and save many returning home for the entirely because it's safe to do so. but people here see otherwise not go to the new but we don't have homes to return to they were destroyed. where shall we go? what am i put the testicles i could do with why have they given us such a short deadline? there are people here from retrieval. msc chung. people from far away from the different areas. what do we talk about? let me pull that up again. there was flashing where we came from, the rebels was slowly drawing us in our houses. now they tell us to leave the displacement camps immediately and how we have some great we have children. we have the elderly people with disabilities. how will we transport them to call that the name of picked up? i know not good news. the u. n. c is more than a $100000.00. people have started making their way back home, but it is says 4 locations to the volume tare. so here in little angle comp, residents

a meeting to discuss the way forward. many say they're worried about what the future holds. catherine, sorry, alda 0, an african union meeting, a foreign minister is this taking place. and if you, if he has capital, the ongoing fighting in the democratic republic of congo is on the agenda. part of renewed diplomatic efforts to end the conflict. cumberland was a v as an analyst with the center for research on congo control. so the good news is pushing the best way to the task, but whether the nother, what c 9 is coming from the eighty's, that they are not holding run back comfortable for them. surprises us see why we have the ocean, but we have a member of african union, which is violating this charter. the african union shot that they would tell you what i think were german. i'm ask initial, according to the one group of experts, at least 4001 of the soldiers across the board and says, uh, 2024 and could be more by now. but no,

they shouldn't. across the i would say actually the african unit isn't bodies or sticking aggressive diplomacy to hold one day accountable for that, that wouldn't allow for his thoughts. and the other engagement to take but seem to come with deductible pressure comes, will be, you know, moment distinguish them and pushing for the primacy. we might aggressive diplomacy to run, they kind of go where we have to think about to come with these. the price is the best for the best of years. me as a lives have been lost in the country. and i think these time to bring about peace is a call to a lot of african countries, a people with around the world to say that after 30 years of narrative, that we're hearing about the condo. it is time for peace, for people to come. all held upon it was coming up next to 0 bye. for now, the pakistan has one of the highest infant mortality rates in the world. and human

rights was 2 with one dying every hour due to pregnancy complications. 101 east meets the breed midwife fighting to save the lives of pakistani mothers and their babies. pakistan's maternal mortality on know to 0. right now, a quarter of the world's population. 2000000000 people are living in countries. in fact, according to the united nations 2023. so the highest number of active violet conflicts since world war 2. and according to those tracking, nutri emissions is on these across the globe, or a country. it'd be the full largest the me to call them on the impact of will however, is so much more than just emissions from the tanks ships and it has a devastating effect on people and the planet. so what is the scale of destruction will find military and in an age with nations justify war on the basis of suppose the security benefits is, is a hunk model. so

a huge threat to collect the security, the or. busy whichever reports that comes out on the state of the climate, this little of the mission stuff, industry spewing more countries committing to a minute, less understanding emissions can help us work out what needs to change. but there's a big hole in the information we have military emissions. these are often poorly tracked and even more poorly reported. and what's worse is the roof of the country's most significant images. there's one miller tree in particular, the biggest in fact, it's $816000000000.00 budget in 2023 at leads the pact with emissions,

the us on tools, the government money or the seeing the operations is the us department of defense. the department of defense has annual emissions is as large as the emissions of many countries. so it's as largest portugal or sweden in 2023. i spoke with ned, a crawford co director of brown universities, costs of will project in 2019. her team uncovered a startling fact. the us department of defense has a large annual carbon footprint. in most countries on us to say the u. s. military emissions are $52000000.00 metric tons annually is to say the united states is the single largest energy user, and the us military is therefore the single largest carbon emitter, looking at it as an institution. 30 percent of those emissions are from races across the world. and 75 percent or from operations,

