Home » Articles posted by Andrew Facini (Page 9)
Author Archives: Andrew Facini
Climate Change, Insecurity, and Migration: A Closer Look at India
By Baisali Mohanty, Thin Lei Win, Siena Cicarelli, and Michael Werz
India presents a key case of the interplay between geopolitics and challenges at the climate-insecurity-migration nexus. As the world’s most populous nation grapples with a complex political environment, its urgent struggle to balance economic development and poverty reduction with climate action has implications for both its 1.4+ billion population and the broader South Asian region.
This new Nexus25 project brief analyzes current challenges in India, identifies critical policy gaps in both domestic and foreign policy, and makes recommendations for improving multilateral governance throughout the South and Southeast Asian region.
These areas of opportunity include:
- Leveraging political willpower to strengthen domestic architecture;
- Developing regional and transnational policy making platforms to effectively address the climate-migration-insecurity nexus;
- Building institutional capacity with adequate coordination mechanisms; and
- Ensuring adequate climate finance.
DASD Caroline Baxter On Integrating Climate Change into Professional Military Education
On January 24, 2024, U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (DASD) for Force Education and Training Caroline Baxter spoke to attendees of the conference “Integrating Climate Change into Professional Military Education” co-hosted by the International Military Council on Climate and Security (IMCCS) and the Swedish Defence University.
DASD Baxter’s remarks are published below with permission from the U.S. Department of Defense. You can read more about the conference and find follow-up resources on gaming, training, and curriculum development in the full conference report.
Introduction
Thank you, Erin, and thanks to the International Military Council on Climate & Security and the Swedish Defence University organizers for inviting me to speak today. I also want to express my gratitude to you for allowing me to give these remarks virtually. This topic is incredibly important to the Department of Defense, and I regret that I could not join you in Stockholm for this event.
My portfolio includes military training and exercises, defense language programs, career broadening opportunities like fellowships, and two of the topics for which we are here to discuss today—professional military education and climate literacy. I chair the Department’s Climate Literacy SubWorking Group, which is tasked with integrating climate considerations into DoD education and training programs. Professional military education—or PME—has been a cornerstone of our climate literacy work. I will talk more about our progress in this area a bit later, and share some best practices and lessons learned from our work.
How Climate Threats are Addressed in the National Defense Authorization Act
By John Conger
“A Direct Threat to the National Security of the United States”
In 2017, the Republican-controlled U.S. Congress made a clear declaration in the Fiscal Year 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) – unopposed formally by the White House at the time – that “It is the sense of Congress that… climate change is a direct threat to the national security of the United States…” The statement and the vulnerability assessment required by the provision was affirmed by a bipartisan vote in the House, accepted by the Senate and signed by President Trump. It reflected the fact that while climate policy can be—and often is—politicized and polarizing, national security leaders have had a long-term consensus that climate change poses risks to both the military and broader national security interests, risks that should be met with urgency, pragmatism and consensus.
Below, we track key provisions that have been included in NDAAs from Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 through FY 2024, building from the initial, bipartisan declaration in 2017 that climate change was a direct threat to national security, to requirements for vulnerability assessments, resilience authorities, strategy requirements, and mainstreaming consideration of climate impacts on mission. These steps also reflect the value of consensus in the House and Senate Armed Services Committees where bills are regularly passed with broad bipartisan majorities. While urgency is important to meet the threat, consensus is important to maintain momentum and avoid backsliding.
There are some clear themes reflected in these provisions, independent of the party in the White House or in control of Congress. First, there’s a focus on identifying specific threats and building strategies and plans in response. Second, considerable focus is on installation resilience and withstanding the impacts of climate change. Third, there’s a growing trend of moving from plans to investments, with a greater emphasis in recent years on investments in microgrids for energy resilience, leveraging natural features for flood protection, and larger research budgets for both resilience and reducing energy use of operational systems.
Many of the measures that Congress has passed reflect the priorities in the Climate Security Plan for America (2019) and the follow up report, Challenge Accepted (2022), published by the Center for Climate and Security.
Ultimately, each of these provisions returns to the original premise from 2017, that climate change threatens U.S. national security and steps must be taken to address it and to ensure the military’s capability and capacity to conduct its missions in spite of it.
Event Summary: Locking In Progress
By Ethan Wong
On February 1st, The Center for Climate and Security (CCS) hosted an event titled “Locking in Progress: Climate Security Priorities for 2024,” focused on US policy, with a central theme of integrating and mainstreaming climate security into strategic decision making across the federal government. The panel event was moderated by CCS Director Erin Sikorsky and featured perspectives from experts with experience in U.S. government climate security policy. Speakers included:
- Dr. Tegan Blaine: Director for Climate, Environment, and Conflict at the U.S. Institute of Peace and former Senior Climate Advisor at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Bureau for Africa
- The Honorable Joe Bryan: Former Department of Defense (DOD) Chief Sustainability Officer & Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Defense on climate
- Dr. Frances Colón: Senior Director for International Climate policy at the Center for American Progress and former Deputy Science and Technology Adviser to the Secretary of State
- Mr. Richard Kidd IV: Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Environment and Energy Resilience
The panel discussed the climate security gains that the Administration has made in the last three years, remaining gaps that need to be addressed, and steps to solidify this progress.This included several important themes covered during their remarks:
- Climate change and climate security is central to the work of DOD, the Department of State (DOS), and USAID, impacting their ability to achieve their core missions.
- The administration has taken significant steps to address climate security concerns across the federal government, including through governance frameworks and investments.
- Agencies effectively linked climate change to their core missions and recognized climate security is broader than only impacts on defense or facilities.
- More work is needed to embed climate security into all aspects of risk analysis and strategic decision making.
- Although there has been progress in facilitating interagency cooperation, especially between the defense, diplomacy, and development sectors, advancing these partnerships and securing organizational change will require time and sustained leadership.
- To ensure meaningful change, climate security needs to be decoupled from domestic politics and evaluated practically.
The event included a questions and answer session from the audience and concluded with final remarks from CCS Director Emeritus John Conger. As noted above, while the conversation covered a range of topics, a core theme—the importance of integrating and mainstreaming climate security into strategic decision making across the federal government—was notable in its recurrence. The panelists emphasized that climate change is not a sector of its own, but is a fundamental shift that presents strategic risks to a range of US activities and is core to the country’s ability to compete globally. Therefore, it is essential that climate considerations be embedded in the US government’s thinking from the very beginning, a shift that takes time and sustained focus.
As we enter the final year of this presidential term, the panelists recognized that 2024 is an important year for the future of climate security progress. Domestic politics can jeopardize the gains made in the last few years, so there is a need to depoliticize climate change and execute existing action to ensure sustained change. However, despite the increasingly polarized political situation, the panel noted that climate security conversations must continue as it broadens opportunities for the US to lead on climate change, including by positively shaping the geopolitics of the issue, more thoroughly tackling the interlinkages between climate and security, and pushing for global climate progress in a strategic and security context.
A recording of the event can be found above, or on The Council on Strategic Risks YouTube page.