Wealthy nations should divert 5% of their military budgets to climate finance, advocates argue.
The call comes as global leaders at Cop28 in Dubai gather for a special-themed day on “relief, recovery, and peace” on Sunday, marking the first time climate-fueled conflict has ever been on an international climate conference agenda.
Participants will discuss the need to direct aid to “highly vulnerable, fragile, and conflict-affected communities” as evidence mounts that climate disasters put regions at greater risk of war, and amid ongoing conflict in Palestine as well as Ukraine, Sudan, and other areas.
But truly protecting communities from climate and conflict will require a shift in priorities, says the Transnational Institute, an international research and advocacy group.
Nation-states: but we’re gonna need that military budget to fight our climate wars, we can’t spend it preventing climate change! Climate wars are gonna be the first opportunity in like 80 years to try large-scale annexations, what the fuck is your problem!!
Everybody else: :o
Also a massive percentage of the world’s freshwater supply? Canada geese though so they’re safe.
How is the war in Ukraine a climate war? Also the next ones seem to be Ethiopia vs Eritrea and Venezuela vs Guyana. Ethiopia wants sea access and Venezuela oil.
You actually want to compare Ukraine and a couple regional conflicts to, say, World War II in terms of scale? Do go on!
So you are saying that we only had one time for large-scale annexation in history? There is literally no larger scale war of annexation as WW2.
Context counts, “large” is a relative term, my comment was about hypothetical future climate wars that could in fact be global-scale, and in context of my comment, I did specifically reference 80 years ago to give a sense of the scale of climate war that I think is possible. It’s insipid and quite literally begging for a participation trophy to come in and cry that I’m not validating that Ukraine is fighting over a lot of land, when in context I was having a completely different discussion.
But if you really need your participation trophy – yes, regional conflicts count, yes, Ukraine is fighting over a lot of land and it is a quite significant conflict. But, like you indignantly figured out all on your own, because it is not a global-scale climate war, the general possibility of which is what I was talking about in my comment, Ukraine was not exactly pertinent to my comment, and I’m not obligated to satisfy the chauvinism of every single nationalistv whose favored nation-state is involved in a war at any given moment in every single comment I make online. Not every comment you see online is, in fact, about the specific regional conflict that is close to your heart.
Since the UN was founded we had three wars of annexation. Israel taking Palestine, China invading Tibet and Iraq annexing Kuwait. That is somewhat ignoring squabbles after the withdrawal of colonial powers somewhat.
So when we see Russia invades Ukraine that is rather simply the largest annexation attempt since the UN was founded. With two more attempts likely, that really speaks towards a massive shift in the geopolitical landscape. That was why I was confused.
What the actual fuck is happening here? It’s like you are commenting on a completely different thread. Are you smelling any burnt toast right now? You are being weird as fuck, sir.
Sincerely,
Concerned
Basically I was trying to explain, why I misunderstood the context of “no large scale annexation wars being possible for 80 years”.
Other then that just consider me an idiot, you are propably right.
:) No worries at all, my friend. I figured there was some miscommunication happening somewhere.