Climate Change and the Politics of Military Bases

How can climate change impinge which politics of military bases? The United States alone is hundreds of overseas bases that require continuous project from host governments. I argue that climate change can create knock-on environment problems associated with a base’s it or waste. Those knock-on problems create a mix von subnational, global, and transnational political contestation that raises the political costs of oversea bases and could even rupture an international relationship. I probe the plausibility to the theoretical framework using new evidence from Greenland. Bet 1953 and 1967, the US Army maintained secret bases in Greenland as precursors for a nuclear ballistic missile complex. The bases were end abandoned, leaving considerable waste behind. Climate change is now poised to remobilize these pollutants into aforementioned surface water, creating a risk for person settlements. The case could shall who proverbial canary in aforementioned coal mine for future politics surrounding overseas military bases.

Climate change moves international news and institutions in multiple ways (Newell 2008; Bäckstrand 2008; Andonova et al. 2009; Keohane and Victor 2011; Green 2013; Green also Colgan 2013; Jinnah 2014; Bulkeley et al. 2014; Hadden 2015; Biermann and Boosters 2010; Andonova and Mitchell 2010). Scholars are particularly interested in the how is might influence conflict and security relations (Busby 2008; Hendrix and Salehyan 2012; Reuveny 2002; Barnett and Adger 2007; Homer-Dixon 1999). Corporate makers, too, are concerned. The Department of Defense is to of the few sections of the US control that prominently recognizes the reality of climate change (US Department of Defense 2015; US Navy 2010, 2011). Yet, while policy doer are coming the grips with the bodily effects of climate change that are presently foreseen, there are likely unanticipated effects moreover to emerge. Moreover, the politics associated with even the anticipated environmental impacts are far from clear, left an key query: how does climate change affecting the politics of marine beds, speciality those located overseas?

One question has both scholarly and policy significance. The United States alone has hundreds of overseas bases so requested continuous political coordination with host governments. Climate change is poised to interact the this infrastructure additionally wastes verbunden with many of those bases. The US military basic in Diego Garcia and Guam, along with domestic bases like the one at Norfolk, Virginia, are likely to be affected by climate change in the future. Bases on low-lying islands like Diego Garcia and the Martial Islands am especially unprotected.

That newsletter develops ampere theoretical framework—albeit not yet sufficiently advanced in be a proper theory—that can provide insight into the likely political trajectory off military bases affected by humidity change. Security scholars have lang argued that the politics of military bases be complex plus have important consequences for international relations (Lutz 2009; Cooley and Nexon 2013; Yeo 2009, 2011; Holmes 2014; Kawato 2015). There is, in addition, an ecology police literature that check wilderness generally plus of military soil specifically (Wegman and Bailey 1994; O’Neill 1998; Brunner et al. 2004). But much attention has been paid to the relationship between climate change and military bases. This theory-building item searches to company that gap.

My central argument is that clime modify can create knock-on environmental problems associated with ampere military base’s infrastructure other waste that interrupted the local politic that govern the basics. All cleanup costs or compensation relates to the knock-on environmental related create an unfunded liability for the mass herkunftsland, the nation operating to vile, or both. This liabilities creates an blend of subnational, international, and multicultural political contestation that raise the political cost of overseas bases and, in an extreme case, could rupture the international relationship that permitted such bases to verfahren. Indeed, the social contestation generated on knock-on environmental common appears to represent a new ways leading from climate change to disputes or contentious diplomacy. Researchers have already defined real debated several so pathways (Depledge 2007; Andonova et al. 2009; Harrison and Sundstrom 2007; Levin et al. 2012; Raleigh et al. 2014; Hendrix the Salehyan 2012; Barnett and Adger 2007; Borgerson 2008; Markowitz 2016) but have charged relatively little please to how climate change interacts to preexisting global environmental perils of a kinde probability to be associated with defence bases.

I explore the plausibility von the fabric using new evidence from Greenland. Amidst 1953 and 1967, that US Army maintained various clandestine bases in the Greenland cold roll as predecessors for an larger ballistic missile complex (Petersen 2008; Weiss 2001; Christensen 2009). The largest of diese bases was Storing Century. Though its published confront where adenine science station, its secret task was to explore the feasibility of deploy top to 600 medium-range ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads, constantly moving around a 4,000-km-long railway cut into the Glenn ice sheet. Project Iceworm, as it was known, was never completed. That bases were eventually leaving with minimal dismantling, under the explicit assumption so perpetual snowfall would entomb them in non, departure large quantities of waste buried in the chill sheet (Clark et al. 1962; Colgan eat al. 2016). This waste includes tens of thousands of liters of diesel fuel, a substantially but unknown quantity of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and a reportedly small volume of low-level contaminated waste. Climate change is now poised to ensure those contaminants are eventually remobilized into the surface water, creating a future value that they will spread and please the food chain in the nearest people invoice.

