[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]
ladies and gentlemen
please welcome the moderator of the
session rachel rizzo
[Music]
good afternoon good afternoon everyone i
think everyone can hear me
um welcome to day two of globe sec it's
an honor to be with everyone today
i can see our speakers up here calling
in from zoom so we'll go ahead and get
started
today this afternoon we are talking
about the intersection
of climate and security
if you've paid attention to many of the
agendas
at multilateral institutions at
many defense departments around the
world the
increasing intersection between climate
and national security and international
cooperation is becoming ever more
apparent
and so today we have a fantastic panel
to discuss just that
first i'd like to go ahead and present
kate guy who is a senior research fellow
at the center for climate and security
in washington dc
welcome um up on the screen there we
have
uh johnny vivekananda who is the head of
the climate and diplomacy
or the uh the head of the climate
diplomacy and security program
at adelphi in berlin hi johnny good to
see you
we have alexander verabeak who is the
policy director
the environment and development resource
center in brussels nice to see you
alexander
and we have brian moran who's vice
president of global sustainability and
policy and partnership at boeing
brian it's nice to see you as well so
let's go ahead and get started
alexander i'm going to go ahead and turn
it right to you because
we just had a very important meeting
last weekend of g7 leaders
in cornwall and i noticed that you wrote
something
and you mentioned that you were
disappointed in a way
in the climate outcomes of that
particular meeting
can you expand on that a little bit and
to tell us what would you have
what you would have liked to see
especially in terms of the intersection
of climate and security at the g7
yes i think the essence of what i wrote
is that
g7 ended up with lots of of good
intentions
things you can't disagree with speaking
about moving towards a green economy
and help poor countries and those kind
of good intentions intentions i
i only missed the thoughts and prayers
but what you really need
is very clear time frames of of phasing
out
fossil fuels and and and the financing
to
to back all these ambitions so what they
have now
is a commitment to end the financing
of um overseas investment of coal
but if you listen to the international
energy agency and that is not
um some kind of of activistic um
green organization this used to be until
very recently the darling of the fossil
fuel industry
they say we should end all investments
in all
fossil fuel projects not only coal so
it's um it's too little and too late
and and we need much higher ambitions
and and treat um this emergency
as an emergency and not as some kind of
new policy we should work on in the
years to come
absolutely i'm gonna ask kate to expand
on that but before i do i realized that
at the beginning i forgot to let
everyone know
that we are using slido for questions so
if you have questions that you'd like to
to ask the panelists um you can either
do that at the microphone when we get to
the q a section or ask on slido so
wanted to make sure
we had that uh point of order before we
go ahead and dive in
um kate coming to you will you expand a
little bit on what alexander
uh was saying about about this meeting
and
um to expand it a little bit i mean the
role of multinational institutions like
the eu like nato
when it comes to when it comes to
climate and international security i
mean
there's obviously a role there what is
it and
how can international or different
countries that might have
different approaches to climate
different goals how does that sort of
manifest itself
in these multinational institutions yeah
so it's it's a great segue from what
alexander was just saying because he was
speaking about
the urgent need to mitigate to make
stronger commitments
to do something about the climate
problem and unfortunately we've sort of
left it go
so far that now the doing something is
increasingly
security actors having to do something
about the problem because we're seeing
more and more climate destabilization
lead to the destabilization of
local environments and places with
histories and legacies of conflict
around the world
and unfortunately the the longer we wait
to do something about the climate
problem the worst we know
these futures become there's
increasingly incredible
uh analysis done by by groups like mine
the center for climate security adelphi
with uh johnny and others around the
world looking at
how bad things get even at just
a half a degree more of warming the
security consequences of that
are are sort of out of control let alone
the trajectory that we're on
so the exciting thing i guess is that
you have increasingly
ministry of defense political leaders
and
uh like the alliance earlier this week
understanding that these are security
problems that need to be central to
security strategies
that is quite new right uh we've been
sort of banging on about the
the security climate intersection for
quite a while now
only within the last uh year to past few
months i think
our political leaders waking up and
realizing this is not just a side issue
for discussion
in the unf triple c in in the cop
process
this is actually a central security
