The Age of Consequences
This is one for the conservative climate change deniers.
The Age of Consequences is a 2017 documentary I mentioned in my essay CLIMATE CHANGE DENIALISM. At the time it was shown on 4Corners, see my blog 800 ... however, the ABC don't have the program on iView anymore, you may rent it from iTunes or Amazon.
For those of my readers who don't watch ABC tv, not even Four Corners, but who might be interested in a (for me at least) new angle on climate change, do yourself a favour and watch this film.
And let me say this: The people interviewed here are from the Right side of the political spectrum, as the general said, "We are not your traditional environmentalists".
Make no mistake, this is explosive stuff (pun intended).
"We are not your traditional environmentalists."
Gen. Gordon Sullivan (Retd), Fmr. Chief of Staff, U.S. Army
Four Corners brings you the views of distinguished former members of the US military and senior policy makers who warn that climate change is not only real, it's a threat to global security.
"I'm here today not only representing my views on security implications of climate change, but on the collective wisdom of 16 admirals and generals."
Rear Admiral David Titley (Retd), U.S. Navy
They say climate change is impacting on vital resources, migration patterns and conflict zones.
Here is the preview:
Then today in the newspaper an article on the same subject, but closer to home ... furthermore, do not miss the second & third articles Climate refugees cannot be forced back home and my blog 531 Australia's peace threatened by climate change, the latter being from - would you believe it - 2015.
'Dystopian future':
Climate change to force review of military's role
by Peter Hannam, SMH
'Dystopian future': Climate change to force review of military's role
Climate change poses "a major security challenge for Australia" that experts warn has the potential to rapidly stretch the capability of the military, as demonstrated by the current bushfire emergency.
Michael Thomas, a retired army major, said "rising emissions will result in a more unstable and insecure world that will have far-reaching human, national and international security consequences", in an article published by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute on Tuesday.
"The bushfire crisis that’s unfolding across Australia provides some insight into what that dystopian world will look like," he said.
Major Thomas, who published a 2017 book on the security risks of climate change, said the fires that caused at least 27 deaths and burnt millions of hectares revealed the limits of Australia's forces to cope with traditional threats abroad and concurrent new ones at home.
"Climate change is talked about as a 'threat multiplier' but it's actually a 'burden multiplier'", he told the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
The Morrison government copped criticism for waiting until earlier this month to deploy 3000 dedicated reserve troops to assist with the bushfire relief despite major fires burning in some states since September.
It also dispatched the navy to assist in the evacuation of people stranded in Victoria's East Gippsland.
Major Thomas said "the bushfire crisis may be the moment that opens genuine but critically honest policy debate on climate change in Australia".
Rising sea levels and more intense storms not only threaten the stability of domestic and foreign communities, they also undermine the capability of Australia's own military to respond.
The type, location and frequencies of challenges for armed forces everywhere were already changing, with flow-on consequences for the equipment, training and structures they need, Major Thomas said.
"What was meant to be tomorrow’s security problem has been catapulted into the here and now," he said.
Major Thomas pointed to Australia's participation with South Pacific partners in 2018 in the Boe Declaration on Regional Security as a recognition by the government that defence forces have "a unique and important role" to play in a warming world.
However, while countries such as New Zealand had followed up with a defense assessment later that yearand an implementation plan last month, the Australian government had made little public about the military's readiness to respond to climate change.
Major Thomas, who served in the military for 20 years, said the lack of a bipartisan political consensus in Australia - unlike in its partner across the Tasman - meant Australia's defense forces were largely absent from the public debate.
"The [ADF's] voice has been lost in the Australian debate," he said.
The government has committed some $70 billion for new submarines and joint strike fighters. In light of the emerging threats, Major Thomas said it should reconsider buying more landing craft - such as those used at Mallacoota in Victoria - or building a reserve fire-fighting or other disaster-relief capacity.
A spokesperson for Defence said the 2016 Defence White Paper identified climate change "as one of the causes of state fragility, a key driver of our security environment to 2035".
"Defence factors climate change considerations into our strategic planning for defence capabilities, estate, personnel and equipment, as well as related operational responses and preparedness," the spokesperson said.
Peter Hannam
Peter Hannam writes on environment issues for The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
_________________________
Climate refugees cannot be forced back home
In a landmark decision, the UN Human Rights Committee has found it is unlawful for governments to send people back to countries where climate change impacts expose people to life-threatening risks or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. It has taken 25 years of case law to get to this point.
The case concerns Ioane Teitiota from Kiribati, a small island nation in the Pacific. He said the effects of climate change and sea-level rise forced him to move to New Zealand: life at home was increasingly precarious as a result of overcrowding, erosion, inundation and insufficient fresh water. Claiming to be the world’s first climate change refugee, he received global attention in 2015 when New Zealand rejected his application for protection. He then argued before the UN Human Rights Committee that by deporting him, New Zealand had violated his right to life …
… read the article at the SMH