The global increase in military spending, currently at a record $2.7 trillion per year, has far-reaching negative consequences for several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This article focuses exclusively on the impact of this trend on SDG Goal 13: Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts.

Resources emphasize that armies are huge consumers of energy, whose Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions contribute significantly to the climate crisisAlthough countries do not systematically record and publish their military emissions, estimates suggest that everyday military activity could be responsible for around 5.5 % of global emissions, which would make the world’s militaries the fourth largest emitter if they were a country. This share is likely to increase as military spending increases and the rest of society decarbonizes.

Increasing military spending directly leads to increase in military emissions. More intensive military activity (training, patrols, conflicts), higher numbers of military personnel and increased procurement of equipment all increase the consumption of fossil fuels and the energy needed for production and research. The lack of standardized “green” procurement procedures and reliance on older technologies mean that militaries will be locked into fossil fuel-intensive equipment for decades. Estimates suggest that the current increase in spending could lead to an increase in emissions of tens to hundreds of millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year.

In addition to direct emissions military spending indirectly increases emissions in the broader civilian economy. They divert financial and other resources from emission reduction programmes. For example, the transfer of funding from foreign aid and climate funds to military purposes. This situation weakens the ability of developing countries to build resilience to climate risks (Target 13.1) and hinders the integration of climate change measures into national policies (Target 13.2).

Increased defense spending also negatively impacts the ability of developed countries to meet their climate finance commitments (Target 13.a). At COP29, several countries expressed concerns about the gap between growing military budgets and limited climate finance commitments. The failure to meet the USD 100 billion per year target and the diversion of resources undermines trust between developed and developing countries and slows down the full operationalization of the Green Climate Fund.

The presence of foreign military bases in least developed countries and small island developing States (Goal 13.b) also negatively impacts local capacity for climate change planning and management. Cases like Palau, where the US military faces accusations of destroying ecosystems and disrupting local climate plans, show how militarization directly contradicts efforts to build community resilience.

Sources concluded that the current level of military spending is incompatible with the Paris Agreement's goal of limiting the increase in global average temperature to well below 2°C. Achieving this goal requires ambitious emission reductions, and if governments are unwilling to reduce emissions from their militaries, compensation plans for greater emission reductions in other sectors will be needed. Improving transparency and reporting on military emissions is key to better understanding and policies aimed at mitigating impacts. Spring