Nicola Sturgeon is an MSP (Member of the Scottish Parliament) and former First Minister of Scotland. Ben Wilson is International Policy Lead for Stop Climate Chaos Scotland.
The world is at a crossroads. The impacts of climate change are destabilising societies, causing conflict, and deepening economic hardship. Yet, instead of rising to the challenge, too many political leaders are retreating from climate commitments, undermining a global consensus that has anchored peace and security since the Second World War.
This, then, is a moment to remind ourselves that climate action is not just about protecting the environment – it is also essential for global security. Failure to act now will drive population displacement, fuel political unrest, and create conflict.
Climate change is already driving conflicts around the world. The war in Tigray, Ethiopia, was fuelled in part by climate-induced droughts. Similarly, in Sudan, shifting migration patterns due to desertification and water scarcity have heightened ethnic and regional tensions, leading to violence and mass displacement.
These are not isolated incidents. If we don’t act now, climate disasters will fuel human insecurity on an unprecedented scale.
The economic consequences of climate inaction also pose a serious threat to peace. When communities lose their livelihoods, social unrest can follow. Economic hardship opens the door to far-right forces seeking to stoke xenophobia and racism. Governments that neglect climate action now increase the likelihood of instability in future.
“Forgotten” fragile states unite to end climate-finance blind spot
Net zero will bring economic benefits
The trend of global leaders backtracking on climate action is being driven by an increasingly sensationalist (and ill-informed) public narrative that net zero is bad for the economy. This is a falsehood now (a recent CBI report showed that the net-zero industry is an important driver of growth) and certainly wrong in the long-term. Ignoring climate action now will saddle us with significant financial and human costs in the years ahead.
As the Stern Review made clear nearly two decades ago, the economic benefits of taking decisive action on climate change far outweigh the costs of inaction. But it’s not just about economics – it’s also about justice.
The latest IPCC reports confirm that climate impacts are already driving poverty, hunger and displacement in some of the world’s most vulnerable communities. These inequalities will deepen – with consequences for all of us – unless emissions are reduced and adaptation efforts accelerated.
UK aid budget cuts threaten climate finance pledge to vulnerable nations, experts warn
The decision of the UK and many other governments to cut aid budgets to fund defence is particularly jarring. The climate finance commitments of the Paris Agreement will almost certainly be hit, further undermining the delicate balance between the Global North and the Global South. COP29 in Baku only just avoided collapse. Without a renewed commitment to climate justice this year, COP30 and the underlying premise of global cooperation on climate change will be at risk.
Loss and damage funding not a luxury
There is no doubt that climate justice demands a sharper focus on mitigating emissions and adaptation. But it needs more than that.
At COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland became the first country to commit finance to the issue of loss and damage. Loss and damage refers to payments from the Global North to the Global South to deal with the irreversible climate impacts they are already experiencing. It is an act of reparation rather than charity.
The Scottish Government’s initial commitment of £2m was modest but heralded as “breaking the taboo” on this most contentious of issues. Other countries followed and by COP28, the United Nations Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage had been established with more than US$700 million pledged.
Loss and damage fund to hand out $250 million in initial phase
In the face of pushback against action on mitigation and adaptation, and a re-emergence of climate denial in UK and global politics, many people, even climate activists, might wonder if loss and damage is now an unaffordable luxury, and question if this is the time to spend political capital, let alone hard cash, on reparations.
In our view, stepping back from loss and damage would be a serious mistake. Failure to ameliorate the irreversible impacts already being suffered will drive more conflict across the world. Moreover, if the Global North breaks its promises again, the understandable scepticism of the Global South about the efficacy of the COP process will only grow. Acting in good faith on all aspects of climate injustice is fundamental to any vision of a peaceful world.
At its core, climate action is a question of justice. The poorest countries have contributed least to the crisis and yet they bear the brunt of its impacts. This is not just a moral failure – it is also a geopolitical risk. We cannot expect the Global South to cooperate in a system that repeatedly ignores their needs and priorities. The principle of fairness is not just an ethical consideration; it is a practical necessity for sustaining peace.
Multilateralism on the line at COP30
This is why the principle of multilateralism – the foundation of the post-war global order – must be defended.
Small nations matter. The principle that Fiji and Kiribati have the same vote as the United States or Russia in climate negotiations is not a flaw – it is a cornerstone of global peace. When powerful countries sideline ‘one country, one vote’ multilateralism – as many in today’s geopolitical wrangling are doing – they signal that might makes right, an approach that make conflict more, not less, likely.
