Skip to main content

tv   Discussion on Climate Change Maritime Security Part 2  CSPAN  October 26, 2019 4:32am-6:09am EDT

4:32 am
john richardson served as chief, talks about how maritime security is changing due to the ice melts, the center for strategic and international studies posted this forum with climate in foreign policy experts, we begin with the panel on the impact on a changing climate, rain biodiversity and human populations living in popular
4:33 am
vulnerable areas. coming back from the coffee break, things begin to our first panel, really enjoy the conversation, is so i want to pick up on some of the themes we ended our conversation, around this idea of the dynamic world and what that means now and the policy and security space, i'm really excited to have an excellent panel to talk about, that we have had there was a vice president for europe, eurasia we have the vice president of oceans for the environment offense fund, we have the debris the affairs of fisheries, and we have amy, so thank you to the panel and i'm going to sit down and we will start off
4:34 am
with heather. >> thank you so, much good morning everyone, i think the arctic is the best place to talk about that intersection between climate stress and security. in many ways, the arctic is telling us and both polar regions are telling us that they are under the most dramatic stress as the arctic is certainly warming two to three times faster than any other place on the planet in many ways now dealing with a very new ocean. in fact our former coast guard commandant called the arctic america's fourth coast. i thought that was a powerful way of thinking about it because many americans do not know the united states as an arctic nation to bring it home, this is homeland security. we now have a new coast that requires our protection. that is what in many ways the nexus between the
4:35 am
rapid diminishment of the arctic polar ice cap is now creating new borders, new coasts to protect. which is why we need enhanced coast guard presence. certainly that's through the enhanced ice breaker component, what we call a polar security cutter. this always required deep water ports. greater domain awareness. we're seeing an increase in commercial and human activity in the arctic. it's also this new ocean and the opportunities that this new ocean provides is really requiring a much more rethought i would argue about sovereignty in the arctic. this is certainly the russian government's perspective because russia is now developing a very ambitious economic development plan for
4:36 am
the russian arctic. which not only includes the development of oil and gas resources in the russian arctic, but also the creation of a major transit route, the northern sea route. what we're seeing is russia needing to enhance the protection of the northern sea route. they're reopening oil fields, putting search and rescue centers across the northern sea route. they're also making important change changes to the structure and how they regulate the northern sea route. of course, what underpins all of this, both the science and environmental change we're seeing in the arctic, as well as the economics, it's all underpinned by science. science is power in the arctic. using traditional knowledge of the indigenous communities is power. of course we're trying to understand the science behind the changes we're seeing in the arctic. i'm
4:37 am
going to touch on some of the key security issues. it's the good, bad and ugly if you will. there is some very good things that are happening in the arctic to manage this nexus between climate stress and security. first and foremost, i think at this point the arctic is well-governed. the united nations convention of the law of the sea provides that maritime space with good legal frameworks for territorial waters, exclusive economic zones, as well as the high seas area around the north pole, the center arctic ocean. one of the most important forms of monitoring and innovating governing the arctic is through the arctic council, the intergovernmental forum that was created in 1996. it brings the five coastal states
4:38 am
together. plus iceland, sweden and finland. what's important about the council that gets missed is that at the center is the indigenous communities. they have a seat at the table. it's their way of the table that's dramatically changing. the council has been groaning under the changes, both the climate change and the new demands on it. right now there are 20 plus observers to the kounscouncil. i would argue that very much changed the dynamic. the arctic is not just for the regional countries, it's becoming a global issue because what happens in the arctic impacts the global environment. as china's role became more and more apparent in the arctic and russia began to assert itself, now we're at a point when we're viewing the
4:39 am
arctic through a lens of great power competition. that was framed by secretary of state mike pompeo in finland in may of this year. he gave a stem winder of a speech that surprised some of the us where it came from, describing this great power competition in the arctic. thats in china's growing economic presence through infrastructure, thru its and of course russia's increased military presence. these are challenging how the u.s. thinks about it. but i always want to end with good news. so often in our line of work we're just talking about challenges. i want to say the arctic has demonstrated great resilience and governance innovation. when we needed to strengthen the maritime
4:40 am
shipping code in the arctic, it took it a decade, created the polar code, which strengthens demands and mandates that ships must be hardened for traversing the arctic. we've created an international oil spill response agreement. we negotiated a fisheries agreement for the central arctic ocean. there are no finish in the central arctic ocean. this agreement puts a moratorium on that for 16 years until science tells us it could be okay if we needed to do that. we have innovations like the arctic coast guard forum which helps do that search and rescue, that oil spill response. something whit and i have been looking at is getting to the high seas challenge to protect the biodiversity beyond the national jurisdictions, beyond the exclusive economic zones that's targeting those high seas area. fisheries, biodiversity, shipping. you
4:41 am
know what? it's a little chaotic right now, i don't think we have it all exactly the right place. i'm very worried about the military dimension. i'm worried about china's dual use infrastructure in the arctic. but i'm heartened when i see innovation, pragmatic governance that's helping to protect the arctic. i want to end on a high note but looking forward to your questions, thanks. >> that's great. >> we're going to turn to asia and the pacific. >> asia is a crucible for climate change and security. if you think about it, it's got two thirds of the global population, many of those are a poor populations. they live coastly. they rely heavily on seafood for nutrition. there's already overexploitation of those fishing resources and it's
