University and his colleagues, social unrest is six percent more likely to devolve into warfare during periods of El Niño activity, which brings drought and extreme weather. El Niño activity, giving us a glimpse into projected climate changes, has played a role in one out of every five civil conflicts since 1950; according to Hsiang, that makes this periodic climate shift as significant as any geopolitical or economic factor (Hsiang, 2011). When climate change impacts are not properly planned for, they can exacerbate existing problems of poverty, social tension, and weak political institutions in developing countries, leading to U.S. military resources being drawn on to provide stability (Trusts, 2011). Some poor countries that are the most vulnerable to climate change may be of particular interest to the U.S. as military base sites, allies, sources of raw materials or other economic relationships, or sites of transportation corridors. When natural disasters occur the United States is called upon for relief efforts (for example, the relief efforts in Bangladesh after a 2004 tsunami and in Pakistan after a 2005 earthquake) and adaptation measures will be a prudent investment to reduce total costs of disaster response. Preventative measures pay off: the U.S. Geological Survey and the World Bank estimate that an investment of $40 billion would have prevented disaster losses of $280 billion in the 90s; the Chinese spent $3 billion on flood control to save an estimated $12 billion in losses (Busby J. W., 2007, p. 13). Africa’s growing oil exports and concerns over terrorism have increased U.S. military interest in the continent as “declining food production, extreme weather events, and drought from climate change could further inflame tensions in Africa, weaken governance and economic growth, and contribute to massive migration and possibly state failure, leaving ‘ungoverned spaces’ where terrorists can organize” (Busby J. W., 2007, p. 9). Humanitarian disasters are the most likely military concern for Africa, considering that the U.S. military would be pressured to deploy forces or logistical support for large humanitarian emergencies. Therefore, the U.S. has an interest in preventing or minimizing the exacerbating effects of climate change through economic development and adaptation strategies. According to a five-year global research project conducted on behalf of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, climate change will lead to unpredictable changes in rainfall patterns in most African river basins (Than, 2011). A 2007 report from a military board convened by the Center for Naval Analyses Military Advisory Board followed the lead of 2004 reports from the Pentagon and 2000 reports from the CIA, in deeming climate change a “threat multiplier” (CNA, Center for Naval Analyses Military Advisory Board, 2007). In May 2009, the Chief of Naval Operations created Task Force Climate Change (TFCC) to ad-
dress the naval implications of a changing global environment (Navy). The TFCC anticipated that floods or food shortages in Bangladesh could trigger mass migrations to India, increasing ethnic conflict and repression in the region. The U.S. Navy recently granted $7 million to a five-year interdisciplinary research team at Vanderbilt University, of which I will be a member starting in August, to investigate how climate and social changes will affect human migration patterns in South Asia; this demonstrates that the U.S. military sees climate change adaptation as a significant national security concern. Economic Development and National Security Improvements necessary for U.S. foreign policy align with my strategy calling for increased economic development investments in poor countries. Given that the greatest foreign policy challenges today are political and economic, the U.S. overinvests in traditional military approaches and underinvests in foreign assistance. In 2007, the U.S. spent $572 billion on the military, $11 billion on international security (mainly in Iraq and Afghanistan), $14 billion on development and humanitarian aid, and $11 billion for diplomatic functions such as the State Department and embassies (White House OMB, 2007). Britain’s General Sir Rupert Smith has argued that military conflict is too focused on the anachronistic notion of “industrial conflict,” which applied to WWI and WWII but not to today’s international security affairs where conflicts are open-ended, not always between two state actors, and are taking place predominately in the developing world (Smith, 2006). In fact, all of the U.S. military operations since 1959 have taken place in the developing world: Vietnam, Cambodia, Iraq-Kuwait, Lebanon, Somalia, Afghanistan, and Iraq. These operations have not ended well politically for the U.S. The U.S. military is primarily engaged in developing countries that recently experienced state failure primarily caused by a lack of economic development, as economist Jeffery Sachs notes, “at the core of the failed state problem are problems of poverty” (Sachs, 2008, p. 279). These poverty problems are most effectively addressed proactively through targeted foreign aid for economic development and environmental security, rather than reactively through military combat. The link between economic development and U.S. national security can gain bipartisan support in an otherwise increasingly polarized foreign policy atmosphere. For example, under Republican President George W. Bush in 2006, the National Security Strategy stated: “Effective economic development advances our national security by helping promote responsible sovereignty, not permanent dependency. Weak and impoverished states and ungoverned areas are not only a threat to their people and a burden on regional economies, but are also susceptible to exploitation by terrorists, tyrants, and international
Spring 2012: Volume 11, Issue 1
19