This report examines how U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) planners could use operations, activities, and investments in the coming decades to address security threats related to stressors from climate change in the CENTCOM area of responsibility.

All Hell Breaking Loose is an eye-opening examination of climate change from the perspective of the U.S. military. The Pentagon, unsentimental and politically conservative, might not seem likely to be worried about climate change—still linked, for many people, with polar bears and coral reefs. Yet of all the major institutions in American society, none take climate change as seriously as the U.S. military. Both as participants in climate-triggered conflicts abroad, and as first responders to hurricanes and other disasters on American soil, the armed services are already confronting the impacts of global warming. The military now regards climate change as one of the top threats to American national security—and is busy developing strategies to cope with it. Drawing on previously obscure reports and government documents, renowned security expert Michael Klare shows that the U.S. military sees the climate threat as imperiling the country on several fronts at once. Droughts and food shortages are stoking conflicts in ethnically divided nations, with “climate refugees” producing worldwide havoc. Pandemics and other humanitarian disasters will increasingly require extensive military involvement. The melting Arctic is creating new seaways to defend. And rising seas threaten American cities and military bases themselves. While others still debate the causes of global warming, the Pentagon is intensely focused on its effects. Its response makes it clear that where it counts, the immense impact of climate change is not in doubt.

In response to the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), the National Research Council appointed a committee operating under the auspices of the Naval Studies Board to study the national security implications of climate change for U.S. naval forces. In conducting this study, the committee found that even the most moderate current trends in climate, if continued, will present new national security challenges for the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard. While the timing, degree, and consequences of future climate change impacts remain uncertain, many changes are already underway in regions around the world, such as in the Arctic, and call for action by U.S. naval leadership in response. The terms of reference (TOR) directed that the study be based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenarios and other peer-reviewed assessment. Therefore, the committee did not address the science of climate change or challenge the scenarios on which the committee's findings and recommendations are based. National Security Implications of Climate Change for U.S. Naval Forces addresses both the near- and long-term implications for U.S. naval forces in each of the four areas of the TOR, and provides corresponding findings and recommendations. This report and its conclusions are organized around six discussion areas-all presented within the context of a changing climate.

This book provides the first systematic comparative analysis of climate security discourses. It analyses the securitisation of climate change in four different countries: USA, Germany, Turkey, and Mexico. The empirical analysis traces how specific climate-security discourses have become dominant, which actors have driven this process, what political consequences this has had and what role the broader context has played in enabling these specific securitisations. In doing so, the book outlines a new and systematic theoretical framework that distinguishes between different referent objects of securitisation (territorial, individual and planetary) and between a security and risk dimension. It thereby clarifies the ever-increasing literature on different forms of securitisation and the relationship between security, risk and politics. Whereas securitisation studies have traditionally focused on either a single country case study or a global overview, consequently failing to reconstruct detailed securitisation dynamics, this is the first book to provide a systematic comparative analysis of climate security discourses in four countries and thus closes an empirical gap in the present literature. In addition, this comparative framework allows the drawing of conclusions about the conditions for and consequences of successful securitisation based on empirical and comparative analysis rather than theoretical debate only. This book will of interest to students of climate change, environmental studies, critical security, global governance, and IR in general.

This book provides an in-depth analysis of the securitisation of climate change in the US, Germany and Mexico and offers a rethinking of securitisation theory. Resting on a Foucauldian governmentality approach, it discusses how different climate security discourses have transformed the political handling of climate change and affected policies, practices and institutions. Going beyond the literature’s predominant focus on the global level, it gives a fine-grained examination of the political and institutional changes in different national contexts. Drawing on the governmentalisation of security, the book develops a new understanding of securitisation that focuses on the role of power. In doing so, it provides new insights into the transformative potential of linking climate change to security but also highlights the political and normative pitfalls of securitisation. ‘In this important book, Franziskus von Lucke provides a theoretically sophisticated and empirically rich account of the relationship between security and climate change. Developing a Foucauldian-inspired account of securitization, the book rejects blanket or universal claims about the climate change- security relationship, instead insisting on the need to critically examine how the securitization of climate change plays out in particular empirical contexts. Exploring the cases of the US, Germany and Mexico, von Lucke points to distinctive dynamics of securitization in these settings, with different implications for the practices these in turn encourage. Ultimately, this book constitutes an important addition to literature on the relationship between climate change and security, while developing a distinct and nuanced account of securitization that will be of interest to a wide range of scholars of security in international relations.’ —Associate Professor Matt McDonald is a Reader in International Relations at the University of Queensland, Australia ‘In 2019 a number of states and other actors (notably the European Union) have made climate emergency declarations. It is therefore more important than ever to understand what the securitization of the climate means. That is: Who can securitize? What security measures are likely/ deemed legitimate by relevant audiences? How does securitization affect the population within and outside a securitizing state? And perhaps most importantly of all, will it succeed? Franziskus von Lucke’s carefully researched book offers answers to all of these questions and many others besides. von Lucke proceeds by examining with the US, Mexico and Germany, three real-life empirical cases of climate securitization. Each one provides unique insights that enable a fuller understanding of climate security. Accessibly written this is a must read for scholars and practitioners alike.’ —Dr Rita Floyd, University of Birmingham, UK, author of The Morality of Security: A theory of just Securitization, CUP, 2019 With great empirical detail and conceptual clarity, the book compares discourses and practices of climate security in different contexts. An essential reading for anyone interested in international climate politics, securitization theory, governmentality and the notion of power in International Relations. —Dr Delf Rothe, Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy Hamburg at the University of Hamburg, Germany

Climate change has long been a contentious issue, even before its official acknowledgment as a global threat in 1979. Government policies have varied widely, from Barack Obama's dedication to environmentalism to George W. Bush's tacit minimizing of the problem to Republican officials' refusal to acknowledge the scientific evidence supporting anthropogenic climate change. Presented chronologically, this collection of important policy-shaping documents shows how the views of both advocates and deniers of climate change have developed over the past four decades.