Changing The Way We Fight - Climate Change and the MOD

 

The Ministry of Defence has published a report by Lt Gen Sir Richard Nugee, the former Chief of Defence People, into the impact of Climate Change on the MOD. This is a subject which may sound tenuously linked at first glance to the business of defending the nation, but, is something of critical importance to us all.

It is perhaps easy to dismiss climate change as something that is nothing to do with Defence or see it as some kind of ‘Guardian reading hippy fixation’ or the newly fashionable insult of ‘its all terribly woke’. The problem is that if we follow this logic, we find ourselves in a place where it could have serious implications for Defence and wider national security.

The report looks in depth at why climate change matters, and how this can impact on the armed forces in what they do, and how they operate. There are arguably several key factors that could have an impact here.

Image by Ministry of Defence; © Crown copyright

Whatever interpretation or view that you personally have on climate change, we live on a planet where changes to climatic conditions are a fact of life. This can see some areas become more arid, while others become more subject to more extreme weather conditions. The challenge is identifying what these changes mean over time for Defence. 

At a top-level climate change is something that if not addressed can cause conflict, or create the conditions where conflict or security issues become more likely. For example, to give a broad case, in the Horn of Africa, dry seasons cause failure of seasonal crop growing which causes famine and economic hardship. This in turn leads to people migrating to cities in search of food. These cities spring up almost overnight, placing significant resource pressures on food distribution networks and massively soaring prices, and leading people to consider alternative ways to find money to get an income. The result is they take to the sea in skiffs and try piracy as a way of generating ransom money to get food to keep their families secure.

This may sound farfetched, but its not far off describing some of the circumstances that have genuinely occurred in the Horn of Africa, particularly the pressure on the growth of cities in locations like Somalia. Without realising it, a dry season and famine in Africa can set in motion a chain of events that sees NATO warships deployed to counter piracy.

There are interventions that can be staged – for example UK Aid does a significant amount of work in trying to not only intervene to provide lifesaving assistance, but also in addressing longer term instability. For example, setting up the means to provide ‘micro-loans’ to women to help them setup a small business and break the cycle of dependency, or helping provide technical advice and training into how to improve crop growing.

All of this is not remotely linked to the business of Defence, but it shows that a strong and effective aid programme can help create the means to reduce downstream the likelihood of needing to get Defence assets involved in solving a problem that could easily have been averted.

There is a whole raft of regions where Climate Change is putting pressure on resources that states need to survive. The concept of ‘water wars’ has been written about at length in plenty of articles, but it remains terrifyingly valid. Water is becoming a key commodity of control, and something that as pressures on it increase, so too does the importance of controlling its distribution.

If countries can control the flow and supplies of water, for example by building of dams or stopping its distribution, then they can exert influence on other nations. Look at Africa and the battle for influence of water on the Nile, or the Middle East and the Turkish efforts to control water flowing into Iraq, or in the Ukraine and efforts to stop water flowing to Crimea.

All of these highlight how a natural resource, essential for life and which we take utterly for granted, can be used in a way to shape international relations and policy.

Another example is the growing pressure on some areas due to crop failure and the spread of deserts, placing significant pressure on populations to try and survive. Their only option may be to migrate en-masse to another location. The result may be both a collapse of food production, and a rapid growth in sprawling large cities that could be a haven for criminality, and associated pressures that millions of people living in close proximity together, without sufficient resources, can bring.

Bluntly, climate change matters because it fundamentally impacts on how humans behave and how their actions can shape wider security outcomes. It is important not to dismiss it as something that is for the eco-warriors to worry about, because if we do, then all too quickly our own warriors will become involved.

For the MOD climate change impacts on a range of areas beyond just the risk of conflict. For starters there is the issue of how does it impact on our ability as a nation to deploy and fight?

One of the key takeaways from the Integrated Review was that the UK wished to remain a ‘full spectrum power’, in that it aspired to be able to operate globally under most climatic environments, from the ‘High North’ of the Arctic, to the jungles of Brunei and the Indo-Pacific region.

This in turn brings a significant challenge in ensuring that troops are properly equipped to fight. It is easy to buy military equipment when you know you only have to operate in one climate and be ready to fight in one environment. Now try buying equipment that is able to support operations everywhere from freezing polar conditions to the desert, and everything in between.

Rapid changes in climate and landscape will make it harder for planners to do everything to the same level if budgets remain unchanged. For example, a rise in extremely cold weather in the arctic regions, possibly featuring even longer and colder winters in the Baltic states, will increase the need to spend more on ensuring British Army equipment can operate in these freezing conditions as a routine way of working.

But if this is happening at the same time as temperatures are soaring in other areas, like the Middle East, then more money needs to be spent on cooling equipment and desert warfare modifications. There is no point turning up in the desert if you are unable to fight because you have collapsed from heatstroke and your vehicles are burning up.

These sort of changes, particularly as they accelerate pose a challenge as budgetary decisions must be made on what to prioritise. What matters most, and where should risks be taken, and what is the impact if those risks are realised?

In a similar vein, the report notes the challenges of deployed operations and embedding with host nations. For example, if there is a rise in conflict due to drought, and the UK is deployed as a peacekeeping force, where do the water supplies come from? This may sound minor, but if you are committed to operations in hot environments, having access to constant water is crucial – one of the most key parts of Camp Bastion was its bottling plant.

To be able to conduct peacekeeping, or enforcement operations in drought ridden countries is going to place a significant burden on logistic supply chains to ensure troops have enough water to stay hydrated and able to function. Without this, the risk of casualties grows significantly.