tenant so you have you seen the biden
administration saying this will be
central to our national
security and defense strategy nato's
commitment and action plan earlier this
week
is huge in terms of pledging investment
and and cooperation a new center for
excellence in canada
uh these are sort of hot off the press
commitments but they're actually
uh sort of revolutionary in thinking
about the problem multinationally
thank you johnny i'd like to turn to you
to to expand
a little bit on on what what kate was
saying i mean you've done a lot of work
on this in terms of how you're thinking
about multinational institutions could
you um expand a little bit on her
comments please
yeah thanks um absolutely okay uh
uh rachel i think um
i i'd agree with what what kate's set
out and i think
also there's there's there's something
like a symbolic significance as well
with multilateral
institutions and entities like nato um
making such statements people might not
be satisfied with the
the meat of what the g7 has come out
with
or be um frustrated that there's no kind
of
timeline or an endpoint or nothing
specifically measurable in the nato
climate action plan that was launched
uh on monday climate security action
plan that was launched on monday but i
think there's a real
um symbolic significance of uh
institutions like nato
like the eu like the g7 um
making climate change but also climate
change and security
uh central to um to their agendas at the
moment
but also on a more practical level i
think there's there's a value in what
they are doing whilst they're not kind
of
at that point where the rubber can hit
the road and they can get down to
operations
there is um i think quite substantive
action
in at the strategic level where there's
there are efforts to integrate
climate security considerations into
strategic planning
if you look at the eu's road map
its climate change and defense roadmap
that it launched last year
it specifically looks to integrate
climate change into all defense actions
across the eu
by increasing its understanding of
security implications of climate change
uh increasing its understanding of how
climate change affects its missions
um now and in the future and then in
uh addressing a better understanding and
then addressing um the infrastructure
side of things how it
has to improve infrastructure to
effectively carry out sustainable
missions
so you know they're building it into
that that knowledge interest
strategy and then you you need that
knowledge before you can get down to
operations yes we do also be
uh need to be acting at the operational
level but um
i think the strategic um piece is
is really um something to be
lauded as well and we see that in the in
the nato declaration in the nato
action plan as well but then also if you
look at uh institutions like
the un system they're also quite um
substantive steps taken there not you
know not as far as we want it to be
but uh the the un just a few years ago
about three years ago established the
climate security mechanism
which um essentially is a an
institutional home
for this issue of climate security which
was um
nomadic and therefore was falling
between the cracks within the u.n system
between you know it wasn't the
responsibility of any one single agency
and now there is this um mechanism which
um it's the kind of the clearinghouse
the the the filter uh
and the the part of the un system that
is responsible for ensuring that
this issue is um cross-fertilized and
then disseminated to all the relevant
agencies that need to be
um acting on this so i think i think
this there is some real practical value
and and this of this these multilateral
initiatives
which then need to be kind of need to
filter down into the
the very practical operational steps at
a more localized level
thank you brian i'd like to bring you
into the conversation
um you know coming from boeing in in the
private sector
seems like this is really where the
rubber meets the road in
in terms of ensuring that the climate
and you know reducing emissions is
something that
organizations are are thinking about and
taking into consideration
when making their plans especially for a
global company so
how is it that boeing is thinking about
um
you know working with the defense sector
to
reducing global global gas emissions
from from from from where you're sitting
what does that look like
yeah hey thanks rachel and also thanks
to globestech for for having us
on this panel um it's an honor to be
here um look we have a vital role to
play in decarbonizing aerospace and
we're hard at work in doing so so at
boeing we want to be a trusted partner
and we want to be transparent and
bringing
innovative solutions to our uh customers
and that's on the commercial side
as well as on the defense side i think
the good news is that
operational effectiveness and
sustainability support each other
they're really two sides of the same
coin and
you know i think as kate and janani said
there's some real momentum right now
on the commercial side if you look at
all the declarations it's a hit net zero
by the middle of the century and even
coming out of nato this week um i think
as kate said
um there's there's a lot of forward
progress and it'll always be a team
sport between industry
and government uh real quickly how we
look at at decarbonizing aerospace it
