Governments have been told not to step back from their commitments to tackle climate change. Otherwise, the world will see population displacement, political unrest and conflict.

Noting that climate justice is vital for global security, former Member of the Scottish Parliament and First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon and Stop Climate Chaos Scotland International Policy Lead Ben Wilson said the world is at a crossroads, as the impacts of climate change are destabilising societies, causing conflict and deepening economic hardship.

In a commentary in the latest issue of Climate Home News, the award-winning independent digital publication covering the international politics of the climate crisis, Sturgeon and Wilson said that instead of rising to the challenge, too many political leaders are retreating from climate commitments and undermining a global consensus that has anchored peace and security, since the Second World War.

According to the duo, this is a moment to remind ourselves that climate action is not just about protecting the environment – it is also essential for global security, adding that failure to act now will drive population displacement, fuel political unrest, and create conflict.

“The war in in Tigray, Ethiopia, was fuelled in part by climate-induced droughts. Similarly, in Sudan, shifting migration patterns due to desertification and water scarcity have heightened ethnic and regional tensions, leading to violence and mass displacement,” they pointed out while identifying regions where climate change is already driving conflict.

Ill-informed narratives

Noting that these are not isolated incidents, they warned if governments don’t act now, climate disasters will fuel human insecurity on an unprecedented scale, as the economic consequences of climate action also pose a serious threat to peace.

“When communities lose their livelihoods, social unrest can follow”.

Economic hardship opens the door to far-right forces seeking to stoke xenophobia and racism, arguing that governments that neglect climate action now increase the likelihood of instability in future.

The trend of leaders backtracking on climate action is being driven by an increasingly sensationalist (and ill-informed) public narrative that net-zero is bad for the economy.

“This is a falsehood now as a recent Confederation of British Industry (CBI) report showed that the net-zero industry is an important driver of growth, with 22,000 businesses, from renewable energy to green finance, employing almost a million people in full-time jobs. Ignoring climate action now will saddle us with significant financial and human costs in the years ahead,” they wrote.

A landmark study, ‘The Economics of Climate Change’ published in The Stern Review, 19 years ago, assessed a wide range of evidence on impacts of climate change and on the economic costs using a number of different techniques.

From all these perspectives, the evidence gathered led to a simple conclusion: the benefits of strong and early action far outweigh the economic costs of not acting. But it is not just about economics – it is also about justice.

The latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports confirm that climate impacts are already driving poverty, hunger and displacement in some of the world’s vulnerable communities. These inequalities will deepen, with consequences for all, unless emissions ae reduced and adaptation efforts accelerated.

The decision of the UK and many other governments to cut aid budgets to fund defence is particularly jarring, said Sturgeon and Wilson. The climate finance commitments of the Paris Agreement will almost certainly be hit, further undermining the delicate balance between the Global North and the Global South.

Without a renewed commitment to climate justice, this year’s United Nations climate summit (COP30) in Belém, Brazil and the underlying premise of global cooperation on climate change will be at risk. There is no doubt, the duo argued, that climate justice demands a sharper focus on mitigating emissions and adaptation- but it needs more than that.

At COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland became the first country to commit finance to the issue of loss and damage -payments from the Global North to the Global South to deal with the irreversible climate impacts they are already experiencing. It was an act of reparation rather than charity, they pointed out.

The Scottish government’s initial commitment of £2m was modest but was heralded as “breaking the taboo” on this most of contentious issues. Other countries followed suit and by COP28 in Dubai, UAE, the UN Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage had been established with more than US$700 million pledged.

They said in the face of pushback against action on mitigation and adaptation, and a re-emergence of climate denial in UK and global politics, many people, even climate activists, might wonder if loss and damage is now an unaffordable luxury, and question if this is the time to spend political capital, let alone hard cash, on reparations.

Sturgeon and Wilson argue that stepping back from loss and damage would be a serious mistake since failure to ameliorate the irreversible impacts already being suffered will drive more conflict across the world. Moreover, if the Global North breaks its promises again, the understandable scepticism of the Global South about the efficacy of the COP process will only grow. They insist that acting in good faith on all aspects of climate injustice is fundamental to any vision of a peaceful world.

Right approach

At its core, they add, climate justice is a question of justice; the poorest countries have contributed least to the crisis and yet bear the brunt of its impacts. This is not just a moral failure – it is also a geopolitical risk. The Global South cannot be expected to cooperate in a system that repeatedly ignores their needs and priorities.

“The principle of fairness is not just ethical consideration; it is a practical necessity for sustaining peace. That is why the principle of multilateralism – the foundation of the post-war global order – must be defended. Small nations matter. The principle that Fiji and Kiribati have the same vote as the United States or Russia in climate negotiations is not a flaw – it is a cornerstone of global peace,” they said, adding that when powerful countries sideline ‘one country, one vote’ multilateralism – as many in today’s geopolitical wrangling are doing – they signal that might makes right, an approach that make conflict more, not less likely.

In short, Sturgeon and Wilson write, the retreat from strong, multilateral climate action is not just an environmental failure – it is a security risk. Leaders who defund climate finance in favour of military spending are not making the world safer; they are creating the conditions for future conflicts.

At COP30, the future of global cooperation on climate change – indeed of the UN process itself – is on the line. Leaders of goodwill across the world must recognise that climate justice, whether on mitigation, adaptation, or loss and damage, is an essential ingredient for a peaceful world. Pandering to strong-man egos will only deepen injustice and increase global instability.

“For the sake of future generations, this one’s leaders must stand up for justice. They must be willing to see beyond today’s headlines and secure a future built on the common good. 2025 might feel like the start of a road toward global conflict, but it doesn’t need to be,” they write.