There are wider concerns about the ethics of deploying with water for yourself, but not the people you are protecting, and whether by supplying water, you are actually taking sides in a conflict, or weaponizing it to encourage people to adhere to your views. Something as simple as a safe reliable source of water may become a potent weapon and way of shaping behaviour in a few years’ time.

There will need to be serious thought given to how to prepare troops to operate in the extremes of temperatures too. Operations in temperate areas will be increasingly less likely to happen, meaning acclimatisation, and understanding of how to safely operate in these environments will be essential.

The Royal Marines have been doing this for years, operating in Norway annually to practise their arctic warfare skills, and the British Army has been operating Jungle Warfare training in Belize and Brunei. But is this going to need to be expanded – if more troops are likely to be deployed into areas of extreme temperatures, do you need expanded exercises, more time abroad and an increase in acclimatised theatre reserves?

During TELIC & HERRICK forces based in Cyprus served as a theatre reserve as they could quickly provide troops acclimatised to the heat of the Middle East to deploy quickly if required. There is likely to be an increased need for troops to be able to deploy without needing lengthy time to get used to the temperature, and able to operate from the moment they land – this could fundamentally change considerations around basing and how best to keep troops stationed around the world.

Climate change will also see a changed focus on resources to adapt to newly emerging technology and new priorities. Changing operational focus to new resources is not new for the armed forces. For centuries access to large strategic reserves of timber was deemed essential to provide the necessary raw material for shipbuilding and other military operations.

Indeed, even up until WW2, the provision of timber was seen as a key military resource to the extent that many people were involved in managing forestry commission reserves. There are locations in Scotland that today function as leisure sites which in WW2 housed Canadian personnel sent over to ‘do their bit’ for the war effort by safeguarding supplies of timber for the UK.

Similarly, the provision of coal was vital for the Royal Navy as steamships emerged into service, and much of the global basing strategy up until 1914 was built around secure access to coaling stations where Royal Navy warships could take on supplies. Small out of the way locations like the Falkland Islands played a crucial role in offering assured access to fuel for vessels transiting the Cape, and in turn particularly after WW1 started, German raiders found access to coal a key requirement for staying credible as a raiding force.

Coal has been overtaken by oil as the key means of propulsion which has again changed the strategic dynamic. Now assured access to oil is essential for keeping armies, navies and air forces active and capable of operations, and drives much strategic thinking – how do you assure access to fuel supplies and get them to the homeland to ensure your continued ability to fight?

In the modern world the other emerging resource that matters is ‘rare earth minerals’, those various minerals which are rare in scope, and hard to find, but are essential to the manufacture of so many technical goods that define the world we live in – like phones and tablets.

The control of the supply of these resources is vital – there has been a lot of attention paid to how in Africa there is a veritable struggle for influence between China and the West in the scramble for control of these minerals.

As technology changes, and climates change, then there is likely to be an ongoing battle for influence to gain access to new and emerging resources that matter. For the UK there will be challenges to avoid resource dependency on one area and ensuring that the armed force cannot be paralysed by lack of access to it.

This in turn calls for new ways of thinking – for example, can military equipment be powered differently, such as by electricity? Not only does this reduce carbon emissions, but it also reduces the logistical footprint associated with running a large force of diesel engine vehicles.

For example, if it became possible to produce electric tanks and armoured personnel carriers, what impact would this have on the ‘tail’ of the Royal Logistics Corps in the units it would need to send to support an ‘all electric’ armoured brigade on deployment? The new technology that we are seeing starting to emerge is not only extremely exciting, but it will also fundamentally change how the armed forces are structured and configured for operations.

In a similar vein, if the Royal Navy can move over time to an increasing use of electric engines, or even some kind of hybrid involving sail and solar power, then what impact does this have on the Royal Fleet Auxiliary and its tankers? Is there going to be a need in 50 years’ time for a tanker force, or will it have been replaced by something else?

Finally, climate change is going to impact on how we deploy and who we operate with. As technology changes and we look to embrace different ways of operations and technology, then there is a need to ensure our allies come with us on this journey.

The UK sees both participation in, and taking a leading within, coalition operations as the future for major military operations. For decades NATO members have taken for granted the interoperability that comes from working to agreed standards and equipment, enabling a much greater level of effectiveness as a result.

But, if some NATO countries take the lead in changing how they work and embrace more environmentally friendly technology, then could the UK find itself left behind if it doesn’t follow in a similar way? Alternatively, could alliance building struggle if the assorted participants discover their military units cannot work together due to disparate supply chains and different technologies?

This is why it is vital to get international engagement to build consensus on what future ways of operating look like, and how to work out the best way to deploy. Ensuring that the UK leads the way here, able to build a coalition that has common standards, and which can put a task force down on deployment, where all the participants rely on similar practises and kit is vital – without thinking about this now, there is a genuine risk of the UK being left behind in decades to come as coalition operations evolve.

When brought together, the reason climate change matters to Defence is because its many different facets have a strong likelihood of really changing how Defence does business. From modernising barracks and accommodation to make them insulated and comfortable, to both save money and improve quality of life, through to thinking about the practicalities of deployments into areas that are climatically quite different to our own, the UK faces significant decisions on what to prioritise.

In the next few years there will need to be a lot of effort placed on thinking about how the UK can embrace and work with the realities of climate change to ensure that it is not left behind, and  that it can continue to remain a leading global military power. If it does not do this, then it will find these decisions are being made by others, and it will be left behind.

Climate change is going to change everything – lets get ahead of the game.