Climate will dictate outcome of Russia’s war in Europe
A Ukrainian diplomat analyzes Europe’s survival amid Russia’s war and accelerating climate crisis.
The current strategy of EU/NATO vis-a-vis russia seems to be slow asphyxiation, with an occasional yearning for business as usual. European leaders do not dare to speak honestly to their citizens about inevitable deterioration of living standards, let alone open military confrontation with russia. Hence, we hear constant mantras about the West not being in a state of war with moscow, and see lukewarm reactions to multiple acts of aggression on the European turf from this eastern neighbor. The calculation is that eventually kremlin will run out of money, arms or people, and the war will come to a halt without too much European sweating. The tremendous losses of Ukraine are deplored but deemed unavoidable and kind of factored in. The future of russia is looked at from the angle of nuclear non-proliferation and fervent though totally unfounded hopes for good democratic russians taking over the reins of the country at some point in the future.
This strategy could work, as it did in 1980s, but for one new irresistible factor – climate change. Thanks to prolific scientific input, we can now forecast both global and regional climatic trends with a good measure of precision.
The global trend is quite clear and scary: we witness accelerating global warming reaching 1.6°C in 2024. Record levels of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions; decreased ice, snow and clouds albedo; stressed plants changing their metabolism to consume oxygen and release carbon dioxide; cleaning up skies from cooling sulphur gases; failing ocean and landmass carbon sinks – all those recent phenomena point to even more and faster hell on Earth.
In North America, desertification of its West coast and inundation of its East coast; widespread depletion of ground waters; chemical contamination of the Midwest and the Mexican Bay; enhanced and frequent tornadoes and hurricanes with many billions in damages; incessant and vast wildfires with their long-reaching air pollution; regular temperature inflicted breakdowns of electrical grids; acts of oil pipeline sabotage by eco activists and many other adverse impacts will keep this continent very much preoccupied with its own problems and thus detached from its transatlantic partners. After all, USA does not expect massive land invasion from its russian or Chinese adversaries in the near future and, therefore, can afford a higher degree of isolationist policy. Under the lens of climate change, one might also view recent territorial claims upon Canada and Greenland, although you don’t always need to occupy your neighbor to accommodate to the inevitable.
In Europe, the Mediterranean band is gradually becoming uninhabitable due to relentless cascade of longtime high temperatures, drought, fires and floods leading to the loss of harvests and fertile lands, malnutrition and hunger, overwhelmed urban areas, and, ultimately, the collapse of financial and economic systems. The slowdown and halt of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation expected before 2050 will make the European climate much more contrast, with summer temperatures of plus 45-50°C and winter temperatures of minus 40-45°С. That factor plus shifts in precipitation amount and distribution will ruin agriculture and jeopardise food security. Europeans will face the lack of fresh and potable water due to melting Alps glaciers that feed major aquifers, as well as salinization of coastal areas and soils due to sea level rise. Southern and Eastern borders of the continent will be stormed by many millions of climate and war migrants exacerbating internal EU problems and conflicts. Deglobalisation and economic decolonization of the Global South will lead to disruption of supply chains and deprive European companies of steady inflows of cheap resources and big financial returns. Against this tumultuous background, European economy will suffer and shrink translating into social upheaval and military weakness. Europeans will not go back into caves or cease to exist, but their lives will become really hard.
China might capture Taiwan, however it will also suffer significantly from climate change, especially its highly populated South Eastern part. The riverbeds of Yangtze and Huang-He dry out and become shallow, while 98 000 water dams bode technogenic disasters. The looming war for the Himalayas freshwater reserves is quite real. The frenzy of renewables and electric vehicles on top of increased coal production, rare earth mining and oil imports makes Chinese infrastructure overstretched, environment overwhelmed and economy unsustainable.
Meanwhile, climate reality in the russian federation will not be ideal but quite tolerable and definitely better than elsewhere thanks to its location within Arctic and temperate zones, huge landmass and natural resources. Occasional wildfires or methane leaks in Siberia will impact the entire world, while ice-free Arctic will create new opportunities for moscow in navigation, fossil exploration and military expansion.
Mistakenly, Europeans or Americans measure russians by their own yardstick, namely that a reasonable human being would prioritize liberal freedoms, a thriving economy and high living standards over reckless and menacing behavior. In reality, most russians are ready to feed on cabbage and turnip while glorifying their leaders and indulging in the West’s demise; they not so much aspire to live rich as to make their enemies live in dirt as they themselves do. This is the fundamental difference between civilization and barbarism. For that reason, the present Western strategy of "slowly boiling the russian frog" will never work. Count in here the climate change factor – and it is obvious that time is on the side of russians. Europe will boil first.
So, what options have Europeans to survive?
If they continue to hope to outlive Russia, they will be literally wiped out from the map, both by climate change and by the russian invasion.
The russian plan is to freeze the war in Ukraine while keeping the occupied territories, to recover and replenish losses and, in a few years, to strike against Europe amid its climatic disarray, economic debacle and military impotence. As we remember from recent opinion polls, the majority of the European population are not willing to defend their lands against outside aggression. This is good news for the russian army, which is always trigger happy to bomb European cities and decimate European nations. It will be impossible to bribe or placate the russians; why would they care to stop if they can take it all by occupying entire Europe? In the process, they will play their favourite game: using some European nations to wage wars against other European nations until they reach the Atlantic. There will be massacre everywhere.
The second option is to hope that russia will be kind enough to accept climate migrants from Europe. Well, those "lucky" escapees will end up toiling as slaves on russian Arctic oilfields and Uranian mines or become cannon fodder for future military expansions.
The third option is to destroy russia first as soon as possible. For those who fear a nuclear strike or proliferation: you can negotiate nuclear disarmament or arms control, but you cannot negotiate with climate. It will be much easier to deal with the newly independent states, which will emerge after the collapse of the russian empire. By achieving this goal, Europeans will not only regain access to this big Eurasian market and its natural resources, but be able to relocate physically in significant numbers to escape the worst climate scenarios. In doing so, Europeans will compete with many millions of climate migrants from the Global South who view the territory of russia as a future climatically safe place to settle. Time is very important here.
So, the proactive defeat of the russian empire is not just the individual task of Ukraine, but an existential imperative for the whole of Europe to achieve climatic survival, preserve internal democratic structures and ensure long-term security.
By Oleksandr Aleksandrovych, a Ukrainian diplomat
* The author writes in his individual capacity. His views may not represent the position of the government of Ukraine.