really falls into four buckets and i'd
love to elaborate later
on how that might be relevant for the
for the military but it's first it's
fleet renewal
right taking less efficient products and
airplanes out of
the fleets and replacing them with more
efficient airplanes makes sense four
engines to two engines
on the operations side it's the second
pillar using digital tools
using analytics to fly more efficiently
to operate more efficiently whether it's
in the or on the ground
and then thirdly renewable energy and i
think that is perhaps even though we
always say there's no silver bullet but
if you're looking for one
it may be sustainable aviation fuels are
sustainable fuels
we have a long legacy in pioneering that
space
first commercial flight in 2008 on the
747 we flew an f and 18
um super hornet with uh with the united
states navy
which is called the green hornet on
staff c17 which is uh present in uh
in nato and papa hungary also flew on on
staff so
it's it's technically viable it's ready
but it needs to be commercially scaled
and then finally the fourth pillar of
how we are decarbonizing aerospace
is new technology whether that's through
autonomous systems lighter materials
more digital design so we have many
levers at our disposal
but transferring some of those now to
some of our military partners is an
exciting opportunity
thank you um i i like to broaden the
aperture a little bit and i'm going to
ask kate and alexander both
both to address this question if you
look at the
meetings that have taken place over the
last week with nato
u.s eu the g7
i'm thinking specifically about nato's
new strategic concept which will
involve china and russia heavily
they also have to be partners in in
the the fight against uh climate change
and the climate crisis
so how do you have you know these these
two strategic competitors in russia and
china on so many other things um
play a role uh that helps us
go forward in a way that um you know
combats uh climate change kate i'll ask
you for that and then alexander i'll
come
back to you yeah look it's a question of
how do you compete and cooperate at the
same time and i can tell you it is the
question
in in the debate halls of dc right now
especially when it comes to climate
especially when it comes to china um how
i see it and i sort of work on
uh climate as a geopolitical issue and
and the winners and losers and all of
those questions
i think increasingly we are entering a
moment of great power competition
you've seen this in the pacific in the
arctic
what i hope for is that climate change
and action on
on both reducing emissions but also
hopefully action on the security
concepts of climate change
are just so important and of such mutual
interest to countries
um that the the great powers can
cooperate on these issues
and i see that uh very starkly between
the u.s and china and
and russia specifically all three of
these countries are facing immense
impacts
offense immense destabilization at home
in their neighborhoods because of of
climate change and not just in the long
term right this is
the next few decades we'll see uh
dramatic impacts in those regions that
all countries
especially super power countries will
have to deal with so it is in their
mutual interest to make sure that we're
bending that curve of emissions
and we're also building resilience in
areas to to prevent some of the worst uh
security outcomes
so to me it's an issue where yes we
might be
heavily competing i speak as an american
with our adversaries on many other
issues
trade and and security and and the rest
climate can potentially be one of those
touchstone areas where we can come
together
still come to the table and speak in
mutual interests you saw this
during the cold war right you had bitter
adversaries
of the us and ussr still working
together on issues like nuclear
nonproliferation
and having those spaces where you can
build trust where you can
have scientific cooperation all the rest
can actually be a really important
thing for what is otherwise an
increasingly competitive moment
thank you alexander i'd like to turn to
you
if you could respond to that as well yes
i very much agree with uh
what kate was just saying we're all in
this together it's
with one uh tiny planet you fly around
it in
in what is it in two days you can fly
around the planet we're all stuck here
in in in space
and we have to deal with this very same
problem uh
china will be an essential
partner i think that's the right word in
in solving
uh the the climate crisis and and by the
way we have
quite a few other planetary crisis as
well in in
pollution and loss of nature etc china
produces i believe
uh 28 of um of of the co2 emissions in
the world which
is more than all the uh the the
the classical developed nations together
produce so we need china on board
i think china did a huge step
what was it about a year ago when they
said that
they would become they would
reach net zero by by 2060
after that of course everybody has been
pushing for become a bit more concrete
they've come forward a little bit they
are on track
of course not fast enough but that's the
same that you can say for
for the developed worlds and the g7
countries
historically we were the first ones
that started polluting a country like
united states is
in in absolute terms of all the
greenhouse gases that they have produced