4:42 am
intensifying. the governments typically have low capacity to deal with those issues and then these in southeast asia, especially, these are the countries that are going to be hit hardest by climate change where some of those impacts will be felt the greatest. to put this in context i want to use indonesia. i'll start with that and i'll back up a little bit. indonesia is the second largest fishing power in the world in terms of amount of wild fish harvests. china is the first, obviously. it's a country that struggled with poverty, has 10% poverty rate of its 270 million people. 10% live below the poverty line, which indonesia is about $0.76 a day. the fishing is often referred to as a last resort occupation, when agriculture
4:43 am
and other jobs don't work out. you can go fishing. and so many of these postal communities depend upon fish for nutrition and for climb out of poverty. if you're not certain how important fisheries are to indonesia, google ministers, and i'm sure you'll pull up the photograph of the boats, the fishing boats that have illegally traversed into indonesian fishing waters. it's made her one of the most popular politicians in indonesia today. as an example of the role that fisheries play, i can tell you a little bit about a blue swimming crab fishery that edf works in. it's the third most important export commodity economically. swimming crab. if you go to the chesapeake and order a crab cake sandwich, chances the
4:44 am
local supply can't keep up with demand. chances are very good you're eating blue swimming crab from indonesia and perhaps one from the java sea. 80% of the product goes to the u.s. there are 300 people in that fishery as far as supply chain workers there. it brings in the country about $300 million. 300,000 people, $300 million, you do the math. that keeps these people just above that poverty line, but only hovering just above it. they remain vulnerable. climate change, impacts will be very serious for communities like these. sea level rise. some of these communities are not just coastal, there is a fishing village that we work with that's literally built on a sand bar ten kilometers from shore with sticks sort of put down in the sand and there's a platform and women and children
4:45 am
but mostly fishermen live there so they can get further access to the fishery. sea level rise is going to be challenging. the losses in productivity that you heard about in the first panel, we heard globally fish production may decline by about 4% or so. but regionally in places like indonesia could decline by as much as 50%. that's because of the loss in fundamentally productivity and also because of fish migrating to cooler waters and polar northward and southward. so this is, of course, potentially catastrophic for these poor communities that are hovering on the poverty line. this will
4:46 am
create a potentially downward spiral. if there's a loss of catch, the logical response is to fish harder. that then makes these fisheries even more vulnerable to climate change. there's an interesting link to understand here and it's talked about in the report. overfished fisheries are more vulnerable to climate change. and climate change will have a negative impact on fisheries. these communities that experience drops and catches will then make their own resources more vulnerable by overfishing. the governments in many of these places have little capacity to control that. so these communities have the potential to spiral downward. another response to declining catches will be for fishermen to go further and further abroad. many indonesian fishermen go right up to the border of the eez of australia and they fish along the line. australia's
4:47 am
fisheries are well-managed and indonesian fishermen get the benefits. we've seen china do the same thing. this of course creates huge challenges in asia where the eezs are packed in so tightly that it will create a lot of potential for tensions to grow among countries. turning to solutions. what can we do about this? the number one solution is to mitigate climate change, to reduce pollution number one. number two, i would say is to promote low carbon energy, wind energy, wave energy, and perhaps thermal water energy as well. solutions that promote blue carbon. the report speaks well
4:48 am
to the issue of mangroves, salt marshes, sea grasses. but there's also the carbon that's found in increasing fish stocks. reviving those to historic levels. there was a paper i saw recently that estimated that if you could replenish whale populations, that's two gigatons of carbon. that's a startling number. another potential way to mitigate is to eat more fish. this may sound controversial. we can talk about it in the q&a. beef is about 20 times more emissions per gram of protein in a life cycle analysis than seafood. okay. but critically, as we heard in the last panel, we cannot just mitigate, we also need to adapt and manage. this is an urgent issue because of the link between fisheries'abundance and resiliency. it's urgent we put
4:49 am
in place good fisheries management in the countries that lack it. this is a food security issue. number one we need to build capacity in these countries who don't have the experience to put in place management. number two, we need to strengthen international agreements because as the fish migrate, the countries that host fish that are leaving have every incentive to fish those populations down before they get across the border. the countries that might receive the fish are not going to want that to happen. there needs to be what we know again and again from observing fisheries around the world when there's unmanaged competition. it leads to a decline in the fish population. so there really needs to be an effort to strengthen these international agreements. there are many international agreements on fisheries, almost none of them contain climate provisions. lastly, we need to develop solutions for some of these local communities like aqua culture, blue carbon and
4:50 am
perhaps some energy solutions as well. there needs to be new solutions like that that can provide nutrition and nutrition income for these communities. there is hope. there are examples that u.s. fisheries are one of the best managed in the world. it's one of the greatest conservation success stories no one's heard of. management can lead to fisheries rebounding. it's not just the u.s. of course. australia has done this, new zealand has done this. namibia, chile and peru. you can rebuild fish populations. this increases resiliency to climate change. in asia there's hope as well. japan last december passed resolutions. china has been implementing dramatic reforms to control overfishing and over exploitation of aquatic agriculture. there's a lot happening. if countries
4:51 am
