Climate change is increasingly changing the national security landscape. Military specialists warn that it represents one of the greatest threats to armed forces across the world. Climate change’s complex humanitarian impact extends to large-scale military operations, logistics, and strategic priorities requiring recruitment and training efforts to adapt urgently. Last year, the Pentagon’s carbon emissions exceeded those of countries like Portugal and Denmark. Militaries are struggling with immense fiscal pressure. They need to be held accountable for vulnerabilities in their operations, which are exacerbated by their very own dependence on fossil fuels.
A 2024 report from the European Union has an alarming discovery. The combined carbon footprint of the world’s militaries likely already amounts to at least 5.5% of global emissions. This dizzying number highlights the urgent need for military entities to rethink how much energy they use and how they affect the planet. Increased reliance on fossil fuels creates considerable vulnerabilities during the act of combat, especially regarding supply chain logistics.
Vulnerabilities in Combat Operations
In fact, one of the top three most crucial vulnerabilities regarding military operations is the need for fuel convoys. Attacks by roadside bombs are common features when these convoys are moved. Those explosives were responsible for almost half of American service members’ deaths in Iraq and about 40% in Afghanistan. Given these risks, the dangers of moving large quantities of fuel should highlight for military planners their need to find other ways to avoid or lessen that risk.
Surprisingly, this has not been the case historically – at least when it comes to fuel consumption within the U.S. military. In practice, soldiers went through an average of one gallon of fuel per day during World War II. By 2006, this number jumped to about 16 gallons per soldier per day for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. This type of demand increases the logistical challenges and somewhat ironically, raises the need for innovative solutions.
The impacts of climate change are not only long-term beyond the scope of short-term military engagements. With the Arctic melting at four times the global average, routes once only imagined are now usable, giving access to previously inaccessible resources. Yet this complex environmental shift is forcing countries to rethink their geopolitical strategies ahead of the curve based on changing circumstances.
Global Military Response to Climate Challenges
Countries all over the world are reacting to the overlapping threats of climate change and national security. Germany’s foreign and defense ministries commissioned an assessment in February, stating, “We are already living in the climate crisis.” This recognition signals a deeper recognition that climate action is no longer separate from security policy.
The UK’s Ministry of Defense has similarly recognized that humanity’s impact on climate and the environment poses a significant threat to national security. With plans to invest tens of billions in military and infrastructure improvements, Germany has begun to shift its gears. The country has started a series of positive measures to address climate issues. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock reiterated the “shattering” and “extremely challenging” geopolitical situation. She reminded listeners that climate action remains a “first order security policy.” In response, the country has announced an ambitious spending initiative of half a trillion dollars to ramp up military readiness and update infrastructure. Beyond that, it will spend 100 billion euros to climate-proof lives and livelihoods.
At the same time, there’s fear that climate action is being put on the back burner as European countries step up their defense spending. The United States is in apparent retreat from its alliances and greens credentials. This trend is starting experts to sound alarms warning of long-term negative security consequences.
Rising Emergency Responses by Militaries
That urgency is echoed in the rising frequency of militaries responding to domestic emergencies with force across the globe. The Center for Climate & Security has tracked more than 500 such responses since 2022, following extreme weather events like floods, storms, and wildfires.
As Erin Sikorsky, the director of the Washington-based Center for Climate & Security, put it, that’s missing the point. She called on security practitioners to incorporate climate change into their long-term strategy. She stated, “Anyone thinking about security needs to think about climate as well. We are already living in the climate crisis.” Sikorsky highlighted that climate change is an unavoidable reality for militaries, asserting that “you can’t escape this. Climate doesn’t care who’s president or what your political goals are at the moment.”
Making the case for the necessity for adaptation even more urgently, Sikorsky stressed that militaries need to be ready for a future defined by climate impacts. “It is coming, and militaries need to be prepared,” she stated. This sentiment resonates with Duncan Depledge from Loughborough University, who observed that militaries now face an imperative: “Whichever direction you go, militaries no longer have a choice about the fact that they’re going to be operating in a very different world to what they do today.”