WASHINGTON — Rare minerals. Food and water. Arable soil. Air-cleansing forests.
In the intellectual heart of the American military and policy-making world, these are emerging not just as environmental issues, but as the potential stuff of conflict in the 21st century.
In some ways, the role of resources in shaping conflict is nothing new. Much as the Spanish conquistadors sought gold, Saddam Hussein fought for Kuwait’s oil. And downstream lands have long worried that neighbors will limit water flowing in the Nile, Euphrates and Jordan.
Now a new field of systematic study is opening within research centers, the Pentagon and intelligence institutions. It assumes that the 21st century will be shaped not just by competitive economic growth, but also by potentially disruptive scarcities — depletion of minerals; desertification of land; pollution or overuse of water; weather changes that kill fish and farms.
National security experts have begun to label such factors threats to “natural security” and to study them, often alongside environmental or advocacy groups. A basic question frames their thinking: What are the new relationships among resources, diplomacy, crisis and conflict?
One hint of the complexity can be seen along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. A war against terrorists seems, at first, to have little to do with resources. But look again: This fall, outraged Pakistani gangs at the border were torching fuel trucks that carry supplies vital to allied troops. And at the end of that supply line, American planning was a small step ahead — a few Marines were trying out new-tech solar collectors, to cut their dependence on diesel fuel.
Strategists also knew that there were other stakes in the outcome. Afghanistan has been seen for decades as a potential route for pipelines carrying Central Asian gas — but only if there is peace. And underground lie huge deposits of riches like lithium, which is crucial to batteries for electronic devices. China in particular has a large interest in those.
The National Intelligence Council has a major effort under way to analyze threats from water and food shortages related to climate change and other environmental causes, one senior American intelligence official said.
National security officials are careful to say that resources are only one factor in the development of conflicts. How politics and diplomacy shape relationships is, in the end, decisive. “But these can be a trigger of instability,” said one senior American intelligence official, whose job forbids him to speak for attribution. “They cause the magnification of other issues.”
Last summer, for example, flooding that uprooted millions of Pakistanis stirred fear in Washington that militant movements might prove more adept than Pakistan’s weak government at delivering aid. Last month, the advocacy group Refugees International reported that the Pakistani Army did respond effectively, but that civilian authorities struggled and American and international agencies should be better prepared for climate-related calamities.
Senior military and intelligence officials who focus on “natural security” issues say the Obama administration has shown a greater understanding of the subtleties than its predecessor, in part because it does not challenge basic assumptions about the harmful impact of climate change.
“But the issues are so complex, the number of actors and the uncertainties are high,” the senior American intelligence officer said. “So the analysis is still speculative. It makes planning much harder and preventive action much harder.”
The natural security risks take many forms. Here are five scenarios, current or anticipated.
Why We Might Fight, 2011 Edition
By Thom Shanker Countries thirst for oil, compete for minerals and confront climate change. The American military, with surprising allies, worries that these issues represent a new source of conflict.
Introduction: A Need for ‘Natural Security’
Rising and Hungry: China
When Fish and Farmland Are Scarce: Yemen and the Horn of Africa
Too Rich for Peace: The Niger Delta
Stalking a New Frontier: The Arctic
Guarding a Planet’s Air: Brazil
WASHINGTON — Rare minerals. Food and water. Arable soil. Air-cleansing forests.
In the intellectual heart of the American military and policy-making world, these are emerging not just as environmental issues, but as the potential stuff of conflict in the 21st century.
In some ways, the role of resources in shaping conflict is nothing new. Much as the Spanish conquistadors sought gold, Saddam Hussein fought for Kuwait’s oil. And downstream lands have long worried that neighbors will limit water flowing in the Nile, Euphrates and Jordan.
Now a new field of systematic study is opening within research centers, the Pentagon and intelligence institutions. It assumes that the 21st century will be shaped not just by competitive economic growth, but also by potentially disruptive scarcities — depletion of minerals; desertification of land; pollution or overuse of water; weather changes that kill fish and farms.
National security experts have begun to label such factors threats to “natural security” and to study them, often alongside environmental or advocacy groups. A basic question frames their thinking: What are the new relationships among resources, diplomacy, crisis and conflict?
One hint of the complexity can be seen along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. A war against terrorists seems, at first, to have little to do with resources. But look again: This fall, outraged Pakistani gangs at the border were torching fuel trucks that carry supplies vital to allied troops. And at the end of that supply line, American planning was a small step ahead — a few Marines were trying out new-tech solar collectors, to cut their dependence on diesel fuel.