gather together and promote aid to these countries to build capacity and can share their experiences, can share their experts and their financial resources, i, think there's hope to avoid the worst for climate change for these countries. >> excellent, thank you. sarah, you can talk a little bit about the indo pacific and east africa. i'm talking primarily about africa and the indian ocean. john provided an excellent segue into what is happening in countries around africa and the adaptive capacity that needs to be built. i agree completely. in countries that are facing extreme impacts, their resources is not the driving factor. there's a mismatch between the drivers of climate change and those in the world who will face the greatest
4:52 am
impacts. the new special report makes that clear by showing the greatest impacts will be in the tropical latitudes. arctics as well. when we're talking about the number of people who live in given areas, the tropics are facing a disproportionate impact from climate change. compared to other parts of the world. some of the mid latitude regions. we wanted today give three examples of recent impacts of climate change that are happening in africa. the first was a tropical cyclone, the hurricane dorian of east africa. it happened in march of 2019. over 1,300 people were killed in mozambique and several other countries around there. currently they estimate over $2 billion worth of damage. and those type of events are made worse as we know by climate change. but they destroy the resilience of communities. we talked about ecological resilience, but community resilience is extremely important. that's
4:53 am
something we have a much greater ability to impact. the second challenge is what's happening in central africa between chad and nigeria. that lake has lost 90% of its water volume over the past 15 years. that's not solely due to climate change, it's also due to irrigation. that illustrates the problems we're facing. the way we deal with lands creates positive feedbacks. in the area of lake chad in particular, the changes that are being seen in fishing communities and different agricultural communities that rely on rain fed water and the lake for irrigation, have created such levels of poverty food insecurity that these areas are becoming a bit of a recruitment for violent extremism. there's not one direct line between climate change and violent
4:54 am
extremism or even between poverty and violent extremism. i wish it were that simple. these issues are connected to one another. the third example i'll mention is the ongoing drought in the horn of africa which is a terrestrial impact. given the manonsoon seasons, the drought that has been happening there for the past several years that has resulted in the displacement of millions of people internally and has put millions of children at risk from drought impact is made worse by climate warming. this is what africa and the indian ocean is facing right now, carbon emissions. part b of the special report looks specifically at the projected risks for people and ecosystems. and one thing that is incredibly valuable to the ipcc report, it puts levels of confidence around things. i wish those of us who look at
4:55 am
the human impacts could be as confident in what we think the impacts will be as the people who study the physics and the biology. it's not a simple math equation. there's a lot lower levels of confidence around what we expect those impacts to be on communities. but that's where the opportunity exists. that because we have the ability to impact through governance, policy changes, the way that human beings may changes in relation to their own behavior. that being said i want to put a pin on that and say it must be incumbent from us who's are creating the most emissions to not rely on developing companies to be the ones that fix our problems. we need to enable them and provide technical expertise. it can't be on developing countries to fix the problems we've created. i think there are three primary mechanisms i see in africa and the indian ocean that are
4:56 am
linking climate change to security issues in the maritime realm. the first is direct competition for finite and mobile resources. the movement of fish, the changes in eezs. there was a great question from the audience about eez boundaries. those boundaries will change slightly but with sea level rise. in africa there are 12 different maritime disputes over economic zone boundaries, which extend from the shore line out to 200 nautical miles. in southeast asia they overlap a lot. in africa, in west africa there's a lot of overlap as well and a lot of contention. these boundaries are the definition of where governance over the marine resources for a given country belongs to the domain of that given country. that country can choose to sell off access to oil exploration, mineral exploration, fisheries exploitation, and governments, especially in africa, earn a lot of revenue by selling some of those rights. the access to
4:57 am
resources are going to change under scenarios of climate warming. my colleagues have done research on what causes conflict often times violent conflict over fish. it's direct access to the resource coupled with and made worse by declining fish populations and unclear maritime boundaries. not just maritime, but also the boundaries in inland waters. the second primary mechanism linking climate change to conflict is changes to food and livlihood security. i want to dig in a little bit more on what we mean by food security and relation to marine resources. food security is defined as the access to nutritional and affordable foods. affordable and
4:58 am
nutritions. and seafood is some of the most nutritious foods we have. so when you're talking about nutrition at a child's level, you're talking about setting the stage for generations of people to come. and access to seafood and i would agree with john there are ways we can increase seafood consumption without destroying the ecosystems we have. it has to do with choosing what types of fish we eat, and reducing the global trade we have around it. that level of food security is extremely important to over 2 billion people in this world. a billion people rely on seafood as their number one form of protein. and most of these people live in undeveloped economies and rely on subsistence and small scale fishing. i mean, one two people out in a canoe collecting fish. not trawlers that have 40 to 50 people on board who can collect a lot of fish. the third and final mechanism connecting climate change to conflict is through the widening gap of socio economic inequality
4:59 am
across the world. these gaps are replicated at the local level in communities that rely on marine resources. at the state and federal level when you have concentration of wealth in different communities. often times away from coastal communities. and the global level, in the accumulation of wealth in northern and developed countries. as climate change affects food and livelihood security you'll see a widening gap. all of a sudden the governance and secure implications for what were driven by resource questions do not become solutions that are resource based any longer. it's really a social justice issue i think. so i liked what you said about the good, bad and ugly. i also didn't want to end on a bad note. so i do see good things happening with maritime domain awareness and maritime governance. that is the recognition by the world, really, about the importance of regulating fishing nations and
