Environmental degradation and conflicts: an indissoluble linkage told by Grammenos Mastrojeni

(To Sara Catalini)
09/06/17

Environmental degradation is inevitably linked to the emergence of violent conflicts. This is not a simple theory based on coincidences and assumptions, the subject has in fact now entered the list of major concerns at a national level, gaining notoriety and scientific credibility after several years of skepticism.

In the 2016, a research published in the academic journal "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences"  created by academics from the University of Potsdam, has discovered the pre-existence of a statistical link between wars and climate disasters; these do not directly provoke the outbreak of the conflict, but they can increase the risk of occurring and rooted in specific circumstances.

The researchers used data from the international reinsurance company Munich Re, whose information was then combined with other data on conflicts and an index, used to quantify how the countries in question are "ethnically fractionated".

Globally there is a coincidence rate of 9% between the outbreak of armed conflicts and natural disasters such as drought and heat waves. It also emerges that in countries that have been deeply divided ethnically, this same rate has risen about 23%.

So this is not a mere hypothesis, the alarm is real and well circumstantial. To clarify a subject as complex as it is rich, Online Defense interviewed Grammenos Mastrojeni, among the leading experts in environmental geostrategy and precursor in tracing a link between conflicts and environmental degradation.

On the occasion of the 2017 release in September of his next book "Greenhouse effect, war effect"Mastrojeni has commented with us the thread of Ariadne combining war and climate change, at the center of his long academic and diplomatic work, taking into consideration the specific Syrian case and the influence of the environmental context in the course of the conflict.

Since the early nineties Mastrojeni has in fact undertaken with a foresight a critical reflection and many researches on the then misunderstood link between environmental protection, human cohesion, peace and security: he published the first article on the interconnection between environment and social stability in 1994, anticipating the first official alarm emerged in the 1997 with the Geo-1 report edited by the United Nations Environment Program.

He currently teaches environmental geostrategy and is co-chairman of the group's G7 that deals with relations between climate and conflict, contributing to the awareness and dissemination of valuable information on the topic.

We need a proper preamble to understand such a sensitive issue: just think first of all that among the greatest threats to international security, large-scale violent conflicts enjoy the highest attention both from the political world and from public opinion.

This translates into an economic response; the development of military capabilities to respond to possible clashes has always consume great resources: worldwide it is estimated that on average in 2014 about 8,15% of national GDP has been spent on defense (World Bank Data 2014, latest data available ).

Although the figure is decreasing compared to previous years, it is necessary to consider that the risks to safety today dress differently from the past and have evolved very quickly in recent years. Faced with multiform enemies and not easy identification, it therefore seems a priority to find alternative solutions for the protection of the main reference object: people.

At present, the most felt threats on a global scale are in order: civil conflicts, terrorism, organized crime, arms smuggling and the climate issue.

One of the new challenges today is precisely environmental degradation, generating social inequities, injustice and closely related to the emergence of violent conflicts. The first person to systematically theorize that environmental change could itself be one security issue it was Richard Falk, who in the 1971, when environmental degradation was only a nascent concern, described what he defined as "The first law of ecological politics", extremely relevant to the issue of human adaptation to climate change.

According to Falk there was a relationship inversely proportional to the duration of the time interval between climate change and the ability to adapt to it: the probability that, in the absence of programmatic interventions, intense conflicts, traumas and social coercions occurred in the area interested grew so much more was traveling on the motto of the laissez-faire.

Today this is a real aspect of contemporary research on climate change: the faster the change occurs, the less time we have available to adapt to it, and the occurrence of dangerous climatic impacts for the safety and development of a climate becomes more likely. country system.

Physical processes such as rising sea levels, droughts, and the absence of biodiversity strongly influence national security, defined within a specific territorial sovereignty, which must be constantly monitored to ensure well-being in its change. and long-term sustainability.

Of future challenges, common perception on the topic, solutions and much more we discussed with Mastrojeni. Below is the interview given by the Professor a Online Defense.

There is skepticism about the link between climate change and conflict. Do you think that this widespread attitude in public opinion derives from the difficulty of identifying environmental degradation as a priority security issue like other emergencies?

It is a complex link and in the past there were doubts about it. Starting from 2006-2007 has become a conception accepted, so much so that it is a line studied and considered by G7, in which I am co-chairman of the group that deals with the relationship between climate and conflict. It is an established doctrine. On the Pentagon website there is the definition of climate change as a "threat multiplier", the same thing happens on the NATO website. The issue is not mistrust, but it is a link that must be explained and the real obstacle is the lack of information. The fact that one of the most influential aspects in this issue is the acceleration of migratory flows is increasing interest in the issue.

The Syrian case is a clear example of how the hydrogeological emergency of the area has generated significant social, economic and political consequences. From your point of view, the measures adopted by the Assad government to combat the phenomenon were unsuccessful? How much did they influence later?

When the measures were taken to move agriculture from the subsistence system to the income system (to bring more income to farmers with the cultivation of cotton) there was no malice or malice, in itself it is not a justifiable political choice, but a shareable line. No one could have foreseen the alteration of the climate that led to an exodus from the countryside to the cities of 1,5 million people. I would like to invite you to learn from the Syrian experience: agriculture that the Assad government wanted to “modernize” has its limits, but also a specific strength: resilience. Being an autarkic agriculture in which the farm produces the family needs and only the surplus is sold, it has a differentiated production and in the face of climate change it resists more, as some crops will be compromised by possible disasters, while others will survive.

Climate change could have significant geopolitical impacts throughout the world, contributing to poverty, environmental degradation and the further weakening of fragile governments. Is it plausible to think that the inability to react with targeted policy proposals could open the way to new political fractures and authoritarian drifts? What link exists between these factors?

A complex and very simple link at the same time: environmental degradation becomes socio-economic pressure in fragile governments for obvious reasons. If, for example, the rural portion of the country's production of poor systems enters a state of difficulty - always considering the difficult conditions of the areas examined - it is likely that the population reacts in illegal forms, social fluidity and contrast. The temptation of an authoritarian drift in similar contexts is always repeated.

In his new book published in September 2017 with Chiarelettere "Greenhouse effect, war effect" the link between conflict and environmental degradation, generating economic and social inequities, is widely explored. What is the solution? A multilateral and integrated approach of various disciplines? Who are the main actors who have to start significantly in this process of change?

I believe that it is the responsibility of all those who are able to do something: governments, supra-national structures and NGOs, we need to run to save countries that are at environmental collapse. The methods are there and they are also cheap and simple: a thematic approach focused on the recovery of land or biodiversity, the secret is to remember that between mitigation and adaptation we are placing the emphasis on the first, or work on reducing the causes of greenhouse effect. But we must first help developing countries to participate in this effort, to adapt to changing conditions.

(photo: Grammenos Mastrojeni)