Pentagon Warns Bush of Climate Change Dangers

From an article published in the Observer:

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

Climate change ’should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a US national security concern’, say the authors… An imminent scenario of catastrophic climate change is ‘plausible and would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered immediately’, they conclude. As early as next year widespread flooding by a rise in sea levels will create major upheaval for millions.

Why is this important? Because Bush has denied that global warming is a danger, and has withdrawn from major ecological treaties, and this is the first time the Pentagon has said that global warming could have major impacts on national security, which will make it much harder for any president to ignore. We’re not just talking about a rise in temperature anymore. We’re talking about “severe flooding” and “Siberian conditions,” which could lead to war.

‘Can Bush ignore the Pentagon? It’s going be hard to blow off this sort of document. Its hugely embarrassing. After all, Bush’s single highest priority is national defence. The Pentagon is no wacko, liberal group, generally speaking it is conservative. If climate change is a threat to national security and the economy, then he has to act. There are two groups the Bush Administration tend to listen to, the oil lobby and the Pentagon,’ added… Bob Watson, chief scientist for the World Bank and former chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

‘You’ve got a President who says global warming is a hoax, and across the Potomac river you’ve got a Pentagon preparing for climate wars. It’s pretty scary when Bush starts to ignore his own government on this issue,’ said Rob Gueterbock of Greenpeace.

Followup: The San Mateo County Times’ writeup of this same issue seems to say that the report was not as official as the Observer made it sound, and that it was presented as a “worst-case scenario” that is “not implausible.” They also say that most climatologists wouldn’t agree with the report, and that it is therefore unlikely that Bush will agree. I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle, but even if they’re right, and the report is largely fiction, it does a good job of illustrating the larger point, which is that climate change doesn’t just mean funny weather. It can have severe impacts on our lives.

“There’s nothing secret about it, there’s nothing Pentagon about it and there’s no prediction in it,” [the report's author] said… It’s full of predictions, actually, but all start from a premise of abrupt climate change that is highly uncertain and outside the consensus of mainstream scientists… Climate is inherently complex, and many climate scientists are dismayed that the Bush administration has sought refuge in that uncertainty rather than grappling with greenhouse-gas emissions from fossil-fuel burning. Yet climate models in general show gradual warming, not abrupt change on a global scale.