The world is at a crossroads. The impacts of climate change are destabilizing societies, causing conflict and deepening economic hardship.Instead of rising to this challenge, too Many political leaders are backing away from climate commitments, undermining the global consensus that has underpinned peace and security since World War II. This moment should remind us that climate action is not just about protecting the environment – it is also essential for global security. Inaction now will lead to population displacement, fuel political unrest and create conflict.

Climate change is already fueling conflicts around the world. The war in Ethiopia’s Tigray region was fueled in part by climate-induced droughts. Similarly, in Sudan, changing migration patterns due to desertification and water scarcity have led to increased ethnic and regional tensions, resulting in violence and mass displacement. These are not isolated incidents. If we do not 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. As 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 future instability.

The trend of global leaders backing down on climate action is driven by an increasingly sensational (and ill-informed) public narrative that net zero is bad for the economy. That is now untrue. (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 burden us with significant financial and human costs in the years to come. As the Stern Review made clear almost two decades ago, the economic benefits of 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 causing poverty, hunger and displacement in some of the world's most vulnerable communities. These inequalities will deepen – with consequences for us all – unless emissions are reduced and adaptation efforts are accelerated. The decision by the UK and many other governments to cut aid budgets to fund defence is particularly striking. The climate finance commitments of the Paris Agreement will almost certainly be hit, further undermining the fragile balance between the global North and the global South. Without a renewed commitment to climate justice this year, COP30 and the fundamental premise of global cooperation on climate change will be at risk.

Climate justice undoubtedly requires a sharper focus on mitigation and adaptation. But it needs more. At COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland became the first country to commit to financing the issue of loss and damage. Loss and damage refers to payments from the global North to the global South to address the irreversible climate impacts they are already experiencing. It's an act of reparation, not charity.. The Scottish Government’s initial commitment of £2 million was modest but was described as “breaking the taboo” on this most controversial of issues. Other countries followed suit and by COP28 the UN Loss and Damage Response Fund had been established with pledges of over $700 million. Given the resistance to mitigation and adaptation measures and the re-emergence of climate denial in UK and global politics, many may wonder whether loss and damage is now an unacceptable luxury. But the authors argue that backing away from addressing loss and damage would be a grave mistake. Failure to mitigate the irreversible impacts already affecting so many will lead to greater conflict around the world. Moreover, if the global North breaks its promises again, the global South’s understandable scepticism about 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.

Essentially, climate action are a question of justice. The poorest countries have contributed the least to the crisis, 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 justice is not just an ethical consideration; it is a practical necessity for maintaining peace..

Therefore, the principle of multilateralism—the foundation of the postwar global order—must be defended. Small nations matter. The principle that Fiji and Kiribati have the same voice as the United States or Russia in climate negotiations is not a mistake—it is a cornerstone of global peace. When powerful countries circumvent “one country, one vote” multilateralism—as many do in today’s geopolitical struggle—they signal that the right of the strong prevails, an approach that increases, not decreases, the likelihood of conflict. In short, retreating from strong, multilateral climate action is not just an environmental failure—it is a security risk. Leaders who defund climate finance in favor of military spending are not making the world safer; they are creating the conditions for future conflict.

At COP30 in Brazil, the future of global cooperation on climate change – and even the UN process itself – is at stake. Leaders of goodwill around the world must recognize that climate justice, whether it concerns mitigation, adaptation or loss and damage, is an essential ingredient for a peaceful world. Appeasing the egos of strongmen will only deepen injustice and increase global instability. For the sake of future generations, the leaders of this time must stand up for justice. They must be willing to look beyond today’s headlines and secure a future built on the common good. 2025 may seem like the beginning of a journey towards global conflict and climate collapse, but it does not have to be. With political will, COP30 can be a moment of reflection, reinforcing the norms and values essential to peace. The imperative of bequeathing a healthy and peaceful planet to those who come after us demands it.

This article was originally published on 9 May 2025 and was written by Nicola Sturgeon, Member of the Scottish Parliament and former First Minister of Scotland, and Ben Wilson, Head of International Policy for Stop Climate Chaos Scotland.