In a recent report by the Center for Naval Analyses the argument was raised for linking climate change to terrorism. Admiral T. Joseph Lopez, former commander-in-chief US Naval Forces Europe and of Allied Forces Southern Europe, was quoted stating "Climate change can provide the conditions that will extend the war on terror""Rising ocean water levels, droughts, violent weather, ruined national economies-those are the kinds of stresses we'll see more of under climate change""In the long term, we want to address the underlying conditions that terrorists seek to exploit," Admiral Lopez said. "But climate change will prolong those conditions. It makes them worse"

While these points outline an interesting research position, serious and undesirable implications would arise if the argument gradually becomes policy. At the outset, such action would over-politicize and polarize global opinion for an area in which international cooperation is mandatory. We have already witnessed the adverse outcome the blind adoption of the strategy engenders. The basic premise that adverse conditions, be them caused by any factor, in this case climate change, contributes to terrorism is both overarching and too basic to lead to productive strategies. In this light, it is no surprise that China and an alliance of developing countries attacked the right of the UN Security Council to debate climate change. China left aside, take a closer look at the countries leading the uproar and expect little or no cooperation at all if the problem is formally linked to terrorism – or articulated as a universal threat to peace, as proposed by the UK government. Global public opinion has finally galvanized in recognizing climate change as a problem that needs to be addressed. Why not take advantage of this rare opportunity and forget about the unnecessary link to the war on terror at this stage?

April 18, 2007