Strategists also knew that there were other stakes in the outcome. Afghanistan has been seen for decades as a potential route for pipelines carrying Central Asian gas — but only if there is peace. And underground lie huge deposits of riches like lithium, which is crucial to batteries for electronic devices. China in particular has a large interest in those.
The National Intelligence Council has a major effort under way to analyze threats from water and food shortages related to climate change and other environmental causes, one senior American intelligence official said.
National security officials are careful to say that resources are only one factor in the development of conflicts. How politics and diplomacy shape relationships is, in the end, decisive. “But these can be a trigger of instability,” said one senior American intelligence official, whose job forbids him to speak for attribution. “They cause the magnification of other issues.”
Last summer, for example, flooding that uprooted millions of Pakistanis stirred fear in Washington that militant movements might prove more adept than Pakistan’s weak government at delivering aid. Last month, the advocacy group Refugees International reported that the Pakistani Army did respond effectively, but that civilian authorities struggled and American and international agencies should be better prepared for climate-related calamities.
Senior military and intelligence officials who focus on “natural security” issues say the Obama administration has shown a greater understanding of the subtleties than its predecessor, in part because it does not challenge basic assumptions about the harmful impact of climate change.
“But the issues are so complex, the number of actors and the uncertainties are high,” the senior American intelligence officer said. “So the analysis is still speculative. It makes planning much harder and preventive action much harder.”
The natural security risks take many forms. Here are five scenarios, current or anticipated.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
As rising nations industrialize, they compete for resources, or use resource exports as bargaining chips in disputes; China does both
RESOURCES IN PLAY
Oil, rare earth minerals, fisheries, ocean zones for trade and seabed exploration
China is buying mineral concessions across Asia, Africa and Latin America; it has harassed foreign aircraft and ships to assert sovereignty beyond the accepted 12-mile limit in the South China Sea, whose bed is thought to be rich in rare metals.
China has risen, in less than 40 years, from a symbol of underdevelopment to the world’s No. 2 economy, and the transformation has left a vast gulf between rich and poor. Its leaders’ greatest fear is political instability, and so it seeks rapid growth to spread the benefits of the new wealth. But its voracious appetite for minerals has at times set it at odds with the West over policies toward countries like Sudan and Iran, whose oil it buys. China also has longstanding unresolved claims to islands nearby, and recently it hinted at withholding exports of rare earth minerals to get Japan to release a Chinese fishing captain who had been captured in disputed waters.
“The Chinese look at the most important thing to keep that growth going, and it is natural resources,” said Vice Adm. Doug Crowder, a former commander of Navy forces in the western Pacific and the Indian Ocean.
Why We Might Fight, 2011 Edition
By Thom Shanker Countries thirst for oil, compete for minerals and confront climate change. The American military, with surprising allies, worries that these issues represent a new source of conflict.
Introduction: A Need for ‘Natural Security’
Rising and Hungry: China
When Fish and Farmland Are Scarce: Yemen and the Horn of Africa
Too Rich for Peace: The Niger Delta
Stalking a New Frontier: The Arctic
Guarding a Planet’s Air: Brazil
WASHINGTON — Rare minerals. Food and water. Arable soil. Air-cleansing forests.
In the intellectual heart of the American military and policy-making world, these are emerging not just as environmental issues, but as the potential stuff of conflict in the 21st century.
In some ways, the role of resources in shaping conflict is nothing new. Much as the Spanish conquistadors sought gold, Saddam Hussein fought for Kuwait’s oil. And downstream lands have long worried that neighbors will limit water flowing in the Nile, Euphrates and Jordan.
Now a new field of systematic study is opening within research centers, the Pentagon and intelligence institutions. It assumes that the 21st century will be shaped not just by competitive economic growth, but also by potentially disruptive scarcities — depletion of minerals; desertification of land; pollution or overuse of water; weather changes that kill fish and farms.
National security experts have begun to label such factors threats to “natural security” and to study them, often alongside environmental or advocacy groups. A basic question frames their thinking: What are the new relationships among resources, diplomacy, crisis and conflict?
One hint of the complexity can be seen along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. A war against terrorists seems, at first, to have little to do with resources. But look again: This fall, outraged Pakistani gangs at the border were torching fuel trucks that carry supplies vital to allied troops. And at the end of that supply line, American planning was a small step ahead — a few Marines were trying out new-tech solar collectors, to cut their dependence on diesel fuel.
