Global warming is changing the way the US trains for and goes to war — affecting war games, weapons systems, training exercises and military installations — according to the Pentagon.
US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel is to tell a high-level meeting of military leaders on Monday that the Pentagon is undertaking sweeping changes to operation systems and installations to keep up with the prospect of rising seas, droughts and natural disasters caused by climate change.
“A changing climate will have real impacts on our military and the way it executes its missions,” Hagel wrote in his introduction to a Pentagon report that was released on Tuesday. “We are considering the impacts of climate change in our war games and defense planning scenarios.”
Illustration: Mountain People
The Pentagon’s strategic planners have for years viewed climate change as a “threat multiplier” — worsening old conflicts and potentially provoking new clashes over migration, and shortages of food and water in the Middle East, Africa and Asia, and opening up new military challenges in the Arctic.
However, with the report, climate change moved from a potential threat to an immediate factor in a wide range of operational and budgeting decisions.
“It makes it a reality that climate change indeed is a risk today and we need to plan, program and budget for it now and into the future,” said Sherri Goodman, chief executive of a military advisory board, a group of former generals and other high-ranking officers that studies US national security.
The report — unveiled at a meeting of more than 30 defense ministers from the Americas and Europe — also signaled the US’ intention to take a lead role at international climate negotiations in Lima in December.
From now on, the US military will factor climate change into a host of day-to-day decisions, a senior US defense official told a conference call with reporters.
“It’s about being baked into things we are already doing and incorporated into all the other things we are doing,” he said.
Those decisions could include war games, training exercises and purchasing decisions — which could all be affected by conditions such as sea-level rise, heat waves and droughts.
War games scenarios would now factor in floods or storms instead of assuming optimal conditions, Goodman said.
“You could make the game more complex with sea-level rise and extreme weather events,” she added.
She said the US navy would have to test sonar and other systems according to possible changes to ocean chemistry and the military will have to adapt to hotter temperatures.
One of the biggest and most costly decisions ahead is the location of about 7,000 US military sites.
As the report acknowledged, US military installations and personnel are already exposed to climate change. The Hampton Roads area in Virginia — which houses the biggest concentration of US forces — already floods during high tides and severe storms, and could see an additional 45cm of sea level rise in the next 20 years.
Meanwhile, military bases in the US southwest are coping with water and electricity shortages, under recurring droughts. Arctic land-based installations are shifting because of melting permafrost, while retreating sea ice is changing naval requirements.
The Pentagon is not planning a wholesale relocation of bases, the officials told the call. However, they said the military was already bringing in sandbags and moving generators out of basements in low-lying areas. It was also shelving ideas for new construction on flood plains.
Other potential changes include cuts to outdoor training exercises because of heat waves, or increased weapons maintenance costs and repairs because of heat and dust.
“As we think about changing weather patterns, we have to think hard about where operations might be conducted and whether we need to change the assumptions about what kind of air breathing conditions ... what kind of sea state we might expect in an operating environment and what impact they might have,” the report said.
The report added that troops could also be at greater risk of infectious diseases, which spread more rapidly in hotter temperatures.
Hagel in comments to reporters at the weekend said the Pentagon anticipated an increase in humanitarian missions, because of natural disasters and recurring famines.
He also said the Arctic presented a growing military challenge.
“We see an Arctic that is melting, meaning that most likely a new sea lane will emerge,” he said. “We know that there are significant minerals and natural deposits of oil and natural gas there. That means that nations will compete for those natural resources. That’s never been an issue before. You couldn’t get up there and get anything out of there. We have to manage through what those conditions and new realities are going to bring in the way of potential threats,” Hagel said.
The Pentagon was first instructed by the US Congress in 2007 to incorporate climate change into its long-term security planning.
However, Republicans in Congress have gone on to block the military from preparing for a warmer future, cutting funds for intelligence gathering or testing low-carbon jet fuels.
Officials told the call that planning for the future would help bring down climate-related costs.
“There is a lot you can do to mitigate risk and lower the cost of risks if you acknowledge the risk exists,” the officials said.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS