It is anticipated that the Middle East and Central Asia will become hotter and drier, with reduced access to freshwater due to climate change. This has caused U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) to be concerned that these changes could exacerbate conflicts within its area of responsibility. Consequently, CENTCOM has sought assistance from the RAND Corporation to deepen its understanding of the role climate change plays in regional instability and how to mitigate potential threats arising from it.
For instance, within CENTCOM’s area of responsibility, extreme temperatures and water scarcity during summer months have contributed to significant civil unrest in Basra, Iraq, from 2018 to 2022. It is expected that the effects of climate risks will continue to spread in the security environment, altering the nature of conflict within countries in the region and creating demand for stabilization operations, humanitarian aid, and disaster relief.
In this context, the importance of the RAND Corporation’s 2023 report, titled “Planning for an Uncertain Future: What Could Climate-Related Conflict Mean for U.S. Central Command?” is highlighted. The report aims to assess the potential impact of climate risks on the security environment and how policymakers can address these risks.
The Link Between Climate and Conflict:
Although there is moderate to low confidence among experts regarding the relationship between climate change and armed conflict, reports such as the 2022 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, the 2021 National Intelligence Estimate, and the 2023 U.S. Annual Threat Assessment all suggest potential for higher levels of conflict and instability, particularly with regard to climate-related violence, such as geopolitical tensions or internal unrest. However, these reports are more cautious about suggesting that these dynamics will escalate to major wars.
To better understand the relationship between climate risks and conflict, RAND analysts examined what current studies identify as causal pathways from climate change to conflict. While climate risks may have a direct impact on lower levels of violence, the pathways from climate events to organized conflict involve multiple steps. These pathways can vary but often lead to some form of insecurity that is associated with multiple impacts on state capacity/power, population flows, and other factors.
Climate impacts, when channeled through incentives for individuals and armed groups driven by greed or grievances, can culminate in conflict. Therefore, U.S. defense planners should consider that causal pathways from climate risks to conflict cannot be reduced solely to resource scarcity.
Causal pathways can help defense planners understand the interaction between non-climatic factors and climate risks that may increase a region’s susceptibility to conflict. For example, extreme heat may become a more significant risk factor for conflict when a state’s capacity is too weak to mitigate its effects on human health, or when it leads to livelihood losses or food insecurity, or intersects with existing social and economic grievances.
Upcoming Conflicts:
The report argues that future conflict is expected to recur in CENTCOM’s area of responsibility. To expand the analysis to include plausible conflict patterns in the region from 2035 to 2070, RAND researchers used a machine learning model that integrates both climatic variables (temperature and precipitation) and socio-economic variables (population growth and economic performance). Under all considered social, economic, and climatic conditions, CENTCOM’s area of responsibility will experience significant conflict in the next half-century.
Although evidence suggests that worse climate outcomes will be linked to increased conflict between 2040 and 2060, rising temperatures and reduced precipitation are not the primary drivers of the future security environment according to the model. Instead, when these risks increase the risk of conflict, they do so by interacting with other variables that more strongly predict conflict. Specifically, the presence of conflict limits a state’s ability to adapt to climate change, increasing the risk of falling into conflict traps (i.e., the tendency of civil conflict to recur or spread to neighboring countries).
Moreover, climate risks can undermine economic development opportunities, contributing to conflict through social and economic conditions. Climate change may also create conditions that are conducive to or trigger conflicts. Finally, climate risks—through migration or food price shocks—can generate conflict far from local climate impacts or lead to conflict in future periods not covered by some current research.
To test whether their models might underestimate the strength of the climate-conflict relationship, RAND researchers made additional modeling efforts accounting for the economic impact of drought. Based on current research assumptions about the impact of drought on agricultural-dependent economies, the researchers predicted a significant increase in conflict risk in those areas.