5:00 am
keeping track of fishing that are being done by large scale industrial fleets in the waters of countries that rely on fisheries for small scale subsistence consumption. place. in southeast asian countries, have a very high rate of ratify ratification because they know that having control over their ports and understanding the transparency behind fishing, fisheries moving around the global economy is so important to what they're doing. so i would say the port state measures agreement now needs more adopters to have a global impact but that's one thing that i think we can have hope about. the bad is really the lack of data that we have on small scale fisheries around the world. so earlier, we saw some fantastic data from the
5:01 am
gulf of maine and we don't have those kinds of data sets for most of the world's fisheries. we don't know where the fish are, how they're reproducing, so in terms of capacity building, simply providing avenues and funding for data collection at a species level for fish is so very important very developing countries. just b to be able to track what's happening because with we don't know what we have, we can't manage what we don't know. and the third thing i'll say is the ugly. and that is the global subsidies for fisheries and fisheries fuel. a colleague of mine is speaking today with the world trade organization trying to lobby for reduction in fuel subsidies for global fishing fleets and the reason that most of us can afford to eat the food we find in seafood restaurants here in the united states is because of government sub diazing the cost of catching those fish in the first place so that's something we need to address. to end on a positive note what i see changing in africa and
5:02 am
throughout the pacific ocean is the awareness of the youth on climate change and climate impacts. it's not you know, not just scandanavian youth. they're doing a fantastic job, but across africa, you see a large awareness of the problem by youth and a focus on local solutions that involve communityies and indigenous knowledge which is something the report really focused on and also the power of women and their security issues as a means of changing the conversation and the paradigms around economic exploitation. >> excellent. thanks so much. so that's a great segway to amy who is going to talk about the a dapation group and how that looks to developing states. >> so i'm really happy to be here today. partly because i feel like historically, the human rights and environmental communities have operated somewhat separately even though
5:03 am
we have a lot to offer. i guess i'm thinking about this in terms of i think the science provides the what. the human rights provides the how. so i'll talk more about what i mean. first i'll talk briefly about what are the human rights impact of climate change? i think people have covered it well without using the word human rights. but what can human rights tell us about mitigation and adapation? so just on the impablgts of human rights. right the food, livelihoods. impacts on fisheries. these are huge, these also land. conflict breeds more human rights problems so all of this. relocation. my migration. also enormous concerns. i think this is intuitive. the rights of indigenous peoples are a concern because they're going to be some of the first impacted groups because they have no political representation and they're such a smalling segment of the population. but we know what
5:04 am
they are. i want to talk about what rum rights might continue to solutions. if we want if we want governments to feel urgent about addressing climate change, we need to double down on democracy rule of law. on what the u.s. government does a lot of. supporting better governance around the world. easy. we sort of know how to do it even if not perfect. i want to pick up on something i think i heard in the last addressing climate change, we need to double down on democracy rule of law. on what the u.s. government does a lot of. supporting better governance around the world. easy. we sort of know how to do it even if not perfect. i want to pick up on something i think i heard in the last panel which is that sometimes communities themselves can help us solve problems. so for example, if we really respected the land rights, the traditional land
5:05 am
rights of people in the congo basin and malaysia and indonesia, we'd be protecting pete lands. people are traditional livelihoods have lived in their environments without destroying them for a long time and they know how to do that. a real marriage between protecting really important carbon states and people's rights. and what can we learn about a dapation? my particular expertise is in business and human rights. we've learned a lot over the past few decades about what happens when you u try to engineer big, national projects from the top. doesn't go very well. so how do you carry out a project like that. they'll first of all, understand the
5:06 am
impacts better and may know how to mitigate them. that's true for communities around the world. but the other reason is that i think it also will help community buy in. so if you're asking people to change how they make their living, change the way they fish or otherwise earn their daily bread, you've got to have them believe in what you're asking them to do and they have to be part of coming up with that solution or they won't do it. in the worst case, it will lead to conflict. so we know how to do this. we have a lot of experience and i guess my call would be when we're coming up with interb national frameworks or national frameworks, making sure that
5:07 am
approach is embedded. i see bits and pieces of that. some of the major funds at least have environmental and social policies. not sure how well that's implemented. this isn't easy stuff. but this has to be part of it. we won't get where we need to be if we don't have community buy in and intelligence incorporated into climate change. that's the challenge. we have to think big. it's a big problem, needs big solutions and we have to think locally and we have to do both. thanks. >> thanks. appreciate it. so that was a great translation of impacts we heard from the first panel and how it looks like from the real world. and i want to take a minute to just think about this idea we picked up in the first b panel of a dynamic world and how we adapt to it. take a little bit of what sarah and amy were touching on. i'm going to throw out a quick question to the panel and all can weigh in as you see fit. how are
5:08 am
organizations dealing with this task? southeast asia. east afterkachlt are they beginning to deal with with this challenge? are they ready? what kinds of steps do we need to take to improve upon them? i'll start to just pull on the comments of the arctic counsel. my own view is the arctic counsel is strain ing enormously. they're putting a burden on a structure that wasn't design to carry that. it's an intergoverment forum.