Strategists also knew that there were other stakes in the outcome. Afghanistan has been seen for decades as a potential route for pipelines carrying Central Asian gas — but only if there is peace. And underground lie huge deposits of riches like lithium, which is crucial to batteries for electronic devices. China in particular has a large interest in those.
The National Intelligence Council has a major effort under way to analyze threats from water and food shortages related to climate change and other environmental causes, one senior American intelligence official said.
National security officials are careful to say that resources are only one factor in the development of conflicts. How politics and diplomacy shape relationships is, in the end, decisive. “But these can be a trigger of instability,” said one senior American intelligence official, whose job forbids him to speak for attribution. “They cause the magnification of other issues.”
Last summer, for example, flooding that uprooted millions of Pakistanis stirred fear in Washington that militant movements might prove more adept than Pakistan’s weak government at delivering aid. Last month, the advocacy group Refugees International reported that the Pakistani Army did respond effectively, but that civilian authorities struggled and American and international agencies should be better prepared for climate-related calamities.
Senior military and intelligence officials who focus on “natural security” issues say the Obama administration has shown a greater understanding of the subtleties than its predecessor, in part because it does not challenge basic assumptions about the harmful impact of climate change.
“But the issues are so complex, the number of actors and the uncertainties are high,” the senior American intelligence officer said. “So the analysis is still speculative. It makes planning much harder and preventive action much harder.”
The natural security risks take many forms. Here are five scenarios, current or anticipated.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
As rising nations industrialize, they compete for resources, or use resource exports as bargaining chips in disputes; China does both
RESOURCES IN PLAY
Oil, rare earth minerals, fisheries, ocean zones for trade and seabed exploration
China is buying mineral concessions across Asia, Africa and Latin America; it has harassed foreign aircraft and ships to assert sovereignty beyond the accepted 12-mile limit in the South China Sea, whose bed is thought to be rich in rare metals.
China has risen, in less than 40 years, from a symbol of underdevelopment to the world’s No. 2 economy, and the transformation has left a vast gulf between rich and poor. Its leaders’ greatest fear is political instability, and so it seeks rapid growth to spread the benefits of the new wealth. But its voracious appetite for minerals has at times set it at odds with the West over policies toward countries like Sudan and Iran, whose oil it buys. China also has longstanding unresolved claims to islands nearby, and recently it hinted at withholding exports of rare earth minerals to get Japan to release a Chinese fishing captain who had been captured in disputed waters.
“The Chinese look at the most important thing to keep that growth going, and it is natural resources,” said Vice Adm. Doug Crowder, a former commander of Navy forces in the western Pacific and the Indian Ocean.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
Climate change feeds anarchy in poor societies
RESOURCES AT PLAY
Arable land, water, oil, sea lanes
Warships from more than half a dozen nations, on the lookout for pirates from Somalia, now ply shipping lanes that carry one-third of the world’s fuel supply around the Horn of Africa. Meanwhile, in nearby Yemen, terrorist plots inspired by Al Qaeda have emerged.
Both problems are usually traced to weak governments and lawlessness. Less appreciated is the role that changes in climate have played in the disintegration of political authority.
Many Somalian pirates are fishermen who can no longer make a living in waters depleted by overfishing. Meanwhile, arable land and water supplies have been drying up, increasing poverty and driving farmers off the land. These shifts have only fed civil conflict and warlordism.
Desertification, disorder and weak government also plague Yemen. “These trends feed cycles of violence, instability and conflict,” said one intelligence officer, who calls the trends “a recipe for a failing state.”
It was in Yemen that a Navy destroyer, the Cole, was attacked by Al Qaeda in 1998, and where terror cells that swear allegiance to the bin Laden network have since set up shop. Secret diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks refer to American-Yemeni efforts to attack the cells.
Why We Might Fight, 2011 Edition
By Thom Shanker Countries thirst for oil, compete for minerals and confront climate change. The American military, with surprising allies, worries that these issues represent a new source of conflict.
Introduction: A Need for ‘Natural Security’
Rising and Hungry: China
When Fish and Farmland Are Scarce: Yemen and the Horn of Africa
Too Rich for Peace: The Niger Delta
Stalking a New Frontier: The Arctic
Guarding a Planet’s Air: Brazil
WASHINGTON — Rare minerals. Food and water. Arable soil. Air-cleansing forests.
In the intellectual heart of the American military and policy-making world, these are emerging not just as environmental issues, but as the potential stuff of conflict in the 21st century.
In some ways, the role of resources in shaping conflict is nothing new. Much as the Spanish conquistadors sought gold, Saddam Hussein fought for Kuwait’s oil. And downstream lands have long worried that neighbors will limit water flowing in the Nile, Euphrates and Jordan.
