Climate Security or Climate Hypocrisy? NATO’s Military Emissions Gap

The Climate of Conflict: NATO and its member states increasingly frame climate change as a “security threat.” But ironically, the military itself is one of the world’s largest institutional polluters—and its emissions are not counted in global climate targets.

Militaries are excluded from emissions reporting under the Paris Agreement, and there’s no binding requirement to reduce fossil fuel use in operations.

This is a silence we can’t afford.

Key Climate of Conflict Points:

  • Military operations produce huge volumes of CO₂ and other GHGs
  • War zones often involve massive environmental destruction
  • NATO’s 2021 Climate Plan included adaptation and resilience—not reduction
  • The Pentagon is the single largest institutional consumer of fossil fuels in the world (source: Brown University)

Explore Further about Military’s Climate of Conflict:

Take Action:

If you believe the military should be held accountable for their emissions, here’s some Climate of Conflict actions:

  • Demand full military emissions reporting
  • Question climate narratives tied to defence budgets
  • Share this truth: There is no secure climate on a militarised planet

My Reflections

“I’ve seen what typhoons do. What droughts do. What flood displacement looks like. When I hear militaries talk about ‘climate resilience’ while burning jet fuel by the hour, I know we’re facing the wrong direction. This Climate of Conflict that can’t be ignored.”

#PeaceNotPosture

gtaAdmin

View all posts

Add comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *