War machine and the health of the planet
AS we start to think about Malaysia’s upcoming role as the chair of Asean next year and the region’s emerging focus on climate, peace and security, I wanted to take a moment to consider some of the hidden costs of the horrors of war.

Beyond the terrifying, heart-wrenching scenes we have been witnessing from Gaza, Ukraine, Sudan, Yemen, and a host of other conflicts around the planet, the carbon emission costs of conflict are truly staggering and must be factored fully into work on the climate-related dimensions of international, regional and national peace and security.

These costs extend far beyond the tragedy of the deaths, injury, mental anguish, deprivation and displacement they cause; they are a significant factor in the global battle against climate change.

If global military emissions were counted as a single country, they would rank as one of the highest emitters in the world. Based on estimates from various sources, military activities contribute to about 5.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. This would place them as the fourth largest emitter, surpassing even countries like Russia in terms of carbon footprint, and a bigger contributor than the global healthcare service.

The US military alone, if considered a country, would rank as the world’s 47th highest emitter of greenhouse gases, greater than entire nations like Portugal.

The environmental impact of war also extends to less obvious issues such as massive deforestation and destruction of landscapes, especially in war-torn countries where governance is weak, and environmental regulations are often poorly enforced. Deforestation contributes directly to carbon emissions and reduces the earth’s capacity to absorb existing carbon dioxide, worsening the overall impact on the climate.

Conflicts indirectly exacerbate climate vulnerabilities by destroying infrastructure, displacing communities, and disrupting normal governance, which makes climate adaptation measures more difficult to implement.

For example, in Yemen and Syria, prolonged conflicts have devastated water management systems, agriculture, and towns and cities, increasing carbon footprints and reducing resilience to climate impacts.

The cost of war on health is unacceptably high, not only in terms of death and injuries, but also through the destruction of essential health services.

Climate change itself is increasingly viewed as a threat multiplier that exacerbates the risks of conflict, particularly in regions where resources are scarce and governance is weak. As climate change leads to more severe droughts, floods, and other extreme weather events, the competition for dwindling natural resources like water and arable land intensifies, increasing the likelihood of conflict.

This cycle of environmental degradation and conflict creates a feedback loop that makes climate stabilisation efforts even more challenging.

And so we need action to address these issues. The United Nations has identified climate change as a critical factor in global security, suggesting that climate action can be a path to peace.

To truly address the twin challenges of climate change and conflict, a coordinated global effort is necessary, prioritising sustainability and peacebuilding in international policy agendas and recognising that when men go to war with each other and worsen the health of the planet, the feedback loop to the health of its people is all too clear.

Integrating climate considerations into peacekeeping and conflict resolution efforts are steps that can help break the cycle of conflict and environmental degradation. Militaries must be held accountable for their carbon footprint.

With Malaysia poised to chair Asean in 2025, the nation has an opportunity to lead in addressing the intertwined challenges of conflict and climate change in our relatively peaceful but potentially challenged region as we see climate-related threats causing cross-border tensions and existing conflicts exacerbated by climate change.

As a regional leader, Malaysia can kickstart discussions that emphasise the need to address the environmental impact of military conflicts and promote sustainable peacekeeping strategies.

Firstly, Malaysia could prioritise the integration of climate considerations into Asean’s peace, security and humanitarian mechanisms and architecture. Some nascent work is already ongoing through publication of a timely report from the Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) examining the dynamics of climate, peace and security in South-East Asia.

Included in its proposals is an overhaul of Asean institutions and centres so that they are able to incorporate climate, peace and security related considerations in their work. Working to develop more effective conflict prevention and resolution strategies that also address underlying environmental issues makes sense. Malaysia could lead by example, demonstrating how national defence policies and practice can be aligned with climate action, reducing military carbon footprints while enhancing security.

Additionally, Malaysia could push for greater transparency and accountability in military emissions within Asean. Encouraging member states to report their military-related emissions would not only foster greater environmental accountability but also enhance mutual trust and cooperation in security matters.

Finally, as chair, Malaysia can facilitate regional dialogue and collaboration focused on the dual threats of conflict and climate change. This could include partnerships for research, shared strategies for reducing dependency on fossil fuels in military operations, and collective disaster response initiatives that consider both security and environmental sustainability.

By addressing these critical issues and laying out a clear pathway for implementation of the recommendations included in the RSIS report, Malaysia can help lead Asean towards a future where peace and sustainability go hand in hand, setting a global standard for integrating environmental security into regional peace and security frameworks, and keeping us, the people of Asean, safe from threats posed by the potentially lethal mix of climate and conflict.

Dr Jemilah Mahmood, a physician and experienced crisis leader, was appointed the executive director of the Sunway Centre for Planetary Health at Sunway University in August 2021. She is the founder of aid organisation Mercy Malaysia and has served in leadership roles internationally with the United Nations and Red Cross for the last decade. She writes on Planetary Health Matters once a month in Ecowatch. The views expressed here are entirely the writer’s own.
Environment,Climate,Jemilah Mahmood,Planetary Health Matters,Conflict,Asean,Gaza
The world’s collective military is one of the biggest carbon emitters on the planet, and where they engage in conflicts there is often massive deforestation and the destruction of landscapes that add to the emissions.