5:09 am
it deals on consensus. it produces some remarkable arctic climate impact assessment assessments and maritime shipping assessments that are extraordinary. i don't think they get much play of them, but they're an incredible value. the six working groups that work on a wide variety of issues, they do important work but it's isolated. it's not well-known. there's a lot of things now that the arctic counsel isn't designed to do. things are being built around the arctic counsel. so the innovations that i mentioned to you, the search and rescue agreement, the oil spill response, international science agreement. it uses the framework of the counsel so the eight members but then the arctic counsel itself has nothing to do with the implementation of those agreements. the members, they failed to approve a declaration
5:10 am
in may, but all the members can say yes, this is a graets impact but i'm not going to do anything nationally to produce the impact. nice. it's lovely. but it's not moving the the needle. what i see happening right now, the council is prohibited. the arctic economic council. the coast guard forum. their all outside. so i sort of see this duct tape apparatus that we're trying to respond to
5:11 am
the innovation, which i think is fantastic and important and they're moving for dediplomacy at lightning speed to get some of these things negotiated, but it doesn't have a home. an organizational framework and what concerns me is these pieces to manage that chaos for their own purposes and i think we have to be very cognizant of it. i think we need a lot of rethinking. of the arctic governing structure. there's no political will. everyone is frightened to do any change so i think we're going to be stuck with a council that's going to be less and less efficacious, if you will, in what we need it to do in the future. >> josh,
5:12 am
sarah was talk inging about there are different modes of conflict arising from climate. resources, changes in food security. all these things sounded like a >> witches brew that describes southeast asia and things that came together in that part of the world in a dire way. what do you think about the ability of existing international institutions and agreements in that part of the world to kind of grapple with this challenge? >> so i think it's important to look at all the levels that are needed. we've got the community level that amy and sarah talked about that are super important where
5:13 am
you need community buy in. you've got action at the national level which is very, very important then there are questions to focus on, the international. with regard to the international sphere in asia, i guess i've got two examples. it's still evolving. hopefully, the conererversation can evolve quickly enough. one exam sl principle is in japan where as i mentioned earlier, japan took this dramatic step of really undertaking this reform of how it manages its domestic fisheries. they did this even though they know and the it was part of the discussion that a significant impact on japanese fisheries is not domestic. it's outside by foreign police by russia, korea and china and others, but the officials basically said look, we have to do what we can do first. and then we will hopefully have greater agency to have our moral authority to come to the international realm to argue the case. we'll see how that conversation goes. another example is in the western pacific ocean. the international institution there is the wcpfc. the western central pacific fisheries commission. and they are now in the process of grappling with the impact of climate change where these pacific island countries, some of which are the poor est in the world,
5:14 am
depend so heavily on those resources. tuna, one of fthe most valuable fisheries resources in the world. the center of gravity of those fisheries under climate change is forecast to shift largely away from those islands and outside of their ways where they can control. so they are grappling right now with this question of how do you allocate quota. how do you do it based on history? will the rights to fish attach or remain with the countries that have those fish resources originally or migrate with the fish? to the open sea where other countries can have more, can sort of harvest them more on their own without the control,
5:15 am
>> thanks. the >> sarah, what are you thoughts? he mentioned some because i'm opportunities for optimism. how do you see that playing out? more regional scale for us. >> in multilateral institutions? the same conversation is happening with the indian ocean tuna commission around catch allocation of the most value tabl tuna and bill fish fisheries. in the indian ocean, there's a large presence of distant water fishing nations. china, taiwan, france, the eu fleet, which is primarily france and spain in the indian ocean and to be part of a regional fisheries management organization, you do not have to be a country whose shoreline touches the waters of that commission. you can simply have a presence as a fleet then voluntarily join that organization and that gives you rights and responsibilities to that organization. so the same conversation is happening right now and there are sort of two competing proposals for how to allocate those valuable tuna fisheries. one being forwarded by the europe european union. the other by what they call the coastal states. and those are it's a consortium of some of the smaller countyries in the tropical pacific ocean. sorry, indian ocean, and so i don't know what the state of those, that conversation is, but it's mirroring what's happening in
5:16 am
southeast asia so i think that's very interesting that these states are exerting a little bit more influence and decision making authority over their own resources and not just simply selling them off to other countries who and keep in mind, the other countries who are coming in are very efficient and for the most part, their fishing methods, they're targeting a few of these really valuable commercial species that have global trades. so they're not necessarily coming in very close to coastal waters and damaging coral reef habitats. i'm talking about long lining fleets. that for the most part stay out in international waters, although not exclusively. then there are two regional security agreements in africa, at least two, but just two i'm familiar with. one is code of conduct. north africa, east africa and the middle east. in west africa, you have the yun day code. these are frameworks that deal with the maritime space. climate change is really only dealt with when it deals with plu economy issues, but because these are security frameworks, they mostly deal with
5:17 am
issues in west africa and east africa. piracy, human smuggling. arms strug smuggling, a lot of which takes place on fishing boats. so i don't know, i can't say how those frameworks are set to incorporate issues of climate change, but certainly they probably should be especially when it come to the migration of marine resources. lastly before we >> turn to the audience here, you talked about local solutions. the lands report, special report on the lands came out in august. there was a fwraet panel. we also derek on the panel and she spoke about just
5:18 am
that and the idea that oftentimes, we talk about these global commitments. >> whether it's paris or other agreements. set these national goals, but those goals are often being implemented at the national scales. regional, global scales and really when you talk to the world, you talk about community level anchor. you talk about some pathways for success and that kind of work? >> sure. this isn't a problem that's new. that's the good news. we've had challenges in implementing large scale projects. at the national and local level for a long time so we've learned something. so i think you can look at standards they're not perfect. they're pretty good. it's
5:19 am
challenging. it covers having a system in the first place. but then specific chapters on land rights and resettlement and indigenous peoples and other aspects of environmental impact. also governance around that. they have experts and help to help their clients actually do these things properly if they don't know how. they have a grievance mechanism that's independent and raises problems when these aren't people, normal people can bring complaints to come complain when the standards aren't followed. what i've seen in some of the adaptation funds, they're picking up some of this with a light touch. that could be strengthened and if a government wants to access a that funding, then they have to start developing capacity
5:20 am
and republic needs to be financially supporting that capacity. this isn't easy. for a lot of companies that have top down cultures, it's a different way of doing things. there's been some progress on having frameworks on migration. urnld interour migration frameworks are slow. it talks about climate change. maybe not as much it should. it doesn't solve the problem, but there's progress in that area and that's going to be a key issue to get our brains and political will power around going forward. >>
5:21 am
something that, some particular concerns. thank you very much. audience if you have some questions? microphones. we'll talk up to three. we have one here. second. one in the back there. >> thank you >> my questions are more for john and sarah and i really appreciate a discussion on the impacts of the community levels in indonesia and africa like chad, mozambique, somalia. i'm very interested to know what is being done at the community levels within the most effected communities to address and anticipate the impacts of climate driven risk and to mitigate the chances for driver of conflict. i'm partly leave thg question sarah because i'm aware of your work in somalia, but at the community level where people could be drawn into
5:22 am
criminality, violence and conflict, what could be done with those communities that are most at risk and on the front lines? thank you. >> we'll get them together. >> hi, i'm monica. i know a lot of you, my question is about technology and the use of electronic monitoring and reporting systems and whether you're seeing of taking that anywhere else. sorry, can you hear me? so the question is about electronic monor toring and reporting as a way to better manage fisheries. wonder if you're seeing an uptake of that anywhere else. i know there are some efforts here in the u.s., but they're sort of in fits and starts. i think the case globally, but i'd be interested in knowing if any of you are aware of any places where it's really going well. >> get one here in the middle.
