Climate and conflict, hand in hand

The world is watching Paris with a heavy heart, drumming a beat that is at once weary with fatigue and quick with panic. At the same time, the environmental community has been watching Paris for many months—for a different reason. It is hard to believe that in less than two weeks, COP21, the 2015 United Nations Conference on Climate Change, will meet in a city still reeling from a tragedy of loss, hatred and fear.

While gathering my thoughts for this biweekly column, I debated whether or not it was appropriate to discuss the upcoming climate talks in Paris with or without fully unpacking the implications of the attacks themselves as well as their responses. But then I received an e-newsletter from 350.org’s French campaigner Nicolas Haeringer. Nico wrote from France, telling us that the upcoming Paris Climate Summit is in some sense “a peace summit.” He reminded 350.org followers like me that, especially now, solidarity and love are of the utmost important as we make every attempt to avoid the most threatening climate disasters.

As Sierra Club founder John Muir once said, “When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.” I worried that I would be conflating headlines, but I realize that it is impossible to treat terror and hate and the climate crisis as disparate threats. Acts of terror shake us. They make us mourn for the specter of peace, peace that violence and division make seemingly unachievable. For that reason, it can be difficult to approach issues of terrorism with anything but raw emotion. The intersection of this tragedy with the upcoming Climate Summit, however, reflects the ever mounting urgency to address the climate crisis before it leads to even more conflict.

Again and again, the latest research on this topic points to the same conclusion: that with changing and warming climate, we should “expect more wars, civil unrest, and strife, and also more violent crime in general.” Numerous studies have demonstrated a link between the effects of climate change and the increase of violence, not only among individuals but also among groups. The dangers posed by climate change—such as drought, crop failures, scarcer water and more extreme weather events—put extra pressure on already tense and struggling populations. While some will find resilience in the face of climate change, others will devolve to further conflict. Thus, swift and meaningful action on climate change is not simply about saving this species or that landscape; it is about the very fabric of our society and the threads that are posed to unravel if we do not.

To be sure, climate action is not the only policy we must enact nor the only element of our culture we must shift to achieve a more peaceful future. Climate policies must be implemented in concert with efforts to increase both equity and equality, just as environmental activists must work in solidarity with other justice-seeking individuals and groups. Environmental change is one sector of several where people in power must decide whether they want to perpetuate injustices—like those that accompany an ever warming and changing climate—or strive to correct them.

Another notable yet unfortunate intersection is between the media and the social response to the attacks in Paris. The ease at which popular media can ignore tragedy in non-western nations is disgraceful, and to me it feels all too reminiscent of the nonchalance with which world powers like the U.S. have approached climate policy. For decades, leaders have dragged their feet in making meaningful commitments to reduce emissions. The nations, communities and groups of people most vulnerable to climate change are the same ones whose stories escape our headlines and whose flags do not color our Facebook profile pictures.

This must end now. It must end with a meaningful commitment to address climate by global leaders at the U.N. Climate Summit later this month. In light of the recent attacks, Prime Minister Valls confirmed that the U.N. Climate Conference will still be held “because it’s an essential meeting for humanity.” Our leaders will not convene in spite of the terror that was sparked in France or in Beirut or Baghdad or anywhere in the world; our leaders will convene because of this pain, and they will convene because the prospect of peace depends upon it.

Rachel Weber is a Trinity senior. Her column runs on alternate Wednesdays.