to the phones, i think it did thousands, so it'd be easy as many are willing to grant the government more time for refunds. why am i sure it's unfair to expect any dramatic change in just 6 months up to what we've experienced for the last 17 years? some essential food prices have dropped, for others have risen. more importantly, before we fit speaking out. now at least we can criticize the government freely without fear of retribution in the after 17 years of looting, we can expect a quick change professor eunice needs more time. prices were high initially. the essentials, like vegetables are now dropping compared to has seen is we will, we're much better off and have peace of mind now. these violations were un report released on when is the q has been with us just from our government, of committing crimes against humanity. citing 1400 people killed and thousands injured between july one and august 15 last year on. when is that chief advise that

professor eunice visited, one of hundreds of sick brit detention sites that operated during i've seen a 0 excel edge that where you stay in prison and taught you of thousands of people who are detained without charge are these are some of the detention so that has been exposed recently and the ancient government in quite a commission is adamant to expose all the sick to detention. so across the country under former governments. the whole existence of this government is because of this that we don't want to stay in the darkness. do that, that has been paid to them. so we want to pay the new environment new as we say, new bank visits as students have been claiming all the time. so that direct to the reform commissions. one of them is just disappeared into commission. some former

members i've seen has only party have reported harris men under the new government allegations of political targeting and violence of a much leading some parties to call for ali elections. aside from domestic challenges, the interim government and bundle dish is trying to manage increasing tension with new daily, including the expedition of shit, casino who fled to india after she was ousted. it's 6 funding for ro hang a refugee is as a declines and is pushing for a un conference in dialogue with the arctic, an army and me on my to resolve the refugee crisis to get trilogy. i'll just say that dr. well, that's often they tell me the cry. the news continues here though, and l just here, after all, while the plan is up. next the

right now for wage population 2000000000 people 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, it's on these across the globe or a country. they'd be the full largest the meat are called and the impact of war, however, is so much more than just emissions from the tanks ships. and what does it say? it has a devastating effect on people on 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 or is this a hunched 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 fully reported. and what's worse is the roof of the country's most significant images. there's one military in particular, the biggest in fact was it's $816000000000.00 budget in 2023 at leads the pact with emissions, the us armed forces, the government funding or the seeing that 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 university's costs of war 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 elephant in the room that has been ignored so far, that's nic buxton author and research over dance to them. base transnational institute, that was just a report showing that the ministry spending globally has reached 2 point one

trillion now a and a warranty claim. and now and gaza has kind of given that next trip. and 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 good 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 mold and 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 fairly deliberate when the cure to approach go was signed and agreed in the mid

ninety's at the military comp time extension that they wouldn't be in tears. if 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 work 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. 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 supplied 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 tanks there will 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's 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 gonna students 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. an example of the full out can be seen in 2017, in yemen, 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, the few fires that's happens. we're seeing it right now in ukraine. one of the key targets is often fuel depot, so we have some changes around nuclear waste. it was

a back seat that was talked 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 say, 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 the skin and leads to toxic after effects seem to shut down a fold sanitation facilities by street being formed and also through shuttle from electricity. 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 tours as 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 fixed in countries such as iraq, afghanistan, syria, are practiced on a storage. i 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 been 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 mature. you have to come to meet the announcements to what's going on. and what you see is that large, 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 this huge trend across depend on a massive amounts of fuel. indeed such. and it's in the rock near the if the touch

or tank because they could undermine us war after that. so this being a real dr. amongst us admitted teacher reduced it's funny ability. it's always good to drink transition. just mean energy. if you can. the problem is we're talking about deep rooted, deep seated historical pollution, which continues to the state. so there's an needs 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 seemed simple and obvious. climate change will lead to increased instability, conflict, and migration that requires military 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 block receive, which suddenly were not faced with the threats of bipolar worlds, the biggest thing was the need to re define what security meant. and so they brought in the agenda to see what 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 of the floods or increase temperatures? it's how can we secure ourselves against 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? some will say climate change has nothing taken seriously enough. 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 some climate change is a threat multiplier threat, multiplier threat multipliers, the threat to multiplies and stay much. and the,

it's 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 stuff like fight for survival. it's at the heart of every to step in 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 dictionary reasons and places of scarcity that you might know actually find a thread to drive to actually cooperates in some parts of africa. for example, whether it's been increase impacts on pastoral communities, climate change to punch the line, billions to the brink of 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 tulsa 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 if you generals 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 they often 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 this idea that kind of 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 at the same level of resources, resources occurring into. i'm going to try as response to the process. 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 quite boldest will be strengthened around the country to hold back. unwanted stopping 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 wolves have been built along voters or on 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 who willingly wants to leave. so there's also the assumption that they're dying to come to america or dine to come to the european union. know there's floors for economic reasons for political reasons and, and sometimes environmental that the environmental, sort of, intertwined with the solution into political. and i think a lot of these narratives are really embedded in their kind of colonial and often racist attitudes. it's, it's, the fluids of savages are out there. and if there's any scheduled to your impacts and zabel 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 the consequences of bits 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 south to the global north. this is a very small percentage. so there's 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 the security this food security border security energy security. ready ready no one can really argue with what, after all through, 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 those security. we used in the context, not just of folders or resources, but a few. i personally support the reference to human security and i would refer to it as climate human security uh to move away from the national security, militarized, problematic framework. so there are different conceptions, security. the trouble is that the ones that were dominates are the ones i'm most

results. and at the moment what we've seen is a massive increase in ministry spending and 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 focuses them 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. it's the state and power and the retreat 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, or native american land standing 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 cop 24 in

december 2018 or thirties issued a terrorism over 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, who greatly expands the definition of terrorism to include those who intend to damage public property or interfere with critical infrastructure coming 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 activists up sales from a traffic breach, sol, legislation ran through like a parliament days later. that would increase fines for public obstruction from $750.00 to $50000.00 or 3 months in jail. when active as camp

out in blockade roads for you know, struct, 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 for town, their right to protest that seems to be in instead of going to the values we're trying to, to promote and pretence. 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, national security imperative there should be taken seriously, but not without a good dose of skepticism. there was 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 copy results like guns. this new 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 sometimes a crisis can bring out the best in people, rather than the west. the a full hails a planet, interrogates while i was thinking about climate change,

the way we do this, a global issue is abstract. so whatever i do, it doesn't seem to make a dent alley re reveals how, with the anger and if you liked it 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 in booking climate action on l g 0, we are to see the series of legend some clothes and the stories of civilizations that market history was. this is where the story of savannah didn't have any stories to tell. the leaders are demanding the parent to justice at this he is african union summit,

but with historical injustice and land restitution high on the agenda. will they engage effectively on conflicts and human rights concerns on the continent follow the african union summit on out his era. the, [000:00:00;00] the email i'm elizabeth put on i'm and this is the news. our live from dog hawk coming up in the next 16 minutes, praying for an endearing phase palestinians and gaza wait for temporary homes and shelters. still locked by israel after him off as it was released his right of captives. i think what's going to show up is the jobs are going to go up and prices