Now a new field of systematic study is opening within research centers, the Pentagon and intelligence institutions. It assumes that the 21st century will be shaped not just by competitive economic growth, but also by potentially disruptive scarcities — depletion of minerals; desertification of land; pollution or overuse of water; weather changes that kill fish and farms.
National security experts have begun to label such factors threats to “natural security” and to study them, often alongside environmental or advocacy groups. A basic question frames their thinking: What are the new relationships among resources, diplomacy, crisis and conflict?
One hint of the complexity can be seen along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. A war against terrorists seems, at first, to have little to do with resources. But look again: This fall, outraged Pakistani gangs at the border were torching fuel trucks that carry supplies vital to allied troops. And at the end of that supply line, American planning was a small step ahead — a few Marines were trying out new-tech solar collectors, to cut their dependence on diesel fuel.
Strategists also knew that there were other stakes in the outcome. Afghanistan has been seen for decades as a potential route for pipelines carrying Central Asian gas — but only if there is peace. And underground lie huge deposits of riches like lithium, which is crucial to batteries for electronic devices. China in particular has a large interest in those.
The National Intelligence Council has a major effort under way to analyze threats from water and food shortages related to climate change and other environmental causes, one senior American intelligence official said.
National security officials are careful to say that resources are only one factor in the development of conflicts. How politics and diplomacy shape relationships is, in the end, decisive. “But these can be a trigger of instability,” said one senior American intelligence official, whose job forbids him to speak for attribution. “They cause the magnification of other issues.”
Last summer, for example, flooding that uprooted millions of Pakistanis stirred fear in Washington that militant movements might prove more adept than Pakistan’s weak government at delivering aid. Last month, the advocacy group Refugees International reported that the Pakistani Army did respond effectively, but that civilian authorities struggled and American and international agencies should be better prepared for climate-related calamities.
Senior military and intelligence officials who focus on “natural security” issues say the Obama administration has shown a greater understanding of the subtleties than its predecessor, in part because it does not challenge basic assumptions about the harmful impact of climate change.
“But the issues are so complex, the number of actors and the uncertainties are high,” the senior American intelligence officer said. “So the analysis is still speculative. It makes planning much harder and preventive action much harder.”
The natural security risks take many forms. Here are five scenarios, current or anticipated.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
As rising nations industrialize, they compete for resources, or use resource exports as bargaining chips in disputes; China does both
RESOURCES IN PLAY
Oil, rare earth minerals, fisheries, ocean zones for trade and seabed exploration
China is buying mineral concessions across Asia, Africa and Latin America; it has harassed foreign aircraft and ships to assert sovereignty beyond the accepted 12-mile limit in the South China Sea, whose bed is thought to be rich in rare metals.
China has risen, in less than 40 years, from a symbol of underdevelopment to the world’s No. 2 economy, and the transformation has left a vast gulf between rich and poor. Its leaders’ greatest fear is political instability, and so it seeks rapid growth to spread the benefits of the new wealth. But its voracious appetite for minerals has at times set it at odds with the West over policies toward countries like Sudan and Iran, whose oil it buys. China also has longstanding unresolved claims to islands nearby, and recently it hinted at withholding exports of rare earth minerals to get Japan to release a Chinese fishing captain who had been captured in disputed waters.
“The Chinese look at the most important thing to keep that growth going, and it is natural resources,” said Vice Adm. Doug Crowder, a former commander of Navy forces in the western Pacific and the Indian Ocean.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
Climate change feeds anarchy in poor societies
RESOURCES AT PLAY
Arable land, water, oil, sea lanes
Warships from more than half a dozen nations, on the lookout for pirates from Somalia, now ply shipping lanes that carry one-third of the world’s fuel supply around the Horn of Africa. Meanwhile, in nearby Yemen, terrorist plots inspired by Al Qaeda have emerged.
Both problems are usually traced to weak governments and lawlessness. Less appreciated is the role that changes in climate have played in the disintegration of political authority.
Many Somalian pirates are fishermen who can no longer make a living in waters depleted by overfishing. Meanwhile, arable land and water supplies have been drying up, increasing poverty and driving farmers off the land. These shifts have only fed civil conflict and warlordism.
Desertification, disorder and weak government also plague Yemen. “These trends feed cycles of violence, instability and conflict,” said one intelligence officer, who calls the trends “a recipe for a failing state.”