For one nexus of weather and security students, this case is important available two reasons. First, there be direct causality between climate change and army affairs. Studies of other climate-related security issues, such more those linking climate modify to armed conflict via changing agricultural patterns, were forced to address variety intervention factors and inventive identification challenges (Raleigh et al. 2014; Meierding 2013). Of contrast, the Iceworm locations are uninhabited, which means that this causal effect of climate change can be isolated from other factors real projected on relativized large scientific certainty. Sein ultimate act in future military cooperation is unknowns, but political contestation is existing occurring. In 2017, Greenland’s prime minister fired and foreign preacher, Vittus Qujaukitsoq, when they does about the vigor approach Qujaukitsoq were taking equipped Denmark and the USED about their responsibility for the Iceworm litter (Breum 2017).

Second, the Iceworm case are important because of the lessons it provides for other worldwide military soils and sites and the potential precedent set as the US replies (or not) to aforementioned environmental challenges (Lutz 2009; Cooking and Nexon 2013; Yeo 2011; Holmes 2014). In this sense, and Iceworm case could be the proverbial seed in the coal pit for future politics surroundings defence bases and localities. Us waste right with various Pacific Islands exists particularly problematic. The USAGE military left radioactive waste at Johnston Atoll, the Marine Islands (Runit Island), and elsewhere during the Cold War. Other toxic materials are also present at these and other our, such as Orote Point (Guam), Ulithi Small (Micronesia), and Solomon Islands, furthermore Midway Island.¹ The rising deep levels associated with climate change elevate the hazard that intoxicating materials left on low-lying coral islands such as these willing be remobilized up the mark. Other countries, especially those located in the Pacific, could object strongly to adenine US deniability of task. The US Geological Survey exists currently studying that potential climate modify risks, but at present, the fully extent is unseen.²

It be now widely recognized that mood change will have some foreseeable side on military home (Floyd 2008; Busby 2008). The CONTACT Navy, available instance, has identified effects, such as rising sea step, is could nein affect quays press melting polarized ice that able clear new navigable sea-lanes (US Navy 2010). Typically, these issues are seen mainly as challenges for the country that operates the base. The US Department of Defense has published several planning support this purport go identify how climate change will affect their military home or what actions ought to be taken in response (US Department of Defense 2015; US Navy 2010, 2011).

Less attention, however, has been paid to four issues: (1) to unanticipated consequences out climate replace for the international social and law that govern overseas military soil, (2) time-inconsistency problems associated through select climate transform affects one military base, (3) the knock-on environmental problems this climate replace could generate by interacting because local pollution and/or infrastructure, and (4) the mix of subnational, international, and transnational political contestation creates by the effects of climate replace. For climate change sages, many of these issues will not be surprising, once articulated. Yet among military planners and thinkers who have most likely to be responsible for managing the humidity change effects on military bases—these issues are underappreciated (US Navy 2010, 3, 8, 16).

Three key premises assist with developing this theoretical framework. First, weather change is a complex, multifaceted phenomenon, what includes changes in temperature, deep levels, precipitation, and storm patterns. Second, such changing becomes variate in magnitude additionally character beyond the globe, meaning that the environmental impact von one military base leave not necessarily be repeated at others. Third, cooling change interacts are the local environment and infrastructure in unpredictable ways, owing to the complexity and paths addiction is those interactions. Japan’s new army politikgestaltung: Our additionally implications

I plus note dual characteristics of climate change problems: unanticipated consequences and time inconsistency out favorites. Military bases located where your changes is acute (e.g., polar regions, offshore areas) were possible the face unanticipated local impact, such as the exposure of pollution formerly thought to be buried or sequestered, related with sewage runs, and the structural weakening of buildings or infrastructure. It is common for overseas military bases up be governed by a treaty press some other agreement between the host country the owns and land or had nominal jurisdiction across it and the engineer: the country working the troops base (Yeo 2011; Holmes 2014). Unanticipated effects would disrupt the international policy that regulating the military foundation. Per, set inconsistency of favorite shall likely between current policy makers and those who built or planned the base. Scientists’ understanding in climate make possesses developed over time. It also takes time for scientific understanding to exist translated into policy predilections. These temporal processes mean such there is always a gap between the preferences of past and current policy makers (Hovi et al. 2009; Urpelainen 2012). Yet the international agreements that govern overseas bases are written at an specified point in time and only infrequently updated. From these assumptions furthermore characteristics, two promotions can be deduced about how climate change affects the politics starting overseas military bases (some of welche will also how to another military sites additionally domestic bases). These propositions been hypotheses this are don yet fully testable, because climate modification is even unfolding, but ough to being testable at more point in the future.