you calculate us miniature emissions. it's more than many, many other countries. so it's really if the out of sense in the room that has been ignored. so i thought that's nic buxton author and research of the interested in bass transnational institute. that was just a report showing that the ministry spending globally has reached $2.00 trillion now a and a warranty claim. and now in gaza has kind of given that next trips, every time ministry spending increases, military emissions increases. getting clarity on emissions is a challenge. there are very few industries. let's see any upside in tracking, the carbon that they're putting out into the atmosphere. that reluctance seems multiplied many times over. when it comes to miller trees, getting accurate emissions, he gets from them as prison, largely for utah. in 2022, a group called the scientist for global responsibility. estimated that altogether new trees and the supporting industries account for up to 6 percent of global

emissions. that's more than the civil aviation and shipping combined. why do you think this massive sol? so the emissions is so often ignored is this deliberate or some kind of oversight. i think the reason why ministry missions is really ignored on the plate was a fest really deliberate when the carrots approach ago was signed and agreed in the mid ninety's at the military comp time exemptions that they wouldn't be into just that was that something pushed through by the pension and us didn't sign the agreement to me yet, but it remained on the books and military and 1997 was very clear that they didn't want to have their operations curtailed and therefore didn't want military emissions, including the 2nd reason is there's vast amounts of military emissions or more related emissions that we can't really at this point count the cost of your calculations do not include the emissions from blowing things up from burning them . that's kind of out of sight out of mind. at the corner of the costs of war

projects, calculations is few of the us armed forces requires a lot of it. we're talking more than 85000000 barrels for operations alone in 2017 keeping track of how many vehicles have gone to and fro. how long, how many times they've had to refill? that's the will not simple so that all military's needs a way to get around. they require fuel and great power, like the united states, which sees itself as pre eminent and wanting to prevail and every conflict desires access to fuel everywhere all the time. so the united states has bases in about $38.00 countries and fuel is supply from those places or is taken to those places and protected. so the united states can operate. i think i calculated once that one jackson and now uses what's an average cost driver would use in 7 years. intensive gas. so these yet thomas tank sterile,

very high fuel use vehicles. and then you've got a very large miniature footprint us as around $800.00 military bases around the world featured. those has to be supplied the results, and it supports the whole global machine which has a very high and carbon impact. but of course, the military's impact on the environment doesn't start with emissions, military forces and was, have left to logically devastating environmental legacy around the world. illegal looking, which often flourishes as part of the war economy, remains one of the biggest contributors to deforestation and species. lot around one 3rd of f kenneth stands trees will last between 199-2005 explosives, damage critical infrastructure and can release particles, debris, and talks that pollute the air, water, and swell and lead to sanitation crises. and example of the full that can be seen in 2017 india, where a collapse of infrastructure led to around 2000 cases of color are being reported

each day. part of war is involved in destroying the environmental capacities of nations. we saw that in a rock radio with a few fires. that's happens. we're seeing it right now and you train one of the key targets is often fuel depot, so we cut in some changes around nuclear waste. it was a factory that was talk to is released ammonia into the so odd of military impacts is a leave, a legacy of destruction. most famously we saw that in vietnam with age are in still affecting bus at dfcs, a decades later, we see it really stuck to the right now in terms of gods. i said, you know, tennessee whole neighborhoods being raised to the ground. you're also seeing the use of toxic weapons such as white phosphorus that bends through to scan and leads to toxic after effects seen to shut down the fold sanitation facilities by street being formed, and also through shuttle for black tricity. and of course, that's a release of toxic chemicals. so when you see built buildings of bombs and that

sometimes releases things like a specialist. and that's not occasionally emissions of course that coming from the lease of weapons and ms. ailes. it's a combination of fast floors, past nuclear testing and fast operations, but also car and clean negligence in cleaning up. finally, these operations dr. my, what you d is a professor of political science and middle east politics at georgetown university in washington, dc. nuclear weapons that have taken place in the past, in the martian islands in the forties and the 50s, as well as in, in june reservations, creating a lot of health impact. the 2nd thing is there's also the impact of the open air fits in countries such as iraq, afghanistan, syria, are practiced on a thursday. mention is the water contention because of their sales to in ground water. so you think drinking and water for agriculture purposes. the situation is