It was in Yemen that a Navy destroyer, the Cole, was attacked by Al Qaeda in 1998, and where terror cells that swear allegiance to the bin Laden network have since set up shop. Secret diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks refer to American-Yemeni efforts to attack the cells.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
Pollution and extraction complicate local conflicts in lands rich in minerals and fossil fuels
RESOURCES IN PLAY
Oil, wetlands, fisheries, water
Nigeria, rich in resources, has Africa’s second-largest economy. But it suffers from political, ethnic and religious divisions that routinely erupt in violence. Civilians have replaced military rule, but have not kept promises to share the land’s oil and mineral wealth equitably by ending corruption. Nigeria is a major oil exporter, but half its people are without electricity.
Oil and gas operations are centered in the ecologically delicate Niger Delta, which has long been lawless; rebels sabotage foreign oil operations, local residents tap into pipelines to pilfer fuel, and the companies have let aging infrastructure deteriorate, all of which feed intense pollution that threatens fishing and other livelihoods.
Amnesty International has reported on the delta as a calamity zone for human rights, breeding conflict. The International Crisis Group cites it as a flashpoint for violence. In a coming book from the Council on Foreign Relations, “Nigeria: Dancing on the Brink,” former Ambassador John Campbell writes: “Residents of the Delta have benefited little from the oil industry. The region is a byword for misgovernment and corruption at all levels.”
Why We Might Fight, 2011 Edition
By Thom Shanker Countries thirst for oil, compete for minerals and confront climate change. The American military, with surprising allies, worries that these issues represent a new source of conflict.
Introduction: A Need for ‘Natural Security’
Rising and Hungry: China
When Fish and Farmland Are Scarce: Yemen and the Horn of Africa
Too Rich for Peace: The Niger Delta
Stalking a New Frontier: The Arctic
Guarding a Planet’s Air: Brazil
WASHINGTON — Rare minerals. Food and water. Arable soil. Air-cleansing forests.
In the intellectual heart of the American military and policy-making world, these are emerging not just as environmental issues, but as the potential stuff of conflict in the 21st century.
In some ways, the role of resources in shaping conflict is nothing new. Much as the Spanish conquistadors sought gold, Saddam Hussein fought for Kuwait’s oil. And downstream lands have long worried that neighbors will limit water flowing in the Nile, Euphrates and Jordan.
Now a new field of systematic study is opening within research centers, the Pentagon and intelligence institutions. It assumes that the 21st century will be shaped not just by competitive economic growth, but also by potentially disruptive scarcities — depletion of minerals; desertification of land; pollution or overuse of water; weather changes that kill fish and farms.
National security experts have begun to label such factors threats to “natural security” and to study them, often alongside environmental or advocacy groups. A basic question frames their thinking: What are the new relationships among resources, diplomacy, crisis and conflict?
One hint of the complexity can be seen along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. A war against terrorists seems, at first, to have little to do with resources. But look again: This fall, outraged Pakistani gangs at the border were torching fuel trucks that carry supplies vital to allied troops. And at the end of that supply line, American planning was a small step ahead — a few Marines were trying out new-tech solar collectors, to cut their dependence on diesel fuel.
Strategists also knew that there were other stakes in the outcome. Afghanistan has been seen for decades as a potential route for pipelines carrying Central Asian gas — but only if there is peace. And underground lie huge deposits of riches like lithium, which is crucial to batteries for electronic devices. China in particular has a large interest in those.
The National Intelligence Council has a major effort under way to analyze threats from water and food shortages related to climate change and other environmental causes, one senior American intelligence official said.
National security officials are careful to say that resources are only one factor in the development of conflicts. How politics and diplomacy shape relationships is, in the end, decisive. “But these can be a trigger of instability,” said one senior American intelligence official, whose job forbids him to speak for attribution. “They cause the magnification of other issues.”
Last summer, for example, flooding that uprooted millions of Pakistanis stirred fear in Washington that militant movements might prove more adept than Pakistan’s weak government at delivering aid. Last month, the advocacy group Refugees International reported that the Pakistani Army did respond effectively, but that civilian authorities struggled and American and international agencies should be better prepared for climate-related calamities.
Senior military and intelligence officials who focus on “natural security” issues say the Obama administration has shown a greater understanding of the subtleties than its predecessor, in part because it does not challenge basic assumptions about the harmful impact of climate change.
“But the issues are so complex, the number of actors and the uncertainties are high,” the senior American intelligence officer said. “So the analysis is still speculative. It makes planning much harder and preventive action much harder.”