since
the start of the industrial revolution
uh the us
is still the winner so that also gives a
responsibility we have the means
to adapt and we have the uh
we carry the guilt of of having produced
so much greenhouse gases that's
that we should do so uh on the other
hand if you look at this moment
in in in the dire situation we're in of
course we have to look at china that is
that is producing uh so much so we need
to work together
think of examples like for instance
india and pakistan since the second
world war they fought
three wars but in the meantime they
have always kept cooperating on
transboundary rivers
there's like six main rivers that that
go from one country to the others and
they have been working and cooperating
on transboundary waters even while they
were
um at war so um and i also like the
the comparison that cages made with our
relationship with the soviet union
during the cold war
so we need to to put
climate change and all these planetary
change issues that we're talking about
in in an area where we can keep talking
and keep working together and as a last
comment here
it's not only the threats which are huge
for a country like china it's one meter
sea level rise
is a third of shanghai underwater
but there's also a lot of opportunities
especially for china because the the
renewable
uh energy that we want to produce we
need
um the the the the
the the precious resources that uh that
that china has so there's an opportunity
for them as well and
by the way everything we consume is
nowadays producing in china so
there's a competition but there's also a
lot of dependencies
uh so it it asks for really really
skilled
diplomacy on all sides
thank you john annie i'd like to bring
it to you before we get to before we get
to slido um
climate migration is increasingly
a an issue but um will affect the
national security for for many countries
not just in
in europe but the united states as well
so
how does climate migration play into
this to this broader question
is that something that you're looking at
i mean how do we have these
conversations in a way that i think
centers humanitarianism but at the at
the same
time requires cooperation between
between many countries at once
uh thanks rachel so i think the
first thing i'd like to stress is that
when the the term climate migration is
somewhat problematic because there's
never a single reason
that people move um it's always
a complex mix of factors and uh climate
might be part of it
but um it may not be the driver a lot of
people are displaced absolutely
displaced by sudden shocks like um
intense storms
or slow onset climate impacts like you
know ongoing bouts over multiple years
um but this idea of
um of the increased number of people
that are
having to move be it because they're
they're displaced or they
it's feeding in these climate stresses
are feeding into their
broader decisions to to migrate um
it is part of the security they can
human security risk landscape that we're
looking at uh linked to climate change
but it's not the whole
um so i'd just like to speak about that
in in a bit but when it comes to
um climate mobility or like the
climate related mobility or migration
it's um it's a it's a narrative which is
very
it can it it's it's got to be handled
really sensitively
if you look at the numbers if you really
look at people on the move
most people are moving a lot of people
are moving and most people are moving
within countries so there really isn't
the evidence
that um that the media might lead us to
believe of kind of hordes of migrants
moving because of climate change
from the sahel into southern europe and
then into
into northern europe or from um
central america into into north america
what we mainly see is stressed
communities whose livelihoods
are becoming less and less viable in the
face of climate change
making decisions to maybe move from
rural communities to the urban centers
within the same country or just cross
the border
within the same region so you see um the
the exponential growth
of um second cities or
um all the capitals which just don't
have in already fragile context which
just don't have the governance
structures and the infrastructure
and the social safety nets to to absorb
the
these um these incomers so that
is um for me the the
climate-related uh migration risk that
we need to be
really focusing on because as there are
these um
ill-governed urban centers growing
in places like nigeria or pakistan
there is much more likelihood of
instability and
and conflict in these contexts than
there are there is
um with this kind of trans boundary kind
of
africa into europe uh latin america
central america into uh the us
um discourse but as i mentioned i think
the climate
related migration piece is only part of
the broader uh
landscape of risks which climate change
is presenting um
to human security um you might have
heard
climate described as a threat multiplier
or a crisis multiplier is i think how
jens stoltenberg described it at the
nato summit um
earlier in the week but what does this
actually mean it's not just about kind
of um
migration and people having to move and
the the risks um
and potential conflict risks linked to
this it's
it means that climate change through a
range of impacts from these kind of
hydro meteorological um direct impacts
like droughts floods more intense storms