clearly unsustainable. in november 2022. the united nations formerly adopted principles to protect the environment amidst on conflicts. and if you look at notice data, the us military submissions split up a bit so that can be measured, have beat on an overall decline since 1975. this is mostly due to a reduction in the number of bases and to move away from coal power to renewables. and you clear all of this? it started to happen even before february 2022. when the us army announced its 1st climate strategy amongst its priorities, installing independent power goods on the basis to improve self sufficiency and to use more renewable energy sources. also applying to have a fleet of electric known combat vehicles by 2035. there is, of course, this new push for reducing fuel consumption and emissions as well as to transition to more efficient vehicles. this will make a difference. i think it's important, but,

and even if they excel rated the transition to renewables, the real savings isn't operation. so then you have to ask, is united states operating in places where it needs to be operating doesn't have bases where it needs to have bases or these a legacy of either the cold war or the post 911 wars. so these are questions that the united states military has not for the most part, evaluated. however, the military and government officials a quick to promote their environmental credentials. the same for her say 2021 is restore our. you'll hear about green was green miller trees and yes, even green munition. the best way to define it is it personally, is, is a environmentally benign ammunition, the, the lead slog in the, in the tip of the bullet has been removed and replaced with a much more environmentally friendly material. you have to come to meet the announcements to what's going on. and what you see is that not the, it's a concern,

not about climate change, but about the funder ability that these groups have too few. or they find out during the rock was that one of the biggest funder abilities to us post is had that was the fact that only from is huge time across depend on a massive amounts of fuel. indeed, such and send the rock new the if the touch or tank because they could undermine us war after that. so this being a real drive amongst us admitted teacher reduced its funded abilities. it's always good to drink transition to green energy if you can. the problem is we're talking about deep rooted, deep seated historical pollution which continues to the states. so there's a need for deep structural change. over the past 2 decades, west and governments from washington to camera have to use the lens of national security to view and framed the climate crisis. climate change is a national security issue. climate change at the center of our domestic national security. the impact of climate change on global security is not of absolute deep

power months. the assumption underlying this framing seems simple and obvious. climate change will lead to increased instability, conflict, and migration that requires the tree readiness. this idea of the environment become a part of national security came after the end of the cold war, when suddenly there was the need to just to find the but you the, you know, viewed intelligence service service within those large world procedure which suddenly were not faced with the threats of bipolar worlds, the biggest thing was the need to be defined what security meant. and so they brought in the agenda to see was the environment is also part of security that led to the assumption from the perspective of america, the west global north, that climate change in the rest of the world will in fact resources creating scarcity. and as a source of conflict, the rest for the western countries, another narrative, just to say, this would create migration. and migration is potentially

a source of address and conflict and instability for the past 1st nations. and that's the real problem with the national security threats. framing is that really it's turning those who are the victims of climate change. there's most impact to taking the course countries into. now the new strengths of the richest country. you never see it. how do we guarantee the security of people forced to beat the homes because the floods are increased temperatures? it's how can we secure ourselves again steve microns? and that, to me is that part of why i think we need to really challenge. besides, you have time and security and always ask the question, who security are we talking about? the other side of the debate? so i'm gonna say climate change has nothing taken seriously. and so we need to secure a sizes to bring awareness to get the military on board to get the policy makers on board. and then we're able to have urgent action that might sound like a smart strategy officer. rule is the world and the respondents to threats and fame

hungry and the see approach people will take to raise when the problem with this approach is that it means challenges a magnified when the people are made into threats. and the rhetoric just french climate change is a threat multiplier threat multiplier threat multipliers. the threat to multiplies, stay much, much just one of the key terms. and this is the idea that climate change will exacerbate existing tensions and conflicts and make them worse. and i must admit, when i 1st looked today, i thought the same, there was this idea to if you're an extreme circumstances, you're going to still like fight for survival. it's at the heart of every disturbing science fiction. maybe you ever watched the part for it's outside, but actually when you look at the evidence,