The natural security risks take many forms. Here are five scenarios, current or anticipated.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
As rising nations industrialize, they compete for resources, or use resource exports as bargaining chips in disputes; China does both
RESOURCES IN PLAY
Oil, rare earth minerals, fisheries, ocean zones for trade and seabed exploration
China is buying mineral concessions across Asia, Africa and Latin America; it has harassed foreign aircraft and ships to assert sovereignty beyond the accepted 12-mile limit in the South China Sea, whose bed is thought to be rich in rare metals.
China has risen, in less than 40 years, from a symbol of underdevelopment to the world’s No. 2 economy, and the transformation has left a vast gulf between rich and poor. Its leaders’ greatest fear is political instability, and so it seeks rapid growth to spread the benefits of the new wealth. But its voracious appetite for minerals has at times set it at odds with the West over policies toward countries like Sudan and Iran, whose oil it buys. China also has longstanding unresolved claims to islands nearby, and recently it hinted at withholding exports of rare earth minerals to get Japan to release a Chinese fishing captain who had been captured in disputed waters.
“The Chinese look at the most important thing to keep that growth going, and it is natural resources,” said Vice Adm. Doug Crowder, a former commander of Navy forces in the western Pacific and the Indian Ocean.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
Climate change feeds anarchy in poor societies
RESOURCES AT PLAY
Arable land, water, oil, sea lanes
Warships from more than half a dozen nations, on the lookout for pirates from Somalia, now ply shipping lanes that carry one-third of the world’s fuel supply around the Horn of Africa. Meanwhile, in nearby Yemen, terrorist plots inspired by Al Qaeda have emerged.
Both problems are usually traced to weak governments and lawlessness. Less appreciated is the role that changes in climate have played in the disintegration of political authority.
Many Somalian pirates are fishermen who can no longer make a living in waters depleted by overfishing. Meanwhile, arable land and water supplies have been drying up, increasing poverty and driving farmers off the land. These shifts have only fed civil conflict and warlordism.
Desertification, disorder and weak government also plague Yemen. “These trends feed cycles of violence, instability and conflict,” said one intelligence officer, who calls the trends “a recipe for a failing state.”
It was in Yemen that a Navy destroyer, the Cole, was attacked by Al Qaeda in 1998, and where terror cells that swear allegiance to the bin Laden network have since set up shop. Secret diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks refer to American-Yemeni efforts to attack the cells.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
Pollution and extraction complicate local conflicts in lands rich in minerals and fossil fuels
RESOURCES IN PLAY
Oil, wetlands, fisheries, water
Nigeria, rich in resources, has Africa’s second-largest economy. But it suffers from political, ethnic and religious divisions that routinely erupt in violence. Civilians have replaced military rule, but have not kept promises to share the land’s oil and mineral wealth equitably by ending corruption. Nigeria is a major oil exporter, but half its people are without electricity.
Oil and gas operations are centered in the ecologically delicate Niger Delta, which has long been lawless; rebels sabotage foreign oil operations, local residents tap into pipelines to pilfer fuel, and the companies have let aging infrastructure deteriorate, all of which feed intense pollution that threatens fishing and other livelihoods.
Amnesty International has reported on the delta as a calamity zone for human rights, breeding conflict. The International Crisis Group cites it as a flashpoint for violence. In a coming book from the Council on Foreign Relations, “Nigeria: Dancing on the Brink,” former Ambassador John Campbell writes: “Residents of the Delta have benefited little from the oil industry. The region is a byword for misgovernment and corruption at all levels.”
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
Rights to the seabed under the melting Arctic icecap
RESOURCES AT PLAY
Exploration for minerals, oil and gas; fisheries
In 2007, Russia sent two mini-subs to the seabed two and a half miles under the North Pole to plant its flag — a move that, however symbolic, points to new rivalries over its potential riches. Canada, Denmark, Norway and the United States also have territory in the Arctic Circle, and international conventions entitle them to economic zones within 200 miles of their borders. But Russia claims — without international support so far — that the seabed is an extension of its continental shelf, and Denmark has begun looking at the shelf off its territory in Greenland.
Russia has already used its oil and gas exports as instruments of state power in dealing with other former Soviet republics. Now, how the seabed would be divided, managed or protected promises to be a subject of dispute with other Arctic nations, presumably to be settled by new treaties or conventions.
Meanwhile, changing ecosystems threaten Arctic fishing industries. “This could become a geopolitical dispute, as dwindling global fish stocks squeeze an already suffering industry,” according to a study, “Sustaining Security: How Natural Resources Influence National Security,” by the Center for a New American Security.
