A Political Perspective: Discussing the Security Implications of Climate-Induced Migration

By Rumman Abdul Razaq 
 
Climate change has inevitably impacted millions of people and nations across the world, whether it be in the form of scarcity of water due to droughts and high temperatures, or due to rising sea levels and increased risks of flooding - to an extent that entire islands may end up inhabitable by 2100, causing their populations to become stateless and forced to migrate as a result. A draft resolution may have been rejected by the UNSC in 2021 which stated that climate change should be addressed as a threat to international peace and security1. However two years later, the international community and Security Council was warned of the direct threat that climate change has. One of the statements by Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, encapsulated that meeting by saying that the world will witness “a mass exodus of entire populations on a biblical scale”; further re-emphasised with “You don’t need me to tell you that the displacement of hundreds of millions of people is a security risk” said by Csaba Kőrösi, President of the General Assembly2. It has been recognised on an international level that climate change is a security implication, whether that may be directly, or indirectly as seen in the past, but different countries and organisations each have different views and plans of action on migration caused by climate change. 
 
National Security is a major concern with climate-induced migration, a prime example being in Syria and Sudan. Syria saw internal migration from rural to urban areas due to many social and political grievances caused by two long-term droughts from 1999-2011. This caused internal instability within cities with the lack of resources and infrastructure for the increasing population; poor governmental support in environmental and developmental issues sparked the Syrian Civil War in 2011 - it can be argued that climate change was not a direct cause of the war, but “one influencing factor”3. Former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon characterized the conflict in Sudan’s Darfur region in 2007 as the world’s first climate change conflict - the main cause for increased violence in the region is said to be climate impacts which Sudan witnesses, namely drought and water scarcity and temperatures rising more than ever4. Regional Stability is put to risk as many migrate cross-borders, and existing ethnic, religious or political tensions may worsen in the countries they move to, such as with the racism Syrians face in Türkiye. 
 
A lack of protection of climate-induced migrants within international law and the lack of cooperation between developed and developing countries puts an element of humanitarian concern. ‘Migrant’ as a term has not been established in international law*, while ‘refugee’ has been, granting refugees safety through legislation with the proper establishment of organisations concerning them, e.g. the UNHCR. Migrants do not have legal recognition, subjecting them towards “detention and deportation”5 as described by Skillington. Developed countries such as the EU, a political and economic association, aims within its borders to “promote peace, its values and the well-being of its citizens” and “regulate asylum and immigration and prevent and combat crime” at its external borders. The EU aims to coordinate amongst itself for its own benefit, rather than for international interests, and its policies conform with the ‘state security theory’, which puts the security of the state (rather than citizens) at the forefront with threats and risks by means of military and border control6. This is echoed further in the joint report by the High Representative and the EU Commission ‘Climate Change and International Security’**, although humanitarian perspective was appreciated, it highlighted that climate-induced migration has risks that “are not just of humanitarian nature; they also include political and security risks that directly affect European interests”. Skillington also notes that “the European Commission describes migrants as a threat to political stability”5. The EU have created a paradox by imposing migration policies and tight borders when they need skilled labor migration due to its population7, but they choose to put forth their supposed state security, it is clear that migrants require more support from international authorities and law, as climate change is a global issue set to affect more people in the near future. 
 
Despite what has been discussed, international institutions are putting forward a ‘human security’5 approach, that citizens require security rather than the state. The UN expresses a consistent view that climate-induced migration is a crisis that requires support, with the IOM recently dedicating a separate section, the MECC, with strategic objectives to effectively manage climate-induced migration8. 
 
To conclude, climate-induced migration poses security challenges for both affected countries and those that are not; it is vital for them to be addressed politically at national and international levels for a worldwide benefit. Unequivocally, these discussions should lead to a plausible solution for both parties.