it doesn't pain that picture. there's no reason to, in places of scarcity that you might know actually find a thread to drive to actually cooperates in some parts of africa. for example, where there's been an increase impacts on pastoral communities, climate change to punch the line, billions to the bring a starvation that they've actually done, how to collaborate and cooperate because they realize that that is the best chance of survival. but nevertheless, united states has looked to certain regions of places where the underlying weakness, thermal capacity and preexisting stressors, like that's a conflict or a lack of democratic governance. and they say, these are the places were instability in migration will come. the one example that keeps coming up in this context is syria. in recent years it's become common place to describe what's been happening for the past decade or so in the country. as a climate, it's seen as a pre kosa of the climate, conflicts to come. however,

quite a total of just send researches not quite so assertive when talking about syria, because syria there was a drought and they did have severe impacts and it caused people to migrate and that dropped was undoubtedly it was and by climate change. but they could find no evidence, there is thomas, what disproportion named involved in the civil war against the side in stock. they found that the bigger impact was the removal of agricultural subsidies, which was a measure required by the mass. but you weren't human, it's, you general is blaming the mass for the war and serial. there was a shift to new liberal reforms under the encouragement of international financial institutions such as the world bank and the i met on the combined created a situation of human and security for the communities and they ended up migrating to other parts. the other aspect is these migrants were not the ones taking the streets for the protest and from the country they were parked in slums,

completely neglected by local authority. and it was already surviving. so the narrative is small, the different levels. and so that has to raise the question, if the time changes is a factor but cleaning it's not a climate change, more than why it should be news. i think it's because if we can turn every conflict that has a global impact such as the syrian more inter type of change, then we will need more resources for the ministry. and the austin serves the interests of local dates as well because it will push more development funding and more 8 funding. so there's a whole bunch of cell 7 interests that to really drive and the site to the climate change co course is conflict more than actually the evidence, even the intergovernmental panel on climate change b i t. c. c at the united nations has been cleared. we kind of jumped to climate conclusions when analyzing conflicts, reporting 2022 states violent conflict and separately migration patterns in the near term will be driven by socio economic conditions and governance. move in by

climate change. in other words, injustice and dictate, has a most significant contribute is to conflict and displacement. there is a valuable discussion investment about how to create an environment for peace, which is a field that doesn't get in any way the same level of resources, resources occurring into. i'm going to try as response to the process of the one key areas investment against what i've seen is climate driven threats. a militarized board is in 2019 astrology. as defense falls, announced that military patrols around australia is waters, could be stepped up to intercept climate refugees. a report commissioned by the us pen to go on in 2003 on the security implications of climate change. have this quick bodies will be strengthened around the country to hold back unwanted starving immigrants from the caribbean islands, mexico and south america. and in europe,

politicians like jordan padilla, president of france is far right, resumed a more national party. have said, boys will be the environment's greatest ally, it is true, then we will save the planet over the last 50 years. 63 rules have been built along voters or occupied territory across the world. in fact, 6 out of 10 people in the world live in a nation with one of these board awards. a lot of the migration is internal displacements. there's no migrant pulling d. what's denise? so there's also the assumption that they're dying to come to america or dine to come to the european union. no, therefore, for economic reasons, for political reasons and, and sometimes environmental than the environmental, sort of, intertwined with the solution into political. and i think a lot of these narratives are really embedded in that kind of colonial and often racist attitude. it's that the hordes of savages are out there. and if there's any, suggest it to your impacts and they will spice and they will effect are dramatic.

new video shows a struggle between border patrol and migrants and el paso. then you're starting to push away from looking at close is injustice to we need to find a way to deal with consequences of it. and that for you turn to the ministry as the one who can deal with consequences. the actual match migration going from countries in the global sales to the global north. this is a very small but sentence. so there is a big difference between the hyper on climate and migration and the reality. it's hard to escape the web security and discussions about the climate crisis. it's not just for security, this food security border security energy security. ready no one can really argue with what, after all, who doesn't want to be secure. i want to security isn't as benign or simple as it's often presented. often one course of people are made secure at the cost of another group security that could change the security we used in the context,