Why We Might Fight, 2011 Edition
By Thom Shanker Countries thirst for oil, compete for minerals and confront climate change. The American military, with surprising allies, worries that these issues represent a new source of conflict.
Introduction: A Need for ‘Natural Security’
Rising and Hungry: China
When Fish and Farmland Are Scarce: Yemen and the Horn of Africa
Too Rich for Peace: The Niger Delta
Stalking a New Frontier: The Arctic
Guarding a Planet’s Air: Brazil
WASHINGTON — Rare minerals. Food and water. Arable soil. Air-cleansing forests.
In the intellectual heart of the American military and policy-making world, these are emerging not just as environmental issues, but as the potential stuff of conflict in the 21st century.
In some ways, the role of resources in shaping conflict is nothing new. Much as the Spanish conquistadors sought gold, Saddam Hussein fought for Kuwait’s oil. And downstream lands have long worried that neighbors will limit water flowing in the Nile, Euphrates and Jordan.
Now a new field of systematic study is opening within research centers, the Pentagon and intelligence institutions. It assumes that the 21st century will be shaped not just by competitive economic growth, but also by potentially disruptive scarcities — depletion of minerals; desertification of land; pollution or overuse of water; weather changes that kill fish and farms.
National security experts have begun to label such factors threats to “natural security” and to study them, often alongside environmental or advocacy groups. A basic question frames their thinking: What are the new relationships among resources, diplomacy, crisis and conflict?
One hint of the complexity can be seen along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. A war against terrorists seems, at first, to have little to do with resources. But look again: This fall, outraged Pakistani gangs at the border were torching fuel trucks that carry supplies vital to allied troops. And at the end of that supply line, American planning was a small step ahead — a few Marines were trying out new-tech solar collectors, to cut their dependence on diesel fuel.
Strategists also knew that there were other stakes in the outcome. Afghanistan has been seen for decades as a potential route for pipelines carrying Central Asian gas — but only if there is peace. And underground lie huge deposits of riches like lithium, which is crucial to batteries for electronic devices. China in particular has a large interest in those.
The National Intelligence Council has a major effort under way to analyze threats from water and food shortages related to climate change and other environmental causes, one senior American intelligence official said.
National security officials are careful to say that resources are only one factor in the development of conflicts. How politics and diplomacy shape relationships is, in the end, decisive. “But these can be a trigger of instability,” said one senior American intelligence official, whose job forbids him to speak for attribution. “They cause the magnification of other issues.”
Last summer, for example, flooding that uprooted millions of Pakistanis stirred fear in Washington that militant movements might prove more adept than Pakistan’s weak government at delivering aid. Last month, the advocacy group Refugees International reported that the Pakistani Army did respond effectively, but that civilian authorities struggled and American and international agencies should be better prepared for climate-related calamities.
Senior military and intelligence officials who focus on “natural security” issues say the Obama administration has shown a greater understanding of the subtleties than its predecessor, in part because it does not challenge basic assumptions about the harmful impact of climate change.
“But the issues are so complex, the number of actors and the uncertainties are high,” the senior American intelligence officer said. “So the analysis is still speculative. It makes planning much harder and preventive action much harder.”
The natural security risks take many forms. Here are five scenarios, current or anticipated.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
As rising nations industrialize, they compete for resources, or use resource exports as bargaining chips in disputes; China does both
RESOURCES IN PLAY
Oil, rare earth minerals, fisheries, ocean zones for trade and seabed exploration
China is buying mineral concessions across Asia, Africa and Latin America; it has harassed foreign aircraft and ships to assert sovereignty beyond the accepted 12-mile limit in the South China Sea, whose bed is thought to be rich in rare metals.
China has risen, in less than 40 years, from a symbol of underdevelopment to the world’s No. 2 economy, and the transformation has left a vast gulf between rich and poor. Its leaders’ greatest fear is political instability, and so it seeks rapid growth to spread the benefits of the new wealth. But its voracious appetite for minerals has at times set it at odds with the West over policies toward countries like Sudan and Iran, whose oil it buys. China also has longstanding unresolved claims to islands nearby, and recently it hinted at withholding exports of rare earth minerals to get Japan to release a Chinese fishing captain who had been captured in disputed waters.
“The Chinese look at the most important thing to keep that growth going, and it is natural resources,” said Vice Adm. Doug Crowder, a former commander of Navy forces in the western Pacific and the Indian Ocean.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
Climate change feeds anarchy in poor societies
RESOURCES AT PLAY
Arable land, water, oil, sea lanes
Warships from more than half a dozen nations, on the lookout for pirates from Somalia, now ply shipping lanes that carry one-third of the world’s fuel supply around the Horn of Africa. Meanwhile, in nearby Yemen, terrorist plots inspired by Al Qaeda have emerged.