5:23 am
>> thank you very much. i was wondering if you could speak to the role of the international financial institutions, for example world bank or asian developing bank with the respect to capacity building in places such as africa or asia. thank you. >> we've got one that ties into the international funding work then another question of electronic monitoring and sort of advanced management as a way for climate management. i'll just throw it to you guys who wants to dive in? >> thank you michael to your question. to answer the
5:24 am
question of what is happening at the community level, i think that question is difficult to answer. briefly and it has to do with what the impact of the community are and the capacity and knowledge of the community. in the north of africa, in particular, the largest impacts of climate change are terrestrial, agriculture and drought. i wouldn't even say there's community risk mitigation. there's simply survival. i would say in the maritime realm, probably the greatest amount of capacity development is happening in data collection. and very basic approaches. data core approaches to stock assessment that happens through regional cooperation with some larger scale levels. so i don't, in a lot of communities that have already been impacted by climate change or that are regularly struggling with issues of food and income insecurity that may be decoupled from climate change, >> i'm not sure that risk mitigation is something that's even where we are right now. i think it's more think inging at ways to improve resource management that incorporates climate change at some level. at some regional level. not a great answer to
5:25 am
your question, but to work at the community level, you need to have support from the federal and state governments to enable communities to both bring problems to the federal and national levels. so i'm seeing a lot of that sort of level of community education and environmental education around the impacts of climate change. plus you're seeing a lot of mobilization as a result of some of the awareness building. i wanted to address your point and relations to violent extremism and recruitment into violent activity. while we see some of those things happening, i think the issue is so much more complex than just climate change causing food and livelihood insecurity causing recruitment into violent groups. it's a much more complex issue. in they of the horn of afterrica, there have been a lot of linkages between rise of parasy about 15 years ago and changes in their marine fisheries but in a lot of time, these things are really
5:26 am
not, the story that gets told >> in the media. simply solving some of these problems will not address the issue ss around the globe. >> there's a lot more to be done. information about what's happening in the water to help these communities understand there needs to be a lot of improvement. what are these resources going to look like in the future and helping communities plan for that. then finally, governance and self-empowerment. the governments had never really reached out. the government
5:27 am
announced they were opening a sand mine to jakarta. but the fishermen there, said no, that mine's right in the middle of our crab fishing and the government heard from these fishermen they have never heard from before. when they shape their own futures. real quick on the technology. so obviously i think you mentioned in the u.s., there's a lot of emphasis on improving monitoring, which is important, not just for the science to understand what's happening in the water. to be able to set, to base management decisions on, but also to improve accountability. because every fisherman will tell you they don't want to catch the last fish but they can't sit around and let you catch the last fish. there's a lot of important importance placed
5:28 am
on this. japan as part of its reform is now pushing to modernize its data with the records there. the records from three years earlier of where the fish are and help manage stocks that are shifting rapidly in these days. china is also realizing and data to track fishing vessels around the world. i think there are a number that have signed up to help with this ngo. helping to understand both the environment al environmental impact. they've been working to enhance broad band with the most indigenous communities. tell medicine. online edgeucation and awareness of bringing their observations and helping us understand that and just on the tracking as well. that's why this code is so important. vessels have to have ais. we are seeing certainly an eck doe tall instances of fishing >>
5:29 am
stocks moving for cooler waters as the poe r lar ice recedes and the water warm. the plankton changes and we're going to see fishing vessels increasingly in >> higher and higher latitudes making sure we understand both that the fishing vessels as well as the scientific vessels. not all is science, my friends, and we have to understand who and what are operating in the why this code is so important. vessels have to have ais. we are seeing arctic. technology is going to have to be transformtive to how we monitor the arctic certainly anecdotal instances of fishing >> stocks moving for cooler waters as the polar ice recedes and the water warm. the plankton changes and
5:30 am
we're going to see fishing vessels increasingly in higher and higher latitudes making sure we understand both that the fishing vessels as well as the scientific vessels. not all is science, my friends, and we have to understand who and what are operating in the arctic. technology is going to have to be transformtive to how we monitor the arctic in the future. >> thank you. i'm afraid we have to stop there so we can get to our final conversation, but i want to thank this panel. really excellent conversation. appreciate
5:31 am
>> we were talking about how the high seas are lawless. and it shows up in the exploitation of fishing stocks. it shows up in transportation of illegal goods. shows up many piracy. the logistics movement of really bad people. this is all part of the landscape. we
5:32 am
wanted to do something together so say we have a shared interest in soling this problem. i'm so very grateful today that john has chosen to be with us as a concludeing speaker. john has just stepped down from having done the chief of nashville operationnaval operations. he worked in every bit of this. every part of his professional career and certainly the last four years when he was a cno, he was focusing on this very question. it's a unique opportunity for us. so would you with your warm applause, welcome to the stage, john richardson, former chief of the operation. >> really
5:33 am
appreciate it. >> great to be back here, by the way. >> excellent. do you know familiar with our humble abode here. >> yeah. but i think this is really just a wonderful way to cap off what's been real stimulating couple of panels this morning. for me, what's really hit home is this idea of of a more come competitive and dynamic world and one that needs to be more adaptive in lots and lots of different ways. we talked about obviously in the first panel, some really grim impacts from climate. we talked in the seblgd panel panel about how these are going to translate to instability. lots ofpportunities for challenge. they translate into threats. but threats can take a lot of different forms. what kinds of climate related threats most concern you? >> i
