Toespraak minister Koenders bij Planetary Security Conference

Toespraak | 02-11-2015

Your Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

I would like to welcome you all to the Netherlands, and to the Peace Palace in particular. It is a great honour to see so many people gathered here today around such an important topic. I would also like to thank the Carnegie Foundation, which owns and manages these beautiful premises.

The Peace Palace is home to several organisations in The Hague that promote international peace and justice. I can think of no better place to discuss how climate and the environment interact with peace and security.

And it seems the very building behind me agrees. You may have had the opportunity to tour the Peace Palace. The fountain in the inner courtyard is decorated with sculptures of polar bears and seals. They were donated by Denmark. At the time of construction, some questioned whether predators and their prey were fitting for a site dedicated to peace. But in recent years the plight of the polar bear has become a symbol for the impact of climate change, which we are now discussing in the context of peace and security. So if anything the Danes were very forward-looking.

Today’s conference marks the launch of the Planetary Security Initiative. I hope this is the start of something that happens more often and regularly. Climate and peace are intimately linked. Climate change forms a grave threat to security, especially in countries that are already fragile.

So we need to work together and help each other, because we face a massive challenge.

The Netherlands has long been aware of how climate and the environment are linked to peace and security. Let me give you an example from Dutch history. Between roughly the 16th and 19th centuries, much of the world experienced a dip in average temperatures. It is known as the Little Ice Age, and some of our most famous painters made their masterpieces during this period, many of which show deep frozen canals and lakes. You can see many of our finest 17th-century paintings at the nearby Mauritshuis museum.

The Little Ice Age did not just influence painted landscapes. It also changed the security landscape. In the autumn of 1794, the French Revolutionary Army invaded the Dutch Republic. The winter that followed was so cold that several Dutch rivers froze. French troops were able to cross them, sealing the fate of the Dutch Republic. So the Little Ice Age had big consequences. With a little stretch of the imagination, you could say that climate changed the course of the conflict.

In today’s world, changes to the climate and the environment are overwhelmingly man-made. And those changes continue to affect peace and security. Many experts in this room have shown how and why. You have done the homework and shown the statistics.

Later today, you will hear about an independent report commissioned by members of the G7. Entitled ‘A New Climate for Peace’, it reaches a clear conclusion, based on 10 years of case studies from all over the world. It shows how climate change is a global threat to security in the 21st century. Climate change will put pressure on the world’s economic, social and political systems. And the most serious risks will emerge when the impacts of climate change overburden weak states.

Let me give a couple of examples: a case from my own recent experience. And other examples of countries in crisis that concern me as foreign minister.

Before I became minister, I was the head of MINUSMA, the UN stabilisation mission in Mali. A large, integrated peacekeeping mission with over 10.000 troops. Average rainfall in Mali has dropped by 30 per cent since 1998. The Sahara desert is expanding fast, pushing people on to land already used by others. And the lack of water wells and disagreements over land inevitably lead to tensions. It began with pastoralists and farmers on the bedding of the Niger River. The tensions then affected different pastoralist groups and eventually the central government in Bamako.

Of course, we cannot reduce the conflict in Mali to climate and the environment alone. The security situation in neighbouring countries, the lack of education opportunities, the spread of organised crime and smuggling: there are many factors at work in Mali, and they all reinforce each other. But we certainly need to take climate into account.

The climate problems that have hit Mali are affecting other countries too. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts that climate change will make the whole Sahel region drier. Tensions between groups may increase as a result, especially when dry spells become longer. Nomads will move their cattle to areas where farmers already have to make do with less water. This is what happened in Mali in fact. At some point neither group will be able to make a living. Poor former cattle herders and farmers will head for the cities, where there are not enough jobs to begin with. This is urbanisation not by pull factors but by push factors. And that could put peace and stability at risk and lead to more unorganised migration.

