Adaptation and military consideration
With global warming, the risks of armed conflict increase. The way we wage war and the way the army operates must adapt. Similarly, post-war reconstruction must take current issues into account.
Over time, global warming accelerates, causing ever more damage. Floods are becoming more and more frequent, storms are gaining in intensity, periods of extreme heat are becoming more and more numerous… And, in addition to the local populations and nature, the armies are also suffering!
Thus, many military bases (and even more so naval bases) are built close to the shores, in flood-prone areas.
The army must therefore anticipate potential damage and explore the solutions available to it. To reduce damage to equipment, but above all to ensure the safety of its personnel. And, when possible, to reduce its ecological impact and its contribution to the release of greenhouse gas around the world.
Adaptation to climate change
With global warming, as we have seen, disasters are increasing in frequency and intensity. The impact on men and equipment is felt.
« Let us remember that the armies are a part of society, to which they are intimately linked. This society is today aware of the impact of climate change on our lives and the efforts that must be made to reduce our carbon footprint«
Nicolas Regaud
“Climate change, an amplifier of risks and threats, is already affecting international security. All armies, directorates and services of the ministry are concerned and must prepare in their fields of competence, particularly in terms of capabilities and operational levels” said Nicolas Regaud, climate Advisor to the Major General of the Armies in a report published on the French army website under the title “The armies must prepare for the consequences of climate change”
In addition, “let us remember that the armies are a part of society, to which they are intimately linked. This society is today aware of the impact of climate change on our lives and the efforts that must be made to reduce our carbon footprint » said Regaud. According to him, this is reason enough to justify the adaptation of the army. Plus the already observed impact of warming on the armies.
« In 2013, when we arrived in the Sahel as part of Operation Serval, computers failed under the effect of the heat, and shoe soles came off » keep saying Regaud. If the example can be laughable, especially if we imagine soldiers hopping without their soles, the implications are serious to say the least. In addition to pressure from society, it is therefore necessary to limit this kind of inconvenience.
During the fourth edition of the Paris Peace Forum, defense ministers launched an initiative: “The armed forces are committed to reducing their impact on the climate”. A joint statement on climate change and the armed forces is then published.
In this treaty, strategic anticipation measures are mentioned, but also adaptation measures. Which therefore do not only concern France.
In particular, we can read that the various signatories wish to « strengthen the resilience of armies by adapting key infrastructures (notably communication, transport, water and energy treatment), equipment and methods of military action to climate risks », but also « ensure the maintenance of the resilience and sustainability of supply chains essential to defense and security as well as access to the technologies necessary for the energy transition.”
In addition, it is reported that it works « in concert with the partner countries most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change in order to develop their climate resilience, through increased military collaboration on disaster risk reduction.”
In the Middle East for example, where storms are more and more frequent, sand prevents us from seeing, complicates progress and has major effects on engines, electronics and health. At sea, due to the warming of the oceans, the accumulation of microorganisms on the hulls of ships slows down their progress, thereby increasing the frequency of stops at the dock and fuel consumption.
But initiatives to solve this marine problem already exist. « The Directorate General of Armaments is working on special paints to limit the adhesion of these microorganisms, while limiting the impact on marine ecosystems” explains Rigaud.
And this paint that respects the environment must also show one thing: limiting the ecological impact of the army is also an objective of the French Ministry of the Armed Forces. This is also the case for other armies, notably within NATO. And for this, we must amplify our collaboration with the scientific community.
In the joint declaration issued during the Paris Peace Forum, mention is made of « implementing energy sobriety policies and adapting our energy consumption patterns while preserving freedom of action and efficiency operational of our forces »
Reduction of the ecological impact of the army
The envisaged reduction in the ecological impact of the armies cannot be achieved through a reduction in the efficiency of the same armies. The main role being to ensure the protection of the citizens – and interests – of a country, undermining the effectiveness of armed troops in the event of conflict is not possible.
Therefore, certain impact reduction methods are not considered. For a good cause?
The first point is the reduction of the impact in certain services of the army: the standards for example. “Promoting the energy transition in the field of defense and developing standards to make materials and equipment interoperable” is one of the solutions explored.
