Search Climate Insights Directory

The authors use the 2019 Worldwide Threat Assessment's accurate prediction of a pandemic to urge policymakers to act on similar warnings regarding climate change. They highlight how environmental degradation and climate hazards threaten global infrastructure, food and water security, and geopolitical stability, particularly in coastal areas and the Arctic.

The document argues that while India's current internal security challenges—such as terrorism in Kashmir and Maoist insurgencies—are primarily driven by non-climate factors, future climate change will likely act as a risk multiplier. By 2050, increased temperature volatility, erratic monsoon patterns, and sea-level rise are projected to heighten human vulnerability. The authors identify three primary security pathways: rural unrest driven by agricultural distress and crop failure; tensions within India's federal structure caused by inter-state migration and river water disputes; and urban violence magnified by heat-induced aggression and food price hikes. The report emphasizes that at a 1.5°C global temperature rise, large portions of India enter a high-risk zone, potentially translating environmental stress into state security threats.

The report evaluates global security threats under two warming scenarios: a 'Near Term' scenario (1-2°C) and a 'Medium-Long Term' scenario (2-4+°C). It concludes that even low levels of warming present high to very high risks, while higher warming levels pose catastrophic and potentially irreversible threats to global stability. The analysis is structured around U.S. Geographic Combatant Command areas, detailing how climate-induced physical shocks and social tensions act as threat multipliers that can lead to state failure, resource conflict, and the breakdown of international alliances.

The document argues that while climate change is unlikely to be the proximate cause of war between India and Pakistan, it acts as a risk multiplier by increasing the volatility of river flows in the Indus River Basin (IRB). This volatility heightens mutual distrust regarding dam operations and water manipulation, placing unprecedented stress on the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). The author suggests that the IWT's framework of partitioning water is inadequate for modern climate challenges and recommends a shift toward joint sustainable management to prevent natural calamities from triggering armed conflict in a nuclear-armed region.

The report argues that current global governance structures are inadequate for the security risks posed by climate change despite advanced predictive capabilities. It identifies three primary gaps: a lack of standardized global information, a disconnect between climate messengers and security audiences, and a lack of coordination between climate and security policy. To resolve these, the authors propose the R2P2 framework, which includes the creation of an International Climate Security Assessment Panel (ICSAP), the appointment of a UN Permanent Representative for Climate and Security to lead a Climate Security Center (CSC), and the establishment of a UN-level Climate Security Coordination Mechanism (CSCM).

The briefing argues that the world is entering a period of high risk due to the collapse of formal arms control agreements between the US and Russia, the emergence of new nuclear powers, and the introduction of destabilizing technologies. To counter this, the author proposes the adoption of 'Nuclear Strategic Stability' (NSS) as a primary metric, where the risk of nuclear conflict is kept as low as achievable. The author outlines a '10-point Code of Responsible Nuclear Armed States' based on six elements: restraint, relevance, reassurance, readiness, reciprocity, and reduction. Furthermore, the document suggests a three-gateway (T1, T2, T3) schematic pathway to disarmament, emphasizing that the removal of tactical weapons and the establishment of conventional arms control are prerequisites for the final elimination of nuclear arsenals under the NPT framework.

The document argues that while the world faces unprecedented security risks from climate change, it also possesses unprecedented foresight through predictive modeling. However, a 'governance gap' exists because this information is not effectively translated for security decision-makers or aligned with security policy timelines. To address this, the authors propose the R2P2 framework, which consists of three principles: Assessment & Anticipation (creating a global climate security assessment hub), Elevation & Translation (establishing leadership by security practitioners to brief decision-makers), and Coordination & Alignment (bridging climate and security policy windows).

The report examines the global governance of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), noting a trend of weakening norms and rising threats. While highlighting successes like the 97% destruction of declared chemical weapons stockpiles and the near-universality of the NPT, CWC, and BWC, it warns of a new nuclear arms race and the increasing use of chemical weapons. It identifies critical gaps in verification—particularly for biological weapons—and the risks posed by technological convergence, such as synthetic biology and AI. The author recommends augmenting existing regimes with ad hoc mechanisms, increasing experiential learning for policymakers, and focusing on eliminating specific destabilizing capabilities like nuclear cruise missiles.

The report details a 90-minute tabletop exercise simulating a nuclear maritime accident in the Bering Strait in 2050. The exercise identified critical gaps in Arctic infrastructure, including the fact that only 6% of Arctic waters are charted to modern standards and a lack of predictive atmospheric and ocean circulation models for winter conditions. Key findings emphasize the need for integrated indigenous emergency response infrastructure, the establishment of 'Confidence Building Measures' (CBM) with Russia to manage high-level nuclear contingencies, and the necessity of a common, multi-agency observation network to track changing Arctic storm patterns. The document argues that proactive research into radionuclide transport and the creation of an Arctic operations center are essential to avoid catastrophic failures in situational awareness and operational response.