Let’s now consider another country in a different region: Syria. An exceptionally long-lasting drought hit Syrian farmers in the years preceding the war. Many farmers headed for the cities with their families, but there were not enough jobs for them. To make matters worse, in 2010 severe dry spells in Russia made food much more expensive. For many Syrians, a bad situation turned into an unbearable crisis. The displaced and unemployed people in Syrian cities were especially hard-hit. Tensions got worse.

Again, we should not oversimplify. No conflict has only one cause. We cannot reduce the causes of the First World War to the murder of Franz Ferdinand. If cause and effect were that simple, we wouldn’t need history books.

But it would be equally unwise to ignore the impact of climate and the environment. They act as an aggravating force by compounding other risks. The Netherlands, Syria, Mali, Darfur and Somalia are quite different places. But they all show that climate change can be catalyst for insecurity.

Organisations such as the OSCE, NATO and the World Resources Institute have been pointing this out for years, and I look forward to their contributions during this opening session, including on contentious issues like geopolitics, security, rights of indigenous people plus climate change in the arctic.

Fragile states show what happens when new risks are added to existing risks. Consider Yemen, for example. The amount of water available for each citizen has been decreasing for years. Conflicts over water, such as raids on wells, were already taking place before the war there began. The war has pushed the country into a vicious circle. Ever less water is available, and there is ever more fighting over it. Groundwater levels were already sinking. But fuel shortages and a broken power grid have put that groundwater beyond reach even faster. Yemen shows that, for fragile states, the compounding effects of climate change are especially hard to deal with. I remember visiting the country in 2008. A poor country in a difficult neighbourhood, with an exceptionally high population growth rate and declining natural resources. An announced crisis, where the so-called international community remained passive. Conflict triggered action in the Security Council only belatedly, when it was too late.

Even countries we consider more or less stable are by no means immune to developments elsewhere. Just think of the issue that’s on everyone’s minds these days: migration. By intensifying drought, natural disasters, hunger and conflict, climate change affects the flow of people.

Many become displaced within their own country or their own region. Many stay in their region – and I would like to commend those countries for fulfilling their obligations in this regard. Surely Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan are already in a difficult situation. Their hospitality is enormous. At the same time, large numbers leave their region. This shows why we need an integrated approach to today’s migration challenges. Dealing with migration involves border management, anti-smuggling measures, development, trade, humanitarian assistance – and climate. We must do all we can to ensure that people do not feel forced to migrate. We must work to protect the rights of migrants and refugees en route. And migration policies must contribute to development. That’s why we need broad partnerships that include the private sector and civil society. And we need a more united group of countries acting together; like-minded alliances within the United Nations and other international organisations.

Migration, however, is only one of the ways in which countries are linked to each other. We all share the risks of climate change and environmental degradation on this planet. Rising sea levels affect everyone, and increasingly fierce hurricanes do not stop at national borders. To paraphrase Martin Luther King: instability anywhere is a threat to peace and wellbeing everywhere. As we look to the future, the challenge will only become bigger.

The consequences of climate change threaten to undermine many successes of the past 70 years with regard to development and peace. They will add new pressures to human, national and international security.

The world is already 0.8 degrees Celsius warmer than it was before the Industrial Revolution. And the change we have seen so far is just the beginning. The dip in average temperatures during the Little Ice Age looks tiny compared with the rise predicted for this century.

One month before the world meets in Paris, we are reminding ourselves what is at stake. We hope and trust we will reach an agreement that is ambitious and meets the world’s expectations. Preventing climate change as much as we can is crucial. But we cannot limit ourselves to mitigation. Even if we realise our ambitions, there will still be a projected rise in world temperature of two degrees Celsius. So mitigation and adaptation are both priorities. And the adaptation agenda must include peace and security. Let me offer two more examples that concern the future.