For the purposes of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the army is also evaluating the possibilities of « developing solutions to increase carbon capture on training military installations » and the possibility « of using the real estate held by Defense institutions for construction of renewable energy installations.”
“Supporting eco-design policies for less polluting and more resource-efficient weapon systems” is also being studied.
Finally, there is the question of energy and the dependence on fossil fuels which still represent, today, a significant part of the energy supply. Thus, “work to reduce the dependence of military infrastructure on fossil fuels (energy autonomy of camps, energy efficiency, increased use of renewable energies) » and « seek solutions intended to reduce dependence on fossil fuels by developing the use of renewable energies alternatives for mobility (synthetic fuels in air, land and sea, electrification of the mobility) » take on their full meaning.
But reducing reliance on fossil fuels won’t just reduce the military’s pollution. This also allows a certain autonomy towards the producers and suppliers that France uses. Thus, we import 98.5% of the oil we consume from Africa, the countries of the former USSR, the Middle East and the North Sea; the gas comes from Norway, the Netherlands, Algeria, and from Russia while the coal – which we import in its entirety – arrives from Australia, the United States, South Africa and Colombia.
We are therefore greatly dependent on these countries to provide us with fossil resources and therefore energy. This dependence is all the more worrying as some of the countries mentioned are not on good terms with us: France is currently part, with the NATO countries, of the regions providing humanitarian and logistical aid to Ukraine’s war of defense against the invasion of Russia. It is also one of the countries which impose economic sanctions on Russia… Russia which thus provides us with a large part of our oil and our gas!
Apart from dependence on renewable energy, there is a final point in the adaptation of armies to global warming. A reality that appears in the invasion in Ukraine mentioned above: that of reconstruction.
Care for the environment and protect nature in a context of war or postwar
Although the war is still going on, the Russian invaders have been repelled from Ukrainian territory at several points. Regions which, after having suffered massive bombings from Russia and the attempted takeover of ground troops, find themselves far from the current front. And therefore, suffer less damage.
In these regions, as well as around kyiv, the capital, « post-war » reconstruction is beginning. Apart from questions of environmental respect, Kyiv wishes to strengthen its rapprochement with the West and mark a clearly visible distance with Russia. This requires a radical change in architecture.
Far from reproducing the post-Soviet architectural style usually in place in the countries of the former USSR, Ukraine is therefore betting on a more Western architecture; and the use of recycled materials are part of this.
The architecture of the countries of the former USSR, also called Stalinist Architecture or Totalitarian Architecture, is characterized by a disproportionate use of concrete, by excessive dimensions and the total absence of greenery. It is this architecture that Ukraine wishes to move away from.
Beyond architectural and political questions comes that of an ecological renewal in the country: rebuilding better and cleaner, in the hope of a greener world, better for Man and Nature.
So Ukraine recovers resources from destroyed buildings and recycles them for reconstruction. Only certain destroyed elements, and in particular the remains of bombs, are kept for the memory of the event. These items will undoubtedly end up in museums.
The Ukrainian Nature Conservation Group (UNCG), founded in 2014, participates in the reconstruction effort. They wish to restore the natural landscapes of Velykyi Luh. Flooded between 1955 and 1958 with the construction of a dam, the destruction of the latter by the Russian army pushed Ukraine to act in this direction.
For them, “the very idea of Velykyi Luh reviving as a natural area is not only timely and ecologically justified, but also such a decision can become a worthy compensation for the wildlife losses caused by war”.
Ukraine goes so far as to organize competitions on subjects revolving around this reconstruction. This is the case of enWAR_mental which talks about the ecological impact of this war and proposes the beginnings of a solution. In a GoogleDocs, the reality of the ecological impact of this war is highlighted in comic form by enWAR_mental.
The Ukrainians have understood this well: taking climate into account is essential in post-war reconstruction. In view of the damage caused to nature by the war itself – via bombings, the passage of armored vehicles and destruction of all kinds – the environment must be taken into account for effective reconstruction. The very viability of the territory depends on it.
In any case, war is dirty and that existence alone is enough to destroy human lives and families as well as nature and animals. Let’s hope that Man ends up learning from the past and his mistakes and puts an end to the war going on on Earth…
Benoit Dupuis-Tordjeman : Photographie et journalisme 