In short, the retreat from strong, multilateral climate action is not just an environmental failure – it is a security risk. Leaders who defund climate finance in favour of military spending are not making the world safer; they are creating the conditions for future conflicts.
COP30 chief calls for global unity on climate action as cooperation falters
At COP30 in Brazil, the future of global cooperation on climate change – indeed of the UN process itself – is on the line. Leaders of goodwill across the world must recognise that climate justice, whether on mitigation, adaptation, or loss and damage, is an essential ingredient for a peaceful world. Pandering to strong-man egos will only deepen injustice and increase global instability.
For the sake of future generations, this one’s leaders must stand up for justice. They must be willing to see beyond today’s headlines and secure a future built on the common good. 2025 might feel like the start of a road toward global conflict and climate breakdown, but it doesn’t need to be.
With political will, COP30 can be a bounce-back moment when the norms and values necessary for peace are reinforced. The imperative of bequeathing a healthy and peaceful planet to those who come after us demands that it be so.
The post Climate justice is vital for global security appeared first on Climate Home News.
Climate Change
AI data centre ban in suburbs would not address fundamental issues: Greenpeace
SYDNEY, Thursday 30 October 2026 — In response to reports that the Albanese government is set to introduce draft legislation this year that would seek to ban data centres in Australia’s suburbs, Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:
“These reports are a testament to the growing community opposition to these completely inappropriate AI factories that have sprung up across our suburbs, and Big Tech corporations should take heed — the data centre build-out must not happen without the endorsement of the Australian people.
“But the government can’t simply ship this problem out to regional Australia without addressing the fundamental issues with this extractive new industry.
“We’re already seeing a trend of AI data centre proposals moving to the regions, in areas that are more water-scarce, more environmentally sensitive, and next to sources of fracked and coal seam gas to support their massive BYO gas-fired power plans — a pattern we’ve seen play out in the United States.
“From the Beetaloo Basin in the NT to the Western Downs in Qld, we’re seeing a wave of AI data centre proposals that would see new gas fast-tracked to support their massive energy demand, and threaten to completely derail Australia’s energy transition.
“Just as suburban Australians are asking, “what for?”, regional communities like Berry Springs and Dalby do not want dirty data centres setting up shop with absolutely no benefit to their communities. Greenpeace is calling for a moratorium on AI data centre developments until strict and enforceable safeguards are in place to protect our climate and our communities.”
-ENDS-
Media contact
Kate O’Callaghan on +61 406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
AI data centre ban in suburbs would not address fundamental issues: Greenpeace
Climate Change
Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines
In the thick of the COP29 climate summit in Azerbaijan in 2024, the UN climate talks were rattled by what can only be described as a major PR disaster. The BBC, Reuters and The Guardian all carried headlines, attributed to leading climate policy experts, that the COPs were “no longer fit for purpose”.
The articles outlined a series of reforms called for in an open letter signed by 22 eminent scientists and politicians, including a former UN secretary-general and previous UN climate chief, with a further 150 lending their support. The headlines shook confidence in the COP process, just as governments were wrestling over a new climate finance goal.
The Club of Rome – which handled the media relations for the letter – hurried to say that its “constructive, supportive ideas” had been “misinterpreted”. Negotiators kept calm(ish) and carried on, in the end landing the finance goal after some high-stakes drama on the final day.
To my surprise, when I went back this week to read the letter again, I could not find the offending line about the COPs not being fit for purpose. The Club of Rome has yet to respond to my query about its disappearance.
Whatever happened to the wording, that sentiment has been widely shared. COPs have ballooned in size while the importance of their outcomes seems to have diminished since the 2015 Paris Agreement (with the exception of the 2023 COP in Dubai where countries agreed to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems).
The same on the surface
Two years on from those painful headlines in Baku, has anything changed for the better? You might be forgiven for thinking not. Official decisions are still made by consensus rather than the majority voting some have called for to stop blockers.
Tens of thousands of officials, activists and business execs still scurry around the halls to an ever-growing list of side events, roundtables and dialogues, while deals still come down to rows, all-nighters and jargon-filled texts adopted to rounds of applause.
But it would not be true to say that COPs have completely failed to respond to the very real need to translate the words of the Paris Agreement into action in the outside world.
