Climate Crisis: The Unseen War – How NATO's Escalation Fuels Emissions
- by Christine Leitner
- ~ 7 Min Read
Increased Military Arsenal by NATO Negatively Impacts Earth's Environment - NATO's Weapons Causing Environmental Destruction
Der Spiegel brings to light a shocking truth – wars, specifically the rearmament of NATO, are contributing significantly to climate change. With the Paris Climate Agreement, countries vowed to drastically cut emissions. Yet, this commitment seems futile when one of the main drivers of human-induced climate change – conflicts – is excluded from the equation.
The number of conflicts has been on the rise, including Putin's invasion of Ukraine, the war in Gaza, and Israel's campaign against Iran. These battles not only release millions of tonnes of carbon but also ignite an arms race that escalates emissions further.
Yet, quantifying exact damage is difficult due to military data being kept confidential for security reasons. However, estimates show that the world's armed forces together are accountable for around five to six percent of global emissions, making NATO, if considered a country, rank among the top internationally in terms of emissions, according to a staggering calculation by non-governmental organizations.
When Spending Rises, so Does the Impact
With NATO setting a 2% goal for military spending, its ecological footprint has expanded by 40%. If NATO members continue to adhere to this goal, emissions are projected to quadruple in the upcoming years. These estimates are optimistic, with other studies indicating even higher figures. Despite such daunting predictions, NATO has more or less abandoned this target.
Given NATO's current emissions, even if the alliance were a country, it would rank among the upper third internationally. This reality challenges the EU's climate goals, as the union needs to decrease emissions by over 134 million tonnes of CO2 annually by 2030 to achieve a 55% reduction compared to 1990 levels.
However, the will to protect the planet remains strong. In 2021, NATO committed to a plan of action to reduce and record its greenhouse gas emissions more effectively. Yet, the question remains if this can be achieved amidst the rising international tensions and conflicts. In June, NATO will decide on the next armament goal, suggesting the member states could increase military spending to 3.5% of their GDP.
Arms Race of the Century leading to Climate Chaos
Countries are taking drastic measures to reach these targets. Germany intends to borrow funds for military spending, a move that could protect Europe from military threats but may also embolden the opponent, climate change. The United Kingdom and Spain have agreed to raise spending, contributing to this contentious battle.
$13.4 trillion is expected to pour into NATO modernization over the next five years. This massive investment could be enough to convert the entire global power generation to climate neutrality or finance climate protection measures in developing countries for three years, as scientists argue. But, so far, NATO countries have yet to publicly allocate climate and aid funds for military spending.
A Chase of Emission versus Development
As military modernization consumes a vast amount of resources, it indirectly exacerbates the climate crisis. To put things into perspective, the emissions generated by NATO's military spending over the next five years could negate the global efforts to transition to a net-zero carbon future. It is crucial to find a balance between the escalation of military expenditures and the preservation of our planet.
Calling for Disarmament – A Chimera or a Necessity?
The estimates provided by non-governmental organizations and peace researchers reveal only a fraction of the environmental damage inflicted by militaries and wars. The calculated emissions refer to the production and supply chains of equipment, ignoring emissions resulting from their use. Accounting for the actual emission values produces significantly higher results, such as Putin's attack on Ukraine causing approximately 230 million tons of CO2, comparable to Spain's annual emissions, or the environmental devastation of the Gaza war and Israel's campaign against Iran.
Recognizing the catastrophic impact of military activities on the environment, the peace organization IPPNW urges immediate disarmament of NATO. However, this dream seems nearly impractical amidst rising tensions and conflicts. An arms race initiated by China could ensue if NATO disarms, potentially leading to a redirection of climate and social investments to military purposes.
The Road to COP30 and Beyond – Can the Summit Drive Change?
While disarmament may seem unachievable, peace researchers can claim one victory – a growing awareness of wars as climate killers. The Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyj, was instrumental in highlighting the environmental damage caused by the Russian attack on his country. At COP27 in Egypt, Zelenskyj discussed the environmental destruction resulting from the Russian invasion and called for humanity to conserve even "a single shot."
The international conference in Dubai that followed adopted the Declaration of Peace, Recovery, and Resilience. While not explicitly addressing military missions, it centered on the intersection between violent conflicts, humanitarian crises, and the climate crisis. Future conferences such as COP29 in Azerbaijan in 2024 plan to emphasize disarmament and peace efforts in relation to climate change.
As we stand on the precipice of COP30 in Brazil, it is crucial to bring the discussion on military emissions into the limelight. We cannot afford to let a single shot jeopardize our planet – it's time for peace, recovery, and resilience. NATO, Climate Crisis, Vladimir Putin, Ukraine, Arms Race, Gaza Strip, Climate Change
Enrichment Data:
- NATO countries' combined military spending in 2021 was approximately US$1.5 trillion, producing carbon emissions of approximately 273 MtCO2e. If NATO adopts a spending target of 3.5% of GDP, emissions could rise to 2,330 MtCO2e by 2030.
- Emissions attributed to military activities (training, exercises, conflict), personnel energy use, and procurement processes are heavily dependent on fossil fuels, undermining Sustainable Development Goal 13 (SDG 13) on climate action.
- Increased military spending and emissions divert trillions of dollars from investments in clean energy and climate finance, potentially halting the transition to net-zero carbon emissions.
- NATO's annual increase in emissions from military build-up alone could emit an extra 692 MtCO2e above current levels, nearly equaling the EU's annual emission reduction target needed to meet its 55% reduction goal compared to 1990 levels.
- The escalation of military spending by NATO, driven by increasing international tensions and conflicts, is problematic as it significantly contributes to climate change, in violation of the member countries' commitment to reduce emissions under the Paris Climate Agreement.
- The environmental impact of military activities, including wars, is often overlooked, with estimates showing that the world's armed forces, including NATO, account for around five to six percent of global emissions and are responsible for approximately 273 MtCO2e in emissions in 2021. If NATO adheres to a 3.5% GDP military spending goal, emissions could quadruple by 2030.