Both problems are usually traced to weak governments and lawlessness. Less appreciated is the role that changes in climate have played in the disintegration of political authority.
Many Somalian pirates are fishermen who can no longer make a living in waters depleted by overfishing. Meanwhile, arable land and water supplies have been drying up, increasing poverty and driving farmers off the land. These shifts have only fed civil conflict and warlordism.
Desertification, disorder and weak government also plague Yemen. “These trends feed cycles of violence, instability and conflict,” said one intelligence officer, who calls the trends “a recipe for a failing state.”
It was in Yemen that a Navy destroyer, the Cole, was attacked by Al Qaeda in 1998, and where terror cells that swear allegiance to the bin Laden network have since set up shop. Secret diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks refer to American-Yemeni efforts to attack the cells.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
Pollution and extraction complicate local conflicts in lands rich in minerals and fossil fuels
RESOURCES IN PLAY
Oil, wetlands, fisheries, water
Nigeria, rich in resources, has Africa’s second-largest economy. But it suffers from political, ethnic and religious divisions that routinely erupt in violence. Civilians have replaced military rule, but have not kept promises to share the land’s oil and mineral wealth equitably by ending corruption. Nigeria is a major oil exporter, but half its people are without electricity.
Oil and gas operations are centered in the ecologically delicate Niger Delta, which has long been lawless; rebels sabotage foreign oil operations, local residents tap into pipelines to pilfer fuel, and the companies have let aging infrastructure deteriorate, all of which feed intense pollution that threatens fishing and other livelihoods.
Amnesty International has reported on the delta as a calamity zone for human rights, breeding conflict. The International Crisis Group cites it as a flashpoint for violence. In a coming book from the Council on Foreign Relations, “Nigeria: Dancing on the Brink,” former Ambassador John Campbell writes: “Residents of the Delta have benefited little from the oil industry. The region is a byword for misgovernment and corruption at all levels.”
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
Rights to the seabed under the melting Arctic icecap
RESOURCES AT PLAY
Exploration for minerals, oil and gas; fisheries
In 2007, Russia sent two mini-subs to the seabed two and a half miles under the North Pole to plant its flag — a move that, however symbolic, points to new rivalries over its potential riches. Canada, Denmark, Norway and the United States also have territory in the Arctic Circle, and international conventions entitle them to economic zones within 200 miles of their borders. But Russia claims — without international support so far — that the seabed is an extension of its continental shelf, and Denmark has begun looking at the shelf off its territory in Greenland.
Russia has already used its oil and gas exports as instruments of state power in dealing with other former Soviet republics. Now, how the seabed would be divided, managed or protected promises to be a subject of dispute with other Arctic nations, presumably to be settled by new treaties or conventions.
Meanwhile, changing ecosystems threaten Arctic fishing industries. “This could become a geopolitical dispute, as dwindling global fish stocks squeeze an already suffering industry,” according to a study, “Sustaining Security: How Natural Resources Influence National Security,” by the Center for a New American Security.
THE POLITICAL ISSUE
What one country can do in the interests of all
RESOURCES AT PLAY
Rain forests, wetlands, habitable areas, arable land; pharmaceuticals and minerals; the world’s supply of oxygen
Even as periodic international conferences fail to achieve consensus on how to address global warming, one modest success story points to a different path: a single nation, acting in the common interest, can accomplish a lot. Research analysts in Washington agree with State Department assessments that such progress is evident in Brazil.
The Amazon is Earth’s largest oxygen-replenishing rain forest, a source of pharmaceuticals and strategic minerals that is rich in biodiversity. But well into the 1980s, deforestation, to exploit timber and expand farming, was proceeding at an alarming rate. Then Brazil’s politics shifted enough to allow new environmental laws and policies. Even in a society with huge disparities of wealth and poverty, Brazil had advantages that gave it flexibility to act: a stable democracy, vigorous development, offshore oil resources, and no external enemies.
Since 2004, deforestation has slowed dramatically, and now global experts give Brazil’s leaders high marks for environmental stewardship.
“Brazil is a major emerging economic powerhouse, which is going to give it all kinds of influence,” said Sarah O. Ladislaw at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “It is producing more food, but using less acreage. It wraps managing natural resources into the elements of managing the country.”
No comments:
Post a Comment