Ella Mitchell

Environmental degradation poses a larger threat to the international community than war

Environmental degradation is most commonly defined as ‘the reduction of the capacity of

the environment to meet social and ecological objectives, and needs’1 through the depletion

of the Earths natural resources, and may be one of the most pressing world problems

imposed amongst the global community upon entering the 21st century. The new

millennium faced the international community with the issues of climate change and

environmental degradation, whilst also introducing a ‘new era’ of war. 21st century conflicts,

such as the US – China trade war have illustrated how war can differ from the standard

definition of being ‘a state of armed conflict between different countries or different groups

within a country’, and led us to question whether the short – term impacts of war which

affect a large proportion of the global population pose more of a threat to the international

community than the long term impacts as a result of the emerging problem of

environmental degradation.

Entering the 21st century, soil degradation has become a growing environmental threat,

aswell as having additional socio – political consequences. Since the onset of the industrial

revolution, there has been a 50% increase in atmospheric CO2 levels, with carbon emissions

and other greenhouse gases being recognised as a leading cause of global warming.2 Soil

degradation has played a large role in the recent dramatic increase, with the degradation of

one of the world’s largest carbon stores being catalysed by intensive agricultural processes,

such as deforestation. Deforestation and other agricultural processes often strip way the

layer of top soil, leaving the soil vulnerable and more susceptible to water and wind erosion,

catalysing its degradation. Soil contains 75% of the land carbon pool, but soil degradation

reduces the volume of carbon that soil can store by up to 70%.3

Ella Mitchell

Recent technological development in regards to the agricultural industry have led to a rise

in the availability of technologies that allow for rapid forest clearing; degrading soil more

quickly and emitting larger volumes of carbon into the atmosphere and contributing to

global warming. A notable long term impact of global warming is climate change, which

leads to more extreme weather events, rise in sea levels, drought, and rising temperatures.

These have negative impacts on a large proportion of the globe, often causing an increase in

poverty, displacement, food scarcity and an increase in food costs. Unless the issue of soil

degradation is tackled globally, carbon emissions and the threat of climate change will begin

to have dangerous, temporally long – term impacts to the world population.

There is no doubt that the nature of war has changed rapidly both post WW2 and upon

entering the digital age. The 20th century is often referred to as the ‘most violent century of

all human history’4, witnessing both world wars and the tensions of the cold war, and so in

comparison it could be argued that armed conflict as a form of war poses less of a threat to

the international community in the 21st century, with a general decrease in the number of

deaths arising from armed conflict since 1946, and a steady increase in the frequency of

cyber wars seen globally in recent decades. But does this mean the threat of war and

conflict has decreased in this new era of war?

The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the summer of 1945 remain the only usage of

nuclear weapons in armed combat, with the number of nuclear weapons globally dropping

from 60,000 in the cold war to 14,000 today.5 This suggests that the threat of nuclear

weapons and nuclear war is dwindling; however, this may not be the case. Russian threats

to use nuclear weapons in the war against Ukraine constitutes one of the worst nuclear
Ella Mitchell

development of the decade6, with the continuation of the expansions and modernisations

of nuclear arsenals worldwide. India, China, Russia and the United States are all

modernising their arsenals of nuclear weapons, with North Korea increasing their long –

range missile testing. Iran continues to step closer being a nuclear power, whilst China

reduces transparency further in regards to their nuclear arsenal.7 Growing nuclear powers

worldwide demonstrate that although the threat of nuclear war isnt as large as it was

throughout the duration of the Cold war, there are still nuclear tensions between multiple

countries, and nuclear powers still pose a slight threat to the international community in

the 21st century.

The growing frequency of cyber wars globally highlights how, despite the shifting nature of

war in the 21st century, it still remains a threat to the international community. The number

of cyber attacks targeting governments across the globe has increased by 95% in 2022 from

20218, largely due to both the growth of technology and rapid digitalisation as a result of

the pandemic. This increases the chances of national security and military data being used

by terrorist organisations, and the selling of information about citizens on the dark web. If

governments fail to defend themselves against cyber attacks in the future, it leaves the

global population vulnerable to having their data stolen. Although war may not pose as

large of a threat to life as it has in previous years due to the decline of fatalities in armed

combat, it now leaves the security of militaries, governments and citizen’s data at risk due

to cyberwar.

Severe environmental degradation imposes many threats upon the population, with one of

the most notable being substantial population displacement. This is prominent in Africa,

which was home to 15 million internally displaced people in 20159, where many
Ella Mitchell

communities are forced to migrate seasonally due to drought, food scarcity or water

insecurity, which leads to a competition for resources and can encourage conflicts. Sudan,

Ethiopia and Kenya all have large populations who migrate in accord with climactic patterns.

Some may argue that poverty and quality of infrastructure have equal importance as

environmental degradation when determining key factors contributing to displacement9,

and that environmental degradation only impacts those who are living in low – income

countries. However, this misconception isnt true, with populations all around the globe

suffering from the environmental, social and economic impacts of environmental

degradation.