5:34 am
guess if you asked me today, it's the acute threats and tomorrow, it's the strategic threats. i think that they have sometimes constructive way of interfering with each other and sometimes not so helpful where the acute can really ok pieccupy your attention and neglect long-term things. with respect to ocean and climate change, it's been maybe particularly vulnerable to that type of a dynamic because those acute challenges that are here and now right in front of us, the ten meter targets if you
5:35 am
will, very vivid. not just well-known, well agreed upon to a vast majority of people. the sea blindness that arises. we just don't realize how much we depend on the seas and oceans for our prosperity. on top of that it's becoming more visible as opposed but it's not as visible as those captured in the, we have to almost force ourselves and discipline ourselves to spend the prominent time and attention on
5:36 am
this. particularly now because there's a really growing the sense of urgency and the fact that some dynamics that are happening, they may be ir reverse bable if we don't act soon. >> looking back across various strategic security documents over the last decade, you can go back to 2010 and the review, climate took up a whole chapter within that review. 2014, it was sprinkled throughout though perhaps with the less dedicated focus and of course today, it's absent. for political reasons from the national security strategy. but my question to you is is is a
5:37 am
little bit of with this bit of action. how are these documents in terms of driving action in terms of allowing the u.s. security xhupt community to adapt better to the threats they're going to be facing? >> i'm kind of a believer in the importance of strategy. you know and kind of getting back to our first question. a well crafted and communicated strategy allows us to do is to make sure that you know while some part of the organization may be captivated by the here and now, there's another part of the organization that can get after these longer term things. so i think it really is important that our strategy rngs streenlgdocuments mention these challenges maybe even >>
5:38 am
threats. having said that, i'm not sure that the military dimension is really the primary foecal point to address climate change. certainly, we'll have an implication for the i think it could really distort is solution and aprooif at the challenges which are more fundamental. food security. that's a much broader challenge than the military can solve. this takes really a whole approach if not international. and the comments about our institution's tune to arise to this challenge and i think are really fundamental types of questions. and you know from a security standpoint, again, i spent a lot of time trying to highlight the importance, that the oceans are, they're under a lot of stress. just separate
5:39 am
from the climate change stress. the shiping the ocean has increased. which is astounding. the seabed infrastructure, you know we're getting a natural resources or whether we are talking about intercontinental communications, 99% of the internet rides on the cables. the seabed is becoming on itself, megacities are moving you know, they're growing in number of and most of them are coming up on the shoreline. there's just a tremendous amount of on the oceans and how do you overlay that with the
5:40 am
stress and challenge of climate change. it could be an approach that would incorporate. >> sticking with the idea that we talk about the dynamic nature of the world is static institutions. so we're kind of creating gaps if you are createing gaps. a lot can happen in those gaps. seems like this is the kind of of in the world today. >> i think the other panels touched on the dynamics at play here and in each region, we do a lot of talk amongst chief of navy about this and chiefs of coast guard. the awareness. just being able to somewhat govern that space and in the slightest manner. in more developed countryies. they've got secure means of governing their territorial waters. that's not the case everywhere. it does give rise seas and i think a lot of our institutions particularly the ones i was wrestling with in the navy,
5:41 am
they are, well they're highly structured. they're built to handle linear problems. phase one, phase two, and i think that operate inside regional boundaries. this challenge is really going to impoezse and it's highly linear, it is truly global. we can talk >> about the importance of the science. and you know, measure it 1,000 times before we get once on this. because we can end up doing more harm than good if we don't do it right.
5:42 am
(technical problem) history to tell us so you have to approach this with a deep sense of humility, in terms of how much we can absorb and measure thousand times before we cut ones on this whole thing, so, we could end up doing more harm than good if we don't end up doing it right. >> when we watch this program in january, the senator at the white house was kind enough to join us for a conversation and he had some remarks, i often returned to them around this idea of a conflict, a couple of resentments and how we are running the risk right now of
5:43 am
engineering a conference of resentment around the world through actions or lack of actions but there are similarly opportunities to mitigate those confluence of resentments, there is an idea that america can't leadership is as in most things indispensable in this area, beyond just litigation and adaptation and reliance is i just ask you what do you think about this and work with our partners and allies to be more adaptive in the security space. >> i think it is absolutely essential if we are going to have a seat at the table if this future is going to come out the way that we would like it for the health and prosperity america is i would argue still we have a tremendous network of allies and partners. that's under stress as well. it particular
5:44 am
lyly in the maritime. on the mission, things, this is one area. i think that of because we share the norms, you know, just that are that transcend national boundaries. right. and i would argue that first among equals are navy to navy types things. go out into international waters. just to the breaking point. partnerships can kind. and look forward into the future for this ship of state. and diplomatic winds to blow. we want to come out relatively close to on track when what
5:45 am
this, when these winds abate and keeping that structure together is is one of the most critical roles that militaries can play to get us through this. >> excellent. thank you. well, i think i'm happy to turn to the audience now and take some questions. we have some folks. one, two and we have a third. third. in front. i'm john with the gis software committee. you were serving the cno when the paris climate accords were steined by president obama. how did you and general dunford
5:46 am
view the role of military advice in terms of security parameters of either being in that document or removing us from that >> document. >> it went back to i saw my role as primarily being to reach out in together and say hey, look, these alliances, partnerships, how you interpret that. we keep up with person exchanges. keep inviting each other to other schools. all of those things that create sort of a deep and meaningful relationship that is founded on the common principles that and where they can find. that's the analysis that i took any way, we did so much good to keep the partnerships as strong as president. >> is