um having this kind of knock-on
consequence on
on human um well-being through
and affecting economic development and
reversing development gains and
reversing peace gains
and these risks these these risk
pathways are incredibly complex and
they're
incredibly context dependent but they
tend to always be grounded in specific
social political and economic dynamics
things particularly
relating to livelihood stresses and
pre-existing inequalities
and different differential access to
power
and access to natural resources so when
it comes to thinking about what to do
about this i think it
has to go beyond thinking about oh how
many people are moving
and how do we stop them it's about
understanding um
why why people are more vulnerable to
these climate security risks is because
they are already marginalized they're
from a particular ethno religious group
or they
they are women or children or disabled
who have um already got constraints on
their access to natural resources which
climate change is
um magnifying or amplifying or they have
livelihoods that are dependent
on natural resources and rainfall which
are
becoming less and less viable in the
face of greater climate variability
um so i think it's important to see
all the different pathways that play out
in the different contexts and
certainly climate related mobility
displacement and migration is a piece of
this but there are many
many of these pathways thank you so much
and and brian i wanted i wanted to come
to you and
build on something that john any said
johnny you mentioned human security
a few times uh in in in your in your
comments
and i think the paradox when it comes to
human security is that
for a lot of countries this this
includes you know deployment operations
and stability operations which then
leave carbon footprints and and so i'm
wondering brian
you know when you think about how
industry and military come together to
reduce the carbon
footprint of of major deployment
operations how how are you thinking
about that
yeah that's a really good question i
mean corporation with with military is
in our dna they're a customer so
it's our first job to listen to their
requirements and to bring innovative
solutions but
um as it relates to climate i think
alexander calls this one's a faceless
enemy so we're gonna
fight that enemy together and an
industry and military's long partner
i'm thinking since it's nato week among
others
i'm thinking of our nato awax program
where 16 nations have come together
and what nato has called one of the most
successful collaborative
adventures ever undertaken by the
alliance pooling sharing
partnering with across militaries and
with industry
is a well-proven concept that that works
well
you know the secretary general said
earlier this week that he wants nato
and the forces in general to be more
capable more digital
and more green and you think about each
of these buckets
um on the capabilities side at boeing
and again
it's it's what we do we've invested 60
billion dollars of our own money over
the last decade
with innovative technologies and
capabilities many of which
uh directly to reduce our environmental
footprint and
and advance sort of the environmental
progressive
aspects of our products on the digital
side
again as i said earlier there are a lot
of tools and capabilities that we're
putting in the hands of our customers
that allow them to operate more
efficiently whether it's again in the
air
or on the ground in the air we have
digital
tools that allow flights to be more
direct
to anticipate weather um so so every
every ounce of fuel burn matters and so
these digital tools and the analytics
behind it
um are really important and then his
point of being more green
i want to get back to it i think
renewable
energy whether that's on the ground and
there have been many
smart smart defense initiatives at nato
that have have
piloted that or in the air with
sustainable aviation fuels which are 50
to 80
lower co2 um i think are are perfect
examples of where we can partner to
further
bend the curve and uh and achieve net
zero which nato as
kate said earlier has set out to achieve
by the middle of the um
century thank you so we have
a little over 15 minutes left so i want
to go ahead and turn to audience
questions i'll start with slido but
again if anyone
has a question that they'd like to ask
live just feel free to raise your hand
i'll find you and you can
um walk up to the to the microphone and
and ask it yourself
there's a really good question from um
mata slovaki uh from from moody's
who who mentioned uh how
how is the eu going to be able to find
balance between
going green and ensuring production
being competitive in the global economy
so alexander i'd like to come to you
for that question
uh yeah i think the the eu is is uh is
rapidly advancing in um oh sorry
i have to look at the screen now would i
lost it
um sorry could you repeat the question
yep
between going green and ensuring
production being competitive yes well
the global economy is going to be green
that is the future and so
in in lagging behind now
for for those countries that believe
that you can continue
with you know using coal or or having a
fossil
uh fuel based economy um
it it might help you for a little bit in
a short while
but ultimately you have to follow the
new trends in technology it's it's
