Military Actions And Activities, PAst Present And Future
Military action paper
Military operations of the past, present and future contribute to environmental instability. Evidence also reveals that the military activities of United States have directly contributed to environmental destruction. More liquid fuels are consumed for these activities that emit climate changing gases and causes global warming. Engagement of America and other states in different military activities are further posing challenges to the climate sustainability. The developed countries like America and Russia are leaving larger carbon footprint on the world. Their incentives of maximizing national security has caused them to build global network of cargo, trucks, counter ships and supplies based of hydrocarbon fuels. This enormous infrastructure is identified as the prominent reason of climate change. The emission of greenhouse gases depends on the amount of energy and fuels used by the civilians. This has made US military a larger consumer of fuels CITATION Joa11 \l 1033 (Nagel). The world is still facing the consequences of the past military operations including the World War I and II. Researches reveals that these wars had played a prominent role in raising temperatures due to carbon emission and global warming.
The countries that are involved in military activities are themselves not safe from the potential threats of climate change. The most visible challenges include rise of the sea level and has convinced many states to think of alternative methods for building military weaponry. Alternative energy sources have gained much attention since the last decade with the aim of minimizing the risks of global warming. The military climate policy of the developed nations remains contradictory because they claim to increase the use of conservational energy methods but until now only a small fraction of hydrocarbon fuels have been invested. America is the larger consumers of the hydrocarbon fuels in the world that reflects its negligence of the climate change policy. America and Russian are also rely on hydrocarbon-based weapon system. Although there has been much debate on eliminating the use of hydrocarbon fuels but the countries are still investing in expansion of military operations CITATION Ben19 \l 1033 (Neimark, Belcher and Belcher). “Between 2003-2007, the war generated at least 141 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), more each year of the war than 139 of the world’s countries release annually” CITATION ICB19 \l 1033 (ICBUW). States have ignored the negative consequences of nuclear war. These activities are will also part of the future because countries are concerned about increasing power. Environmentalists have raised concerns about the implications of military activities and suggest implementation of international climate treaties. To control the deteriorating impacts of military operations there is need for shuttering military machines. Environmentalists also claims that reducing the pentagon’s budget will also shrink the capacity of waging war that will cause decline in the purchase of liquid fuels. The Green New Deal also reflects the need for addressing the issue of climate change linked to the military activities.
The argument claims that violent measures adopted by states for ending terrorist activities indulges them in military activities. However investment in military operations is continually increasing the treats of climate change. The Iraq and Afghanistan war was initiated by America in an attempt to take revenge from the extremist organization but the state itself generated million tons of carbon that harmed the world. These violent measures created more complexities because it targeted not only terrorists but also affected millions of innocent. Revenge never leads to an effective solution for ending evil from the world. Facts reveals that, “US military bought about 269,230 barrels of oil a day and emitted more than 25,000 kilotons of carbon dioxide by burning those fuels” CITATION Ben19 \l 1033 (Neimark, Belcher and Belcher). These statistics depicts that America is spending a large amount on purchase of fossil fuels that causes high-level carbon emission and toxic agents. These pollutants are raising world temperature and challenges the nature.
The present agenda of countries to investments in military activities is also increasing the risks of climate change. Opponent views that violent measures like war and torture are not appropriate for the environment and climate protection. “The US Air Force purchased US$4.9 billion worth of fuel, and the navy US$2.8 billion, followed by the army at US$947m and the Marines at US$36m” CITATION Ben19 \l 1033 (Neimark, Belcher and Belcher). This can be understood by considering the ramifications and after affects of Afghan war that were experienced by the entire world. Emission of greenhouse gases is against the idea of human welfare. America invested huge finances and maintained control over the territory of Afghanistan but the outcomes were negative including global warming. The war failed in achieving its purpose of eliminating terrorism but resulted in high carbon emission that raised world temperature. The criticism on global civil society becomes more valid when one considers real-life scenarios. America’s agenda of initiating wars for targeting terrorism is still criticized all across the world because it caused more misery by deteriorating climate CITATION Joa11 \l 1033 (Nagel). Terrorist attacks cause fewer casualties then other disasters like car accidents and homicides but the state is inclined to strengthen its military base. The argument claims that war brings destruction and undermines the safe environment concept but countries are neglecting their responsibility towards climate protection.
The role of US in invading Iraq depicts that the state failed to accept the common agenda of Global Civil Society of avoiding war and violence. “Much disagreement exists on the humanitarian justification of the invasion of Iraq. Nonetheless, the invasion and its aftermath offer the opportunity for reflecting in some detail on how emerging standards of humanitarian intervention might be applied in practice” CITATION Jam041 \l 1033 (Cockayne and Samii). This reflects that the means adopted by America had been brutal and against the political ideology of civility on which the notion of global peace was based. The disagreement between countries reflects that the developments failed to implement a single criteria for the acceptance of humanitarian role of states. The invasion in Iraq presented two views on humanitarian as US agenda was to fight against terrorism for the protection of world. This further created confusion about the exact role of global civil society that was actually aimed at protection of the rights of all people.