Environmental degradation has a direct impact on global temperature, with deforestation

depleting trees which would alternatively store CO2. The impacts of global temperature

increase affects both high and low income countries. This can be seen in South Africa, a

newly emerging economy, where environmental degradation has had large social and

economic consequences. The temperature increase in South Africa has impacted sectors

which are sensitive to heat10, and generally made labour sectors less productive. It has been

concluded that the impacts on the low – skilled labour industries are affecting women the

most, being more prone to thermal stress. It has been predicted that in the future, this

could reduce the gender – pay gap in such industries, due to the decreasing availability of

low skilled female workers. Despite this positive social outcome, this introduces economic

implications, due to the decrease in availability and productivity of workers. By the end of

the century, South African GDP is projected to drop by 11% if the threat of environmental

degradation isnt mitigated.10 This highlights further how the large spatial scale nature of

environmental degradation continues to grow and impact more of the global population.
Ella Mitchell

Post WW2 and in 21st century society, war has begun to impact a larger proportion of the

globe than ever before, both directly and indirectly. There have been growingly extreme

social impacts of the war on certain groups around the world, such as the indirect impact of

the Israel - Hamas war on the Jewish and Muslim communities. This can be seen through

the increase in hate crimes across London since the conflict began in the middle east, with a

1350% rise in antisemitic offences, with a 140% rise in Islamophobic attacks within the same

time period11, demonstrating how wars can indirectly impact communities from all around

the globe.

Economic sanctions in times of war imposed on countries also have negative socio –

economic implications for citizens living in the country where the sanction has been

imposed, and often the country which is imposing the sanction. This can be seen with

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, which led to political tensions across Europe and

economic sanctions being placed on Russia by EU and G7 countries. The sanctions had a

large impact on the Russian economy, with their GDP shrinking by an estimated 2.1% 12in

2022 alone, and was forced to enter a recession as a result. This was as a result of the lack

of goods being exported out of Russia, with a diminishing revenue from fossil fuels and

declining trade, as well as frozen assets. However, the decrease in Russian exports also had

a negative impact on those living in the EU or G7 countries, as they were reliant on Russia as

a source of fuel. Russia made up 39% of gas used in the EU, and so they had to source

resources from other countries as an alternative. This made the exportation of oil and other

fuels much more expensive, which impacted citizens when trying to heat their homes and

fuel their cars due to the increased price of oil and gas. This had a negative impact on the

quality of life of those living in countries which had imposed sanctions by increasing the cost
Ella Mitchell

of living nationwide, which illustrates further how War has forceful consequences for those

who aren’t directly involved in war across the globe.

Both war and environmental degradation poses danger to the international community,

being uncertain and overlooked by global governments whilst having irreversible, long term

temporal impacts. Although the threat of war still poses risk to life and disruption to

communities globally, environmental degradation currently poses more of a danger to the

international community in the 21st century, as it is visibly getting worse and impacting

almost the entirety of the global population either socially, economically or

environmentally.

References

1) United Nations (2015). environmental degradation. [online] United Nations

Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia. Available at:
https://archive.unescwa.org/environmental-degradation.

2) www.globalchange.gov. (n.d.). Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide | GlobalChange.gov.

[online] Available at: https://www.globalchange.gov/indicators/atmospheric-carbon-
dioxide#:~:text=The%20amount%20of%20CO%E2%82%82%20in.
3) Begum, T. (2021). Soil degradation: the problems and how to fix them. [online]
www.nhm.ac.uk. Available at: https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/soil-
degradation.html#:~:text=In%20the%20last%20few%20decades.
4) War and Peace in the 20th Century and Beyond. (2003). doi:
https://doi.org/10.1142/5130.
5) Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. (n.d.). 2023 Doomsday Clock Statement: Nuclear
Risk. [online] Available at: https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-
time/nuclear-risk/.
Ella Mitchell

6) Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. (n.d.). 2023 Doomsday Clock Statement: Nuclear
Risk. [online] Available at: https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-
time/nuclear-risk/.

7) Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. (n.d.). 2023 Doomsday Clock Statement: Nuclear
Risk. [online] Available at: https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-
time/nuclear-risk/.

8) Chwe, H. (2016). The Rise of Cyber Warfare: The Digital Age and American
Decline. Swarthmore International Relations Journal, [online] (1), pp.43–49.
doi:https://doi.org/10.24968/2574-0113.1.11.

9) UNEP. (2017). Displacement and Environment in Africa: What is the relationship?

[online] Available at: https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/displacement-and-
environment-africa-what-
relationship#:~:text=This%20is%20especially%20pronounced%20in [Accessed 31
Dec. 2023].

10) Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia. (2022). article:Effects of climate change on the South
African economy. [online] Available at:
https://www.unive.it/pag/16584/?tx_news_pi1%5Bnews%5D=12927&cHash=ef5097
eccae2539638d9ff0e93250de2#:~:text=By%20using%20longitudinal%20data%20that
[Accessed 31 Dec. 2023].
11) Dodd, V. (2023). Antisemitic hate crimes in London up 1,350%, Met police say. The
Guardian. [online] 20 Oct. Available at:
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2023/oct/20/antisemitic-hate-crimes-in-london-
rise-1350-since-israel-hamas-war-met-says.

12) ww.consilium.europa.eu. (n.d.). Impact of sanctions on the Russian economy. [online]

Available at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/infographics/impact-sanctions-
russian-economy/#:~:text=The%20Russian%20economy%20is%20shrinking.