not just of borders or resources, but a few. i personally support the reference to human security and i would refer to it as climate human security to move away from the national security, militarized, problematic framework. so there are different conceptions of security. the trouble is that the ones that would dominate are the ones i'm most results. and at the moment what we've seen is a mess of increasing ministry spending, the national security spending everywhere. so what happens then is that the national security idea dominate. it takes away the issues around distribution and justice and focused on stem instead, on increasing and defending an attraction occurring system. the power of the military security framing is so great that those who question it can find themselves targeted state and power never treat bottles. for instance, in 2016 us law enforcement agents used to gas and water cannons. despite below

freezing temperatures, on, on, on going straight is protesting the construction of the keystone oil pipeline on native american land, extending bulk in north dakota, governments around the world. i've also been proposing and even passing that enables them to crack down on activists branded as eco terrorists in poland, days before hosting called 24 in december 2018 or thirties issued a terrorism award and denied entry to at least 13 foreign climate activists rich to to attend cooling the security threats in the philippines, a new 2020 anti terrorism will greatly expand the definition of terrorism to include those who intend to damage public property or interfere with critical infrastructure coming to tactic of environmental groups. it also allow suspects to be arrested without warrant and to change that charges for up to $24.00 days. and

in australia, a stumped in early 2023, in which climate activist episode from a traffic breach, sol, legislation ran through like a problem and days later that would increase funds for public obstruction from 750 $1.00 to $50000.00 or 3 months in jail when active as camp out in blockade, roads or you know, obstruct the construction of fossil fuel infrastructure. for the most part, they're not harming individuals directly. and on the other end, see governments responding pretty harshly. we can't in the name of protecting infrastructure that is actually harming us. the rest people are per town, their right to protest. that seems to be in instead of going to the values for trying to, to promote and protect. when we talk about the climate crisis, it's important that we separate rhetoric from reality. the corporate military

industrial complex. as a good point, it's messaging thrown around was like written, multiplies the national security imperative there should be taken seriously, but not without a good dose of skepticism. they're a vested interest in the mix, and there's a lot of discussion about the climate damage inflicted by military security for the system. so also we need to remember that the security framework is as much about attracting attention and money to try solutions as it is about diverting focus. from the time it is a comment crisis company, there's all like guns. there's no way we can resolve the climate crisis through building pickles. therefore, we need approaches which are based on international collaboration. we need to look at what is the root cause is of in security for people. and we need to find just ways to help them adapt to climate change. so it's a long whole. but to me now from past experiences that's situations of crises can be dealt with quite different. and that sometimes

a crisis can bring out the best in people. rather than it was, the a full hails a planet, interrogates while i was think about climate change, the way we do this is a global issue. it's abstract. so whatever i do, it doesn't seem to make a dent. alley re reveals how, with the internet connected into distancing also from the climate crisis. and delane meaningful action as faculty reactions has been both intentionally and unintentionally quite a few ideas to create confusions. if we're confused with the power of psychology and booking climate action on out to 0, the

limits to have a dream contained to study in your own adventure, now counter and ways an increasing power in africa, josh and most and that is killed. so did use violence in the country that these rushes presence in the central african republic, a stabilizing force, or calculated strategies to dillman across the continent. they provide security and they take uranium, they provide security. i may take diamond rushes shadow when i phone, which is 0. the latest news as it breaks 1st, then zalinski has guides the international guarantee to step up all these deliveries to ukraine. take the defensive with detailed coverage people with must department of government efficiency showed up here the us is headquarters,

demanding access to the building from around the world for the people of what made any annual fee test be 10. it's the end of a painful chapter of displacement. the a donald trump says he's spoken with the russian president on the day, his defense secretary has laid out plans to end the war in ukraine. the you're watching all to 0 life or my headquarters in delphi, and you navigate the also coming up a concerted push to keep the goals of ceasefire alive, mediators, katara and egypt intensify, efforts to find solutions after pressure from the us and israel to resume the war

leaders of the african union discuss the conflicts and the chemical.