The report argues that climate change is a vital national security risk that requires a whole-of-government response. It proposes a 'Climate Security Plan for America' structured around four pillars: demonstrating leadership through a new White House Office on Climate Security, assessing risks via a Climate Security Crisis Watch Center, bolstering international resilience to compete with adversaries like China and Russia, and building domestic infrastructure resilience. The plan emphasizes the need for the U.S. to remain in the Paris Agreement and to integrate climate foresight into military doctrine and intelligence assessments.

Nigeria aims to produce nuclear energy by 2025 and reach 4,800 megawatts of capacity by 2035, primarily through a 'build-own-operate' model with potential partners like Russia and China. However, the document warns that these plans are complicated by severe climate risks—including desertification in the north and sea-level rise in Lagos—and persistent security threats from groups like Boko Haram and ISWAP. While Nigeria has successfully removed highly enriched uranium from its research reactor with international help, the briefing argues that the government must better integrate climate and security risks into the design and transport of future nuclear facilities to avoid vulnerabilities.

The Council on Strategic Risks (CSR) commemorates Dr. Janne E. Nolan, a founding board member and expert in nuclear security. The tribute highlights her role in establishing the CSR and the Nuclear Security Working Group, her influence on nuclear strategy through her writing, and her commitment to non-partisan, multidisciplinary approaches to addressing existential threats, including nuclear proliferation and climate change.

The document examines how Egypt's pursuit of nuclear energy, notably the $21 billion El Dabaa project with Russia, is complicated by climate vulnerabilities and security dynamics. It highlights risks such as sea level rise threatening coastal power plants and rising temperatures affecting reactor safety. The report recommends that the United States engage in nonproliferation efforts and that international entities help Egypt implement comprehensive climate security assessments for its nuclear infrastructure.

Egypt is advancing its nuclear energy sector, primarily through the El Dabaa plant project with Russian support, to meet growing electricity demands and reduce fossil fuel dependence. However, this expansion occurs against a backdrop of domestic political consolidation, regional instability in Libya and Sudan, and severe climate risks. The Nile Delta is particularly vulnerable to sea level rise and saltwater intrusion, which could threaten coastal nuclear infrastructure and destabilize the economy. The report urges the U.S. to renew its leadership in nuclear nonproliferation and encourages Egypt to integrate comprehensive climate security assessments into its nuclear planning.

The briefing argues that the world is entering a period without formal arms control agreements between the US and Russia, increasing the risk of nuclear miscalculation and a new arms race. To counter this, the author introduces 'Nuclear Strategic Stability' (NSS) as a metric to assess postures and capabilities, and proposes a '10-point Code of Responsible Nuclear Weapon Capable States' based on restraint, relevance, reassurance, readiness, reciprocity, and reduction. The author outlines a three-gateway (T1, T2, T3) framework to transition from current deterrents to total disarmament, emphasizing that the security of states must be ensured through conventional arms control before final nuclear elimination can occur.

The Council on Strategic Risks examines the implications of the Trump administration's intention to withdraw from the 1987 INF Treaty. The authors argue that this move, alongside the potential withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and the JCPOA, signals a profound shift in the global security environment. They advocate for new arms control strategies that focus on specific destabilizing weapon classes—particularly those with indistinguishable conventional variants—and emphasize the need for non-governmental expertise and consultation with international allies to maintain global stability.

The report argues that climate change will increasingly exacerbate risks to US national security by intensifying physical impacts and mounting geopolitical tensions over the energy transition. It identifies a likely increase in cross-border conflicts over water and migration, strategic competition in the Arctic, and the risk of unilateral solar geoengineering. The document highlights 11 highly vulnerable countries and two regions (Central Africa and Pacific island states) where climate-induced instability may necessitate increased US diplomatic, humanitarian, and military resources. It also notes that current global policies are insufficient to meet Paris Agreement goals, leading to competition over critical minerals and technologies.

The document outlines how biodiversity loss in forests undermines societal stability and global security. It identifies five key mechanisms: the role of pollinators and seed dispersers in food security, the capacity of diverse forests for carbon storage to mitigate climate change, the function of healthy forests in flood prevention, the reduction of zoonotic disease spillover through intact ecosystems, and the overall resilience of biodiverse systems against disturbances.

The document outlines a fictional 2030 scenario where a public-private consortium led by Canada and the United Kingdom proposes deploying stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) over the Arctic to preserve sea ice and slow the Greenland ice sheet melt. The simulation tasks participants representing various nations and blocs—including Russia, China, Norway, the EU, Mexico, and the African Union—with deciding whether to join, oppose, or remain neutral toward the consortium, and determining their preferred SAI deployment levels based on security, economic, and geopolitical interests.

The document outlines the systemic risks where agrifood-driven greenhouse gas emissions and climate-induced food insecurity intersect with geopolitical instability. It notes that the agrifood sector contributes one third of total GHG emissions and that food price inflation is spiking across low- and middle-income countries, exacerbated by the war in Ukraine. The text argues that climate change acts as a social crisis that intensifies inequality and threatens human security, calling for a systems-thinking approach to integrate climate and security policies.