Climate change and pollutions are interlinked because future military activities are having direct and indirect impacts on global environment. With economic development the countries have invested in military with the aim of maximizing national security. The developed countries like US, China and Russia will invest more in military operations that indicates that the risks will be apparent in future. Military of these countries believe that they are immune to climate change. Negotiations among countries on climate change were made for the first time in Kyoto Protocol 1997 CITATION ICB19 \l 1033 (ICBUW). The agenda was to limit the role of military for resolving the issues of climate change. However no significant changes occurred because the governments of these counties pays little attention to climate sustainability. Each developed country is still spending a larger part of its GDP in the expansion of military base and related activities without considering the negative consequences. Every country is still manufacturing more weapons and consuming more hydrocarbon fuels. In 1970s the soviet invasion of Afghanistan and Iranian Revolution are also practical examples of excessive use of oils. Bush administration pulled America out of the Kyoto protocol claiming that investing in global warming controls is expensive and unaffordable for the country CITATION Joa11 \l 1033 (Nagel). The present situation also depicts lack of state’s interest to protect the climate as Trump denied to sign the Paris Agreement of Climate. This indicates that countries are not willing to reduce their military carbon emission.
The examination of the military activities reveals that they are intensifying the conditions of global warming. A tradeoff is going on in US for budgeting between materialized defense and environmental security. The facts also depicts that US military is contributing to 30 percent of the world’s global warming. Environmentalists argue that the states must now invest in activities that promote climate sustainability by cutting the military budget. There is need for taking adequate actions for stopping the military activities that will threaten the environment sustainability and contributes to climate change at dangerous level. Governments of the developed countries must integrate climate protection policy in their agendas and limit military expansion that pose challenges for the future generations. There is need for global action to eliminate the risky military practices that causes massive carbon emission leading to global warming. Both combat and non-combat operations are contributing to greenhouse gas emission that the world needs to stop. US is still fueling the military machines that irrespective of the significant damages it already did to the world in its 9/11 military actions. In the year 2017 58.4 metric tons of carbon dioxide was released that rose global warming. Most of the carbon emission is the result of physical installation, building of sites and operations carried by the military. Similarly a larger portion of the energy is consumed by the ships, planes and vehicles that require massive fuels. Multiple gallons of fuel are needed for running a single jet that also increase risks of climate change.
I think that military activities of the past, present and future directly caused climate change. This is due to the fact that rise in sea levels resulting from global warming threatens the military installations. The most common reason for changes in climate include the emission of carbon. I think that the developed countries are more responsible for climate change because they are more concerned about national security and every year spend more money to expand their military. The role of military operations of the past made it clear that these activities are linked to the emission of greenhouse gases that leads to global warming. I also believe that America is among the developed countries that contributed largely towards global warming since the last decade due to its involvement in Afghan war. Research studies and data has confirmed that these operations resulted in carbon emission of million of tons. Our environment is still facing the consequences of the series of war including World War I and II. However the countries are still reluctant to invest in their military base. Data also reveals that American’s military activities in Afghanistan had contributed to global warming.
I agree with the viewpoints of environmentalists because they are concerned about protecting the climate for the future generations. This required cutting expenditures of military and engaging countries to become a part of climate protection policy. However countries are focusing in nationalist interests and ignoring the global threats. I think that it is important for the countries to realize that climate change deteriorates the quality of life and affect all humans. I believe that becoming part of military operations is due to lack of rational approach. The states are only taking decisions that could expand their national security but are least concerned about the environment. It is also criticized by environmentalists that US had announced its policy of relying on conservative methods for military activities but larger part still comes from hydrocarbon fuels. The only possible solution that could allow the world to fight with the climate war is by reducing the use of fossil fuels. America is a largest consumer of fossil fuels because it is building its cargo, military ships and air force that are based on hydrocarbon fuels.
I think that the developed countries are not taking the issue of climate change seriously. Only little amount from budget is spent on green policy mission. America’s agenda of raising military budget each year is a clear picture of how current activities will further worsen the climate. I also believe that the world is already paying huge cost of these military activities in the form of floods, droughts, wildfires and desertification’s. If the countries continue to increase their military actions that will further raise the sea level and possibilities of floods. I think that an effective solution is to implement international climate treaty for preventing nations from engaging in military activities. I believe that the developed countries like US, China and Russia will invest more in military operations that indicates that the risks will be apparent in future. This is important not only for the survival of the current generation but also for the future generations. The Green New Deal also reflects the need for addressing the issue of climate change by making it compulsory for the nations to minimize their military operations. I feel that developed countries like America, China and Russia have bigger responsibility towards climate protection.
BIBLIOGRAPHY Cockayne, James and Cyrus Samii. "The Iraq Crisis and World Order: Structural and Normative Challenges." International Peace Academy (2004).
ICBUW. CLIMATE CHANGE and the responsibility of the Military . 2019. 12 09 2019 <http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/climate-change-and-the-responsibility-of-the-milit>.
Nagel, Joane. "CLIMATE CHANGE, PUBLIC OPINION, AND THE MILITARY SECURITY COMPLEX." The Sociological Quarterly 5.2 (2011): 203-210.
Neimark, Benjamin, Oliver Belcher and Oliver Belcher. US military is a bigger polluter than as many as 140 countries – shrinking this war machine is a must . 2019. 12 09 2019 <http://theconversation.com/us-military-is-a-bigger-polluter-than-as-many-as-140-countries-shrinking-this-war-machine-is-a-must-119269>.
Useful LinksFree Essays About Blog
If you have any queries please write to us
Join our mailing list
@ All Rights Reserved 2023 email@example.com