it's it's one of the uh one of the few
uh things you can you can you can learn
from history
and also think about what brian was just
saying about
uh how boeing is innovating and also in
his cooperation with the military
the military have always been on top of
new trends
and for a long time those trends were
going into the direction of more fossil
fuels
there used to be sailing ships with
cannons and spanish galleons whatever
and someday we moved into steam ships
and
and and into into new technology of
using oil and ultimately even
nuclear for for some navy ships uh
but now the new trend is going towards
green and you can't imagine that
the military stays behind there so i
think for
uh the eu is now rapidly
uh becoming more involved on a path uh
towards starts becoming green the the
quite recently the ambitions have been
really increased from um
from from 42 to uh to 55 percent just
just
just recently and i think that is
um that is the new trend where
where you will find the winners not just
in in europe but but worldwide
thanks brian did you want to add to that
i see you not
nodding vigorously sorry
it's engaging alexander is i think it's
spot on and and um
just a couple examples come to mind uh
one being
again i come back to fuels because
they're that is the carbon we're talking
about
and sustainable aviation fuels and the
signal
the mods could send or are sending in
some cases
um are are essential because right now
we can't close or we haven't closed the
price gap
we can we can produce it we know how to
do it and we've flown it
all the way up to 100 boeing through a
triple seven in 2018 on 100
saf um the problem is that the price
point is two to three x
and so i think a demand signal from the
mods as it's already happening i
saw in the uk ministry of defense has
suggested that 50 of their
at their fleet will fly on 50 staff in
the near future
uh those are really important signals to
the market to the producers to go
produce this stuff
so um and i i come back to the final
point this this notion that they're
really
two sides of the same coin this notion
that a a greener more sustainable
uh force is somehow less capable or
somehow less competitive i think
is false thank you
so i'm gonna ask a couple questions here
and i'm going to turn both to kate and
john any to
to answer them the first one i'm going
to admit ignorance because
you guys are are better uh
suited to to answer these climate
questions and i but there's a really
good question from
lucia that says is geoengineering a
plausible solution
that we can possibly turn to to mitigate
climate change
so i'll ask that one but then also
there's another great question on
what are the biggest issues arising from
uh from climate change for the defense
sector
specifically so kate i'll turn to you
and then johnny i'll come to you
afterwards
sure all the easy ones yeah of course
with
geoengineering so i personally i mean
there's a lot more research that that
needs to be done into these technologies
because the
the biggest thing is there are so many
question marks still about how
throwing chemicals into the ocean or
into the atmosphere have
dramatic knock-on effects that we just
don't understand yet that science
hasn't hasn't really gotten its its uh
arms around so
uh you know that's that's not a viable
option for now unless we want to
potentially
uh uh cause strange triggers in the
climate system that we don't know about
what i am worried about when it comes to
geoengineering is the massive security
threat behind it
um that you know regardless of what it
devastation they could do to our
ecosystems um
just think about the the nature of
uh potential blame behind some of those
events
so the the example here is say there was
a
a huge hurricane that we knew was going
to strike um
uh norfolk our our biggest naval base in
the united states
um and we potentially had the power uh
to do something about that which again
is
is under doubt uh would we be able to
say
yes well we're gonna do this and and
change the path of this hurricane if it
had
knock-on effects down the road that we
didn't understand and we didn't know
and the security problem there is as
soon as that genie is out of the bottle
you can always blame all the united
states to that right the united states
uh was involved in that that that led to
the drought that we had in mexico
months later we don't know that that's
the case um but
a country can always sort of change and
point the finger and have that blame
right and we see this already
um unfortunately with climate uh
effects in places in the middle east and
in africa
groups on the ground are taking
advantage of that climate change for
their security
um their security consequences right so
uh there's great reporting
out of iraq where isis has used climate
change as a recruitment tool
for its ranks right saying look at
what's happening that's the west
uh they're to blame for this come and
join us um
and and we'll fight back back against
the people that cause drought in your
home
geoengineering to me is that same sort
of blame game
where it can be a tool of of
ethnonationalism and a tool of
uh sort of increasing tensions between
countries
um that to me is uh one of the biggest
impacts for the defense sector i mean
you can look at it
across three different metrics the
impacts on security environments