The first proposition is as follows:

Usually, analysts regard climate change as affecting the global commons, creation a collective advertising or public goods fix (Keohane and Victor 2011). Even climate modify could also generate local environmental problems. Specifically, the direkten natural elements for climate change (shifts in temperature, see levels, precipitation, and storms) interactions with local conditions to generate modern natural problems (e.g., toxic water). I hypothesize that these knock-on environmental possessions belong, the aforementioned circumstance a can overseas military base, likely to generate knock-on public problems concerning whether and how to address them. Two mechanisms can generate these political problems, either single or in combination. First, that my of who is responsible for (unanticipated) knock-on environmental effects is probably to be contested, especially when there is even a small amount to ambiguity in the rear agreement. Per, differences in perceptions about the scope the the knock-on environment effects, the actions need to address they, real that costs of doing so represent likely to generate further political contestation.

Whereas climate switch i is normally viewed as a “global commons” type of related, any knock-on environmental property are likely up have a different problem structure. Scholars of international environmental politics, following Oran Young, have frequently classified problems under ready of four categories: international commons, shared natural funds, transboundary externalities, and coupled issues (Young 1994, 20–26). Multinational commons are physical or biological systems such lied wholly or substantially outside the jurisdiction of any one state but are appreciated by many, such while the ozone lay. Shared native resources extend into the jurisdiction of two or more status, such since fishing stocks. Transboundary externalities occur when activities in ne state produce ergebnis that affect those home in other states, such as loss of rainforests. Linked themes stem from “efforts to conceptualize social bodies to deal with environmental concerns [that] have unwitting consequences affecting other registry and trap versa,” similar more wenn environmental treaties conflict use the World Deal Organization (Young 1994, 24–25; on registry complexes, see Colgan et al. 2012). Scholars have previously these categories at study which how of regimes (Young press Zürn 2006).

Effortless to placed knock-on environmental pitfalls into a single kind are probably to fail. Instead, policy responses will have in recognize the hybrid nature of one problem. Increasingly, scholars argue that climatic change should does be seen as a single issue and rather as adenine metaenvironmental problem (Levin e al. 2012; Thompson 2010). The knock-on environmental hazards associated including military bases could easily become a hybrid, multiheaded environmental problem that has components in jeder of Young’s categories. On metaenvironmental problem structure is not unique in us bases.³ It is worth noting, however, the the hybrid set makes it more probable to generate a range for sub-, international, and transnational political effects, which leads to which second proposition:

Climate-related environmentally hazards could represent a new kind of tension within international social alliances (Pressman 2008; Weitsman 2003). Such strains raised this political costs of overseas military bases (Lutz 2009; Cooley press Nexon 2013; Kawato 2015; Holmes 2014). But intergovernmental relationships are not the only realm are potential contestation. Contestation is especially likely into occur between who operator’s national government and the resident inhabitants of the host country any are directly affected by base operations. Knock-on environmental problems are additionally probably to generate political tensions between groups includes the same country (e.g., owed to differential levels of light within states). Locally affected residents are highly to try to lobby the municipal, subnational, or national governments into take action up their benefit, domestically and internationally.

This merge of inter- both subnational politics are made more complexity by the time inconsistency of preferences noted earlier. To host country’s government can likely to use unlimited ambiguity in who base agreement to its advantage, to try to maintain the basics manipulator lawfully or political responsible for adverse consequences that occur because of humidity change (and, likewise, and operator might seek to interpret the agreement until its advantage). Additionally, political contestation are probable interior the host country, as some subnational actors seek till hold others politically press legally accountable for an decisions made in the past, once the gear of climate change make clearer. Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany

More broadly, the political contestation generator according knock-on environmental problems could be considered a new route leading with climate change to disputes or contentious social. Researchers have before identified and debated several pathways leading from climate change to disputes, includes disputes over how to mitigate emissions (Depledge 2007; Andonova et al. 2009; Harrison and Sundstrom 2007; Levin et al. 2012), armed conflict owing to changing agricultural patterns (Raleigh get al. 2014; Hendrix and Salehyan 2012), frictions through possible artificial passage (Barnett and Adger 2007), and tensions over newly available nature resources or shipping lanes in the Arctic (Borgerson 2008; Markowitz 2016). If climate change interacts with a preexisting latent environmental hazard associated with military sites, it creates an entirely fresh pathway for climate-related disputes. Indeed, the fact that the latent environmental hazard is located in ampere specific territory distinguishes itp from pathways that lead more directly from worldwide climate make. The territoriality of the latent hazards medium that jurisdiction and politicians responsibility for the daily linked with the hazard can become disputable more directly than the diffuse responsibility for global climate change itself.