Sea levels have risen by 20 centimetres since 1880, and they could rise by another metre or more by 2100. For small island developing states – or SIDS – this poses a truly existential threat. I am happy that they are represented here today. Some may practically disappear under the rising sea within our lifetimes. Their concerns are our concerns: three of the four countries that make up the Kingdom of the Netherlands are located in the Caribbean, and are SIDS themselves. What’s more, over a quarter of the Netherlands’ land area is below sea level.

The threat to small island developing states is one of the reasons we are working hard to adopt a new, global, legally binding agreement on climate change in Paris. But it also shows that preventing climate change is not enough. That’s why we are sharing our experience in water management with countries all over the world.

Worldwide, 700 million people live in low-lying coastal areas less than 10 metres above sea level. Already, between 100 and 200 million people a year are victims of floods, droughts and other water-related disasters. By 2050, this number could double.

The Netherlands is a low-lying delta country which has dealt with floods for centuries. More than half the population of my own country lives below sea level. The Netherlands has a lot to offer when it comes to disaster prevention and early action. Our Disaster Risk Reduction Teams make the best Dutch water and delta expertise available to foreign governments that urgently need to prevent a water-related disaster. They also assist countries that have already experienced such a disaster and want to prevent another one. And the Dutch Surge Support facility helps ensure a better international response when disaster does strike.

The Netherlands also supports the Middle Eastern Desalination Research Center, an institute that was founded to address issues related to water and conflict. We also support the FAO to improve water security in countries like Jordan, Syria and Lebanon.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Finding innovative solutions to water- and climate-related challenges forms one of the main themes of our bid for a seat in the UN Security Council for the 2017-2018 term. And I believe that these solutions should be part of the toolbox of every diplomat. Clearly, diplomacy works better if it takes a climate perspective too. Even better, diplomacy should include climate as a key part of its activities.

The initiatives I mentioned recognise that challenges concerning the climate, environment, development and security are interlinked. In fact, most are funded by my colleague, Lilianne Ploumen, the Dutch Minister for Foreign Trade and Development Cooperation. Dutch diplomacy is used to taking an integrated approach. We already combine foreign policy with development cooperation and trade, all under the same roof. Climate change, environmental degradation and resource scarcity are now becoming top global challenges. No diplomat can say that these are only matters for environmental or development experts. The health of our planet is a new reality for diplomacy. Diplomats will be at the forefront.

Others are also expanding their diplomatic toolboxes. The EU is undertaking a strategic review of its external action. The review rightly takes a broad approach to security, and it will certainly pay attention to climate change. It will have to if it wants to be relevant. The Dutch government will see to it that it happens during its EU presidency in the coming half year. It is no time for complacency as is shown by the OSCE, whose Secretary General Dr. Zannier is with us today, and which is increasingly active in the preventative approach.

I expect this Planetary Security Conference will provide the strategic review with valuable insights. Climate fragility needs to be a central foreign policy priority.

The new climate perspective in diplomacy also implies new coalitions. Good research does not magically become good policy or good practice. Too often, policymakers miss out on insights from the academic world. And too often, researchers find it hard to explain what their work implies in terms of concrete action. The Planetary Security Conference brings together thinkers and doers. It provides an annual platform for better cooperation and action between politicians, policymakers, academics, think tanks, security organisations, the private sector, civil society and the media. You are all pioneers, and we need you. This conference offers you the chance to compare agendas. It gives you the opportunity to develop planned or ongoing research.

It enables you to discuss new policies and initiatives. And it allows you to expand your networks and outreach. In short, it will help all of us to move from knowledge to action.

This conference is not something that we’re organising for you; it’s your conference. I’d like to thank all those here today who were involved in the preparations. And I hope everyone will participate actively in the debates.

Since I’m confident that you will all make this first annual event a success, I’d also like to ask for your input and suggestions for how to continue. Let’s not do things the way we always do them.

Ladies and gentlemen,

This is an important year. The increased attention for climate change gives us the opportunity to redouble our efforts. The time has come to commit ourselves and to take action against climate change and its consequences. May our discussions today and tomorrow prove fruitful.

Thank you.