the impacts on security infrastructure
and the impacts on our security
institutions as well right
so you'll have those direct and and
second and third order consequences on
the environment that you're operating in
you'll have increasingly uh devastating
impacts on your infrastructure think
about permafrost thought and the arctic
and
and the devastating sort of melting that
that does to often nuclear installations
in that region
but also our institutions right can nato
withstand
the intense more intense more frequent
shocks that are going to be happening in
its region of the world
are institutions strong enough to sort
of stick together and cooperate as we
talked about in that reality
i think that's an open question um are
our alliances
are our global institutions the u.n
security council are these bodies fit
for purpose to deal with these
coming trends in these coming threats um
to me that's maybe the
the most worrying aspect of of defense
implications
thank you johnny i'm going to turn to
you
thanks rachel yeah um i think i share
kate's uh
concerns and fears about geoengineering
i
i think however whatever we
feel kind of morally and ethically about
the risks and the uncertainties
um that it holds it is going ahead
because there's no control either within
um in the private sector
there is a lot of um r d around this
there's a lot of investments
um and also in in kind of non-aligned
countries who might just be advancing
this and even in
in within the allied allies um nato
allies are also
advancing some um um
avenues of research into this but i
think the really
critical thing is accepting that it is
happening and it is going to happen
and that there needs to be um some form
of global governance in this it it needs
to be
regulated because we can't stop it we
can't stop it we can we can
hope that it's not going to advance too
much but pragmatically
this does need geo engineering does need
to have
some regulations within some kind of a
global governance framework do we have
the multilateral
institution ready um in place do we have
the international
legal frameworks in place no um so i
think this is something that we really
need to be thinking about i mean there
are efforts around this um the carnegie
foundation is doing some great work
here um and i think um
i think this global governance framework
for geoengineering is is critical just
to
you know ensure that when it does happen
and whatever forms it's taking there are
some
um rules and some restitution measures
for the kind of the blame and the the
consequences that kate touched on
um in her response and in terms of the
the challenge for
uh for the the defense community i think
the the tripar site kind of system that
kate set out
uh is is a really helpful way of
thinking about this how the
the defense communities got to be ready
and i think there's a lot of
um thinking going into mission readiness
there's al and you know
changing the way that um military assets
are
are being uh planned for the future
um there's also
thinking around kind of um the
challenges around
needing to do more kind of disaster
response
more civilian protection work in places
like the pacific and
places that we know are already um
facing much more intense and frequent
climate impacts and then
the security community is having to step
up as first responders
where i think there is a gap is uh that
the security sector needs to be better
able to also deal with these these new
uh climate security risks
that are being created or the climate
security
implications which are compounding
existing conflicts
uh kate mentioned iraq that's a great
example another example is the lake chad
region
of um of the sahel where you look at
existing military operations
and you see that they are entirely
climate blind and they're actually doing
more harm and we've got some really
compelling evidence i was
lucky enough to be able to do some field
work there when we heard from members of
armed groups and
um kind of ex-members of armed groups
like boko haram and islamic state west
africa saying that the reason that they
joined
wasn't to do with any ideological um
affiliate affinity it was because of the
security strategies
of international um stabilization
efforts
and counter-terror efforts that were
undermining their
livelihoods so kind of um international
troops coming in with things like slash
and burn strategies to literally smoke
out insurgents
um but then by doing so degrading
already drought affected
arid land and soil that are what the the
this a very agrarian community needs
to sustain its livelihood these kind of
operations
these strategies uh were then
really locking people into this kind of
climate security cycle
um of of conflict because there was just
no way out then if your livelihood's
been
eroded now for the next decade they had
no choice but to join armed groups um
and also we're just so angry at such um
such blindness so i think this
there's a real need to climate-proof
security strategies and stabilization
strategies and peacekeeping and i think
that's a real knowledge gap that needs
to be
um filled by the security community
thank you okay so we have about four
minutes left so i'm gonna go
around the horn and everyone has about a
minute
we have talked about when it comes to
climate and and the intersection
of climate and security we've talked
about multinational institutions the