Global warming is projected to be around 1.3C lower this century than it would have been if the world had not committed to tackle the climate crisis under that accord. Developing countries have a valued space at COPs in which their voices have equal weight in decision-making, unlike in many other international fora. And most importantly, perhaps, there has been a subtle shift, tipping the balance away from negotiating towards doing.
Brazil branded last year’s summit in Belém as the “COP of Implementation”, corralling the sprawling Action Agenda into six axes. This was a bid to impose some structure on the mushrooming efforts between governments, UN agencies, cities, businesses and civil society to set targets and spur faster results on their pet issues, from methane emissions to health and adaptation in conflict zones. COP30 alone saw the launch of 120 “plans to accelerate solutions”.
COP30 roadmaps off the cuff
Meanwhile, as the formal negotiations drew to a close, it was clear that consensus decision-making was evolving into something a little more improvised.
With only around half of all countries on board with the idea of a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels, COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago announced his team would put one together over the coming year, along with another on how to meet a global goal to halt deforestation by 2030. Those roadmaps will be launched next week, presented and discussed at COP31, though it’s still unclear whether or how they’ll be incorporated into the formal negotiating agenda.


Some leading policy-makers don’t think that matters too much. Speaking to journalists before the Antalya summit, COP30 CEO Ana Toni and Dutch climate minister Stientje van Veldhoven said “coalitions of the willing” can move ahead without needing consensus from the COPs. This, they said, was evident this year at the first global conference on TAFF, co-chaired by van Veldhoven and attended by 60 countries.
“Consensus or no-consensus in the general COP doesn’t make a difference for the choices I have to make in my country to get my country to phase out fossil fuels,” said the Dutch minister. The Netherlands recently became one of the first to publish a national TAFF plan.
COP31 banks on flagship voluntary initiatives
This thinking has permeated the management and expected outcomes of this year’s COP too. Earlier this year, Türkiye, supported by international energy agencies, floated the idea of a voluntary goal to boost electrification to 35% of the world’s final energy consumption by 2035 – and this is now being touted as one of the main results to be expected from Antalya.
Türkiye is also championing a pledge on AI and climate, while co-host Australia is pushing to ease access to climate finance for least developed countries and small island states.
COP31 presidency announces AI pledge as UN climate chief says Big Tech ‘on thin ice’
None of these needs consensus. But with a political cover decision already in the works, as trailed by the COP presidents, they – and perhaps the fossil fuel roadmap – may find a home in the official text if language acceptable to most can be found, giving them them additional weight.
UNFCCC reform process in the shadows
Formal reform is underway too, if quietly. UN climate chief Simon Stiell is leading a review informed by ongoing consultations with a group of 15 well-respected climate policy experts, three of whom signed the open letter in 2024.
Among them is leading Swedish climate and sustainability scientist Johan Rockström who has strong ideas about how to make COPs function better, including a switch to majority voting. He told the same press briefing nothing stands in the way of this, because the rules of procedure for making decisions at COPs have never been formally agreed.
Still, to get away from the default setting of consensus would require agreement on a new system that may be impossible to achieve given the rise in bullying tactics by fossil fuel heavyweights.
Comment: The UN climate process was built for negotiation – now it must support implementation
The deliberations with the high-level policy gurus, as reflected in a summary of June’s session in Bonn, largely echo what’s already happening organically, calling for stronger partnerships and accountability both in and between the Action Agenda and negotiations. It doesn’t mention voting.
A general overview of the reform exercise says that “improving and optimizing the [UN climate] process over the medium to long term… will be critical to fostering trust, enhancing collaboration, and catalyzing increased ambition”.
In the short term, don’t hold your breath for anything concrete on reform at COP31 but watch for signs in what ends up dominating the headlines from Türkiye.
The post Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines appeared first on Climate Home News.
Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines
Climate Change
Experts: What China wants from the COP31 climate talks
With the COP31 climate summit in Turkey looming, all eyes are on China to see what the country will push for in the negotiations.
At COP30 last year, China helped to secure a “dialogue” on climate-related “unilateral trade measures”, as well as a two-year “work programme” concerning climate finance.
The nation also championed south-south cooperation throughout the conference and co-led a summit on methane, alongside Brazil and the UK.
In a recent press conference, China’s environment vice-minister Li Gao noted the need to “uphold multilateralism” and send a “clear political signal” that the global community is united around climate action.