5:47 am
there a way to introduce introduce fishing for a navy. and have it put into the ndaa as maritime save has been trying to do. and can that then be used as a gateway to corporation with other navies that
5:48 am
you mentioned. thank you. >> this fishing topic comes up a lot of regional conferences that i had the privilege of attending because as the early panel said, it's import. having said that and it's in my mind about authorities. and navies. that's why the law enforcement primarily with the coast guard. to service and particularly information sharing and maritime domain awareness. in other nations, those authorities are all united in one maritime body. those nations. we're out there on
5:49 am
the high seas. i think by taking information, to enable authorities to thank for the confusion of technology. someone at gnais, i know there are others. okay, what are the rules and norms and how are they enforced in terms of what a particular relationship is squawking on as is. how are we going to respond to that if we find what
5:50 am
they're saying in their ais transmission is different from what we observe edd them to be doing and maybe we turn it off all together. the good guys maybe take more exand can respond to them. >> how's it going. we've seen that the navy has pushed back from their climate studies. recently the task force has shut down. what is the navy doing to compensate for that loss. what are you doing to research priorities that you've seen. the new cno. also the same realm what do you think. >> well i think that you would find just some examples, we sent a carry strike group up in the north, arkctic sickle in november of 2018. and we, i mean, you craft into the books, the settlement. what's changed in the 20
5:51 am
or so years, it's still cold as hell up there and the seas are very, very rough. we have to get our sea legs back. that was one of the last. there's nothing like a louisville slugger to smash the ice off of everything else. the exercises in
5:52 am
alaska. right and so this is, one of kind of as a nation and the arctic region and in fact, i think we just concluded one up there that involved you know a pretty sophisticated operation with navy and marine corp. we've got despite the recent trends and headlines the navy had a steady investment in ocean science and in fact when i was a chief of naval operations just to reinvigorate what i saw as kind of a
5:53 am
slipping competitive edge. the task force ocean which was an academic effort primarily focused at those bright stars in the academy. doing ocean research. infusion of resources to stay on the front end of this. and whether there's a competitive ocean sciences that we stay competitive as well. >> okay. more questions? >> you stunned them into silence. >> one on the back. >> i love the topic. thanks for being here. great discussion. question. >> sorry. >> i'll get closer.
5:54 am
>> thanks so much admiral for being here. thanks for letting me ask a second question. you called climate change a challenge. repeatedly referred to it as a challenge. is it many more than that? when you look at u.s. military ins installations and when you think about it, it's not only a threat multiplier, but the potential for its reach to our own communities and our shores. is the challenge not enough? is it more like any other threat that is existential as often people refer to it? just curious how you rank it. >> it's a bit of semantics i suppose and i guess in my mind, the challenge or a threat, not meant to prioritize them in terms of their importance. it's just sort of the nature of kind of f a dlub rat deliberate approach to harm. one thing
5:55 am
about the climate, it's just going to happen a. it has, one of the scariest things about it. it has no aim. no intellect. the science is just going to take over here. some of the forces in the scientific dynamic, i don't mean by calling it a challenge to lessen the impact of that. you know? particularly along the coast and surprised that the navy is present. it's got a lot of impact on the infrastructure. all of those things. but you know, it's sort of, it's like in those really, the scariest horror movies are those things where this force is just
5:56 am
moving without a conscience through and manifesting itself on the environment. this is climate change. almost spookier than a threat that has a deliberate intellect that's after us. it is just happening to us. and we're going to have to just deal with it. we can't convince it not to threaten us. right? this is something that's a challenge that is is super >> urgent. >> i took your point to heart. this is not necessarily a military threat. in as much as it's not something that is sparking an acute military conflict in the way we think of these things happening traditionally. it's hard to say navy. go deal with this challenge. go nuke that hurricane. that doesn't mean there isn't opportunity for services to engage and to work. >> i
5:57 am
want to go back to this idea of opportunity for american leadership and your idea that navy to navy maritime to maritime conversations are sometimes the most fruitful than most grounded and solid and honest conversations that we have with our international partners. there's a report just out by the climate and security group, climate screening of america and they call for the national security directive addressing climate response and they go into some detail about what it might look like. they call out the regional security plans with our partners. so i want to pose that to you about your thoughts. about how you might make something like happen through the bureaucracy of the pentagon. go back to the point about strategic planning
5:58 am
and maybe that gets to the lexicon issue. and what might be useful. again because >> we're not looking necessarily to, you know, deal with a particular issue, but to allow it back in the security. that so first just in terms of what does this mean for the military? we ignore this. where there are security challenges and threats, tensions, now i don't mean to be you turn the temperature up on that and climate change just makes it harder. more pressure, more
5:59 am
stress. so when you're talking about defending and governing international boundary, even at sea, the fact that you know your food source is now migrates outside of your international boundary. it's a security challenge. the most fundamental nature to a nation and so i think that this idea of national security directive and if you look at the people that put that report together, very broad, very distinguished. these are people, very thoughtful people. and you know from a wide variety of national security, right? not just military, but so many other places. so i think that this type of an approach is really valuable. and it would be not so much in the department of defense i would suggest would play a supporting role, but this must secure kind of at the national security council level to sort of unite all the levels of the
6:00 am
6:01 am
6:02 am
6:03 am
6:04 am
6:05 am
6:06 am
6:07 am
6:08 am

16 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on