private sector
global partnerships what did we miss
what is it that the audience should know
what should we be thinking about that we
didn't
discuss today uh alexander brian
johnny and then i'll close with kate
alexander do you
i think the key message should be that
we can solve climate change we know how
to do it
we have the knowledge we have the
technology we
even have the money it is less expensive
to do it now
than to wait and we know exactly how to
do it
and a huge part of that is following
everything that we have promised to each
other to do in in 2015
in in the agenda 2030 and
we can't do it the only thing that is
lacking
is leadership and political will
and good international cooperation i'm
hopeful for this
year that after four dreadful years
where the biggest leader in the world
was
not leading and only creating
devastating policies
that now that the us is back in the game
and
is leading that we have a chance because
if the us
is not there nothing happens if the u.s
is there
something can happen uh but is it
is it enough that we see no it isn't uh
leading up to cop
26 it is so important that this year
becomes something like the second half
of 2015 where there's hope
where we set the right policies and
where we go forward
because it is doable that's my one
minute i hope
thank you brian yeah look i thought was
a really good discussion um the one
thing that jumps to mind is target
setting
um i think the secretary general talked
about um sort of realistic
ambitious and concrete targets you know
at boeing we we hit net zero for our own
operations inside of our four walls last
year
and um you can do that when you know
what you're netting against and um so i
think
um whether it's with the u.s
administration or or indeed
at nato setting some targets out and
then being able to measure against those
it's an important
um opportunity and where industry can
help in that
we've been on a journey for some time
and and burning down
and decarbonizing our operations and our
and our footprint
so i think that would be one point thank
you jenna knee over to you but you got
about 30 seconds
and then i'll close the camera goodness
okay um well i think a lot of the
conversation we've had it focuses on
mitigation on reducing emissions i think
we also need to give equal space to
adaptations the need to adapt to the
climate risks already at play i think
oftentimes people get fixated on
technical responses to these climate
risks
um and i'd say a real priority uh
within the frame of this kind of need to
look at also adaptation is
um looking at what drives climate
security risks um
and so programming responses need to
focus also on things these kind of
soft and maybe you know i'm very aware
of being the uh the civil society voice
in this uh security
uh conference but um people-centered
issues things like bolstering social
cohesion building trust between state
and people
and redressing inequalities now these
aren't kind of big
um military uh approaches but i think
these these are the factors that
underlie vulnerability the
marginalization of women and group
youth for example and this is what makes
them vulnerable to climate and conflict
risks and so this also needs to be part
of
what we're thinking about in terms of
future engagement thank you
okay if i could take us home yeah well
underscore all of all of what was just
said from each angle i mean the way i
see this
is this is now a central defense and
security issue
it's not a side environment issue
anymore this is
the stuff of strategic competition of
the future
between all of our nations so it's not
something that
that we can just uh forget about or keep
to the environment ministries
anymore it's stuff that our defense
ministries need to understand
the problem is is we often don't have
the talent in
our mods in our senior
political uh diplomats to understand
these problems
so i i guess i challenge all of you to
to
think really seriously about the the
training and education that needs to
happen in in your security sectors
to understand these problems you know
climate change is a messy complicated
issue it
involves a lot of science it involves a
lot of modeling are your uh
forces understanding what to do in those
situations do they know sort of how to
climate-proof their operations how to
build resilience
um it's going to take investment and
it's going to take retraining
and i i would be remiss if i didn't
mention so our
world climate and security report came
out last week uh for the nato summit and
and offer solutions of these types you
know how should ministry of defense be
planning and strategizing around these
issues so
you can go look that up uh the world
climate and security report 2021
for a first taste of of what you should
be doing and how you should be
restructuring your security operations
perfect well that was a wonderful note
to end on thank you to everyone thank
you to our panelists
we're going to continue in this room at
2 20 with a session on
political extremism goes virtual and
international but right now
i will be streaming maria tracia stage
with a globe sec talk from radislav
danilok
and a session growing the digital
economy in cee
with ministers from slovakia estonia and
slovenia so thank you globesec thank you
to our panelists
and have a wonderful rest of the day
thank you rachel thank you
you