Samina Mustafa
M.Phil. Sholar
Promises, often crafted with good intentions, have an unfortunate tendency to crumble. The optimism surrounding COP28’s outcome demands a tempered response infused with a prudent skepticism. The headlines will undoubtedly showcase carefully chosen terms like ‘abate,’ ‘phase down,’ and ‘phase out’ concerning fossil fuels. However, beneath the surface, the agreement is unlikely to be fortified with tangible targets or unwavering deadlines. Instead, it might heavily rely on idealistic visions of swiftly advancing carbon capture technologies, allowing for the persistent, unapologetic use of fossil fuels across various scenarios.
Notwithstanding these reservations, a complete dismissal of COP28 might be premature. Certain facets of the summit have proven productive, with the spotlight on the groundbreaking Declaration on Climate, Relief, Recovery, and Peace. This forward-thinking declaration advocates for more assertive collective action to fortify climate resilience, especially in countries and communities highly susceptible to fragility or conflict.
The pivotal intersection between climate and security, acknowledged by COP28, is of profound significance. The declaration underscores a dual acknowledgment: first, that climate change intensifies security challenges, and second, that state fragility and conflict impede climate adaptation and mitigation efforts. This symbiotic relationship forms a perilous loop, leaving the most vulnerable exposed to both violence and climate hazards.
These discussions bear particular weight for Pakistan. The country has experienced a 34% surge in militant attacks in November alone, with security concerns cited as the driving force behind the contentious expulsion of undocumented Afghans. The recurrent cycle of droughts and floods in the region further compounds these security challenges.
A noteworthy concern is the anticipated upswing in climate migration, expected to fuel clandestine activities. While the traditional focus revolves around resource competition triggering conflicts, such as water and food scarcity, this is only part of the narrative. Climate change erodes state legitimacy by diminishing states’ capacity for service delivery, providing fertile ground for non-state actors. This vulnerability may result in desperate farmers becoming more susceptible to militant recruitment, and climate migration could amplify the demand for illegal activities like people smuggling, providing additional funding streams for militant groups.
Furthermore, the understanding is growing that climate disasters divert security forces from their primary objectives, pulling them into extensive rescue and reconstruction efforts. Militaries globally, from Spain to the US and East Africa, find themselves entangled in responding to wildfires and floods, diverting resources unpredictably. Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg’s statement at COP28, emphasizing climate change’s prominence on Nato’s agenda, underscores the interconnectedness of climate and security.
Embedding a climate perspective into security policymaking is deemed more feasible than ensuring access to climate finance and adaptation initiatives in insecure areas. A report from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) highlights a substantial adaptation finance gap in low-income countries, particularly in fragile and conflict-affected regions. Pakistan, seeking support from the Loss and Damage Fund, must focus on fostering effective collaborations with local governments, schools, and NGOs to deliver climate finance in challenging contexts.
Ultimately, vulnerable countries like Pakistan must actively engage in breaking the cyclicality of climate and security. This involves enhancing democratic norms and prioritizing climate-related concerns amid the intricate web of international agreements and commitments.
