition, revealing that the world's armed forces, including NATO, are responsible for approximately 5-6% of global emissions.
- Furthermore, the increase in military expenditure, as envisioned in the EU's 'ReArm Europe Plan/Readiness 2030', could raise national emissions, potentially diverting trillions from clean-energy investment, making it increasingly challenging for the EU to meet its net-zero ambitions.