Competitor Tools:
The report notes that while the United States is taking steps to prepare for a climate-affected future, its global competitors—China and Russia—and its main regional adversary in the Middle East—Iran—are developing their own strategies. They could influence the dynamics between conflict and climate, particularly in the Middle East and Asia, as follows:
- China: China could provide alternative energy technologies to Middle Eastern countries, potentially aiding the green transition. Beijing is also well-positioned to be the first responder to climate disasters, especially in South Asia, leveraging its geographical proximity and strong historical ties with Pakistan.
- Russia: Russia’s toolkit includes developing alternatives to commercial shipping routes in the Middle East via the newly opened Northern Sea Route due to ice melting; leveraging important food exports to the Middle East; and potentially becoming a major source of essential minerals needed for green energy production.
- Iran: Iran faces acute climate-related vulnerabilities, where climate risks intersect with weak socio-economic fundamentals (slow economic development, poor management) to fuel civil unrest. To address its poor environmental policy management and maintain internal stability, Tehran might capitalize on reduced water, electricity, and/or oil exports at the expense of Iraqi stability.
Comprehensive Approach:
Given that the causal pathways from climate risks to conflicts revolve around political and economic concerns, reducing climate-related conflicts will require a whole-government approach, with U.S. Central Command playing a supportive role to regional partners. This leadership could mitigate conflict largely through unconventional security cooperation activities that address climate-related security challenges. These efforts would also support U.S. objectives to remain the preferred partner in the region.
Cooperation among U.S. agencies, alongside public-private partnerships, will be crucial in supporting regional innovation to address the impact of climate risks. A range of processes, activities, and investments can be undertaken by U.S. Central Command and regional partners over the next three to five years to address climate risk impacts, including:
Integrating Climate Risks into Regional Exercises: This includes Bright Star, Juniper Series, and International Maritime, using joint training and assessment funds as applicable, building climate knowledge within U.S. Central Command and with U.S. military representatives responsible for defense relations abroad, and through expanded training and education; and working with joint military education institutions.
Encouraging Allies to Integrate Climate Impacts into Force Planning: This involves creating bilateral and multilateral platforms for technology exchange to mitigate and adapt to climate change impacts (e.g., cooling equipment, all-weather intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance), providing the Department of Defense’s climate assessment tool to regional partners to assess climate risk resilience, and working with partners to develop and implement defensive climate action plans.
Conducting Bilateral and Multilateral Regional Exercises to Enhance Disaster Response and Recovery: Using joint training, expanding the partnership program with countries within U.S. Central Command’s area of responsibility that are vulnerable to extreme weather events, such as Pakistan.
Integrating Climate into Strategy, Planning, and Intelligence Products: U.S. Central Command should incorporate climate analysis into its strategy development, defense planning products (e.g., operational plans), and intelligence products. This should include updating emergency evacuation plans.
Building Climate Knowledge Across Military Levels: U.S. Central Command would benefit from increased climate awareness across all levels of headquarters staff and frontline personnel, such as security cooperation officers and defense attachés stationed in the region. Consequently, RAND researchers conducted a five-step research project analyzing the full spectrum of the relationship between conflict and climate, from climate risks to potential conflict risks and adversary responses, to implications for defense planning.
Report 1: Climate Risks and Impacts
- Identify climate risks
- Conduct climate analysis
Report 2: Conflict Pathways
- Identify causal pathways of conflict
- Determine impacts of human systems and lack of security
- Identify types of conflicts
Report 3: Conflict Projections
- Determine the interaction between climate, socio-economic projections, and conflict data
Report 4: Hostile Responses
- Identify regional interests of China, Russia, and Iran
- Determine responses to climate-affected conflicts
- Identify non-military responses to climate risks
Report 5: Implications for Defense Planning
- Identify conflict outcomes and requirements
- Determine potential types of intervention
- Analyze potential costs associated with interventions
Source: Karen M. Sudkamp, Jeffrey Martini, and others, “Planning for an Uncertain Future: What Climate-Related Conflict Could Mean for U.S. Central Command”, RAND, 2023.