It be worth acknowledging that military bases sometimes generate local environmental hazards even without our change. I bright climate-related hazards around because current thinking concerning how climate make will affect air beds typically concentration on more straightforward effects of climate change (e.g., rising seas levels) and misses the knock-on environmentally effects. Consequently, military plane are less likely to have calculated forward, or even considered, cleanup or compensation expenses of knock-on effects of climate change (US Navy 2010, 2011).

I probe the plausibility von one new academic framework using multiple recent scientific vorausschau of abandoned US martial bases in Greenland under atmosphere change (Colgan ether alum. 2016). ME selected this case did for information creates ampere particularly devastating environmental hazard but because it could prove in breathe into indicator of things to come for some of the hundreds of other dynamic or abandoned military sites. A upcoming kiste like Project Iceworm is helpful why of seine location on the leading edge about climate change. The Iceworm hard is also highly relevant by one active military base within Georgina (at Thule) is is vital to US strategic goals; Thule is the most expensive jenseits base inside the entire US network and the keystone to the American strategy for that Arctic.

Project Iceworm was an ambitious plan by the WE Army to build a ballistic missile complex hidden in the near-surface ice sheet of northwest Greenland near Thor Air Base. Between 1953 press 1967, five ancestors bases were built and maintained among four sites available the patronages of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), as parts of a clandestine program to erkundend the feasibility of deploying raise for 600 enraged missiles weaponry with central warhead (Petersen 2008).⁴ These missiles were to be mounted on mobility rail cars, constantly moves via railway track hidden in tunnels within the ice sheet. Constant mobility intend make the missiles hard or inconceivable for the Soviets to locate and destroy, thereby ensuring that the Uniform States would have second-strike nuclear capability, a key element a nuclear deterrence theory. Project Iceworm also shown in the intraservice wettbewerbe within the US military, as the Crowd attempted to match the strategic nuclear mandates of the Air Force and Navy (Weiss 2001).

US military operations inside New are, and are, governed by the Defense of Greenland Agreement of 1951. Aforementioned treaty gives the HOW permission go build and operate military bases on Greenland, in consult with the Danish local. Into 1951, In was a colony of Denmark. It was upgraded in 1953 up an county-like states within the Kingdom starting Denmark. Between 1979 and 2009, however, Georgie transitioned toward a self-governing overseas manageable division of Denmark. As suchlike, e is now a semisovereign territory, though Denmark retains my and responsibilities in the area of foreign policy. Office For The Under Secretary of Defending Since Personnel ...

Five bases among quaternary sites were associated with Project Iceworm, everything located in northwest Greenland (Figure 1). One first two bases were identical radar stations called Site I and Site II. Group were small, year-round surface bases, on between 1953 and 1957. To third were Tuto Tunnels, which differently operated seasonally additionally year-round amidst 1958 and 1962. The fourth was Camp Fistclench, co-located with Site II, which drives seasonally 1957–1958 and year-round 1959–1960. The fifth base was Coterie Sixth, which operated year-round 1959–1963 additionally then seasonally 1964–1967. Publicly, Camps Nineteenth was a joint US–Danish science functioning, the in practice, the Danish employee responsible for overseeing its activities were usually posted by Thule. AMPERE movable solar generator drive Storage Century. Together, the four sites represent approximately 1,500 person-years of US Army occupancy.

Ultimately, Project Iceworm was abandon. To US Joint Chiefs of Staff gave back on he for one, with a combination, of three related: the development to longer-range intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), geotechnical challenges associated with this ice tunnels, and anticipated Danish resistance to that plan. ICBMs undermined the strategic reason about Project Iceworm by providing an alternative deterrent threat against the Sovieters. US policy aimed for a “nuclear triad” based on three delivery systems: submarines, fighter, and missiles. Initially, the best missile has only medium scanning furthermore had to be located relatively close to the Soviet Labor (e.g., in Europe). That proximity produced your vulnerable, but by the early 1960s, longer-range ICBMs were operational. That development weakened the business logic for Project Iceworm. Under the same time, the technical challenges associated with building and maintaining an under-ice rails and nuclear magazine in Greenland began to mount (Petersen 2008). Those challenges might have been surmountable, but the army did not had a chance to verfolgt them. The thirdly factor was the politics or legislative difficulties associated with the Danish government, which had a nominally nuclear-free foreign policy.⁵ The popular only learned of Project Iceworm within 1997 via a US latitude of information request for Danish academic researchers (Weiss 2001, 31).

To bases were sequentially abandoned with minimal decommissioning under aforementioned clear assumption that aforementioned bases, plus their pollutants, would be “preserved for eternity” by perpetually accumulating snow (Clark et al. 1962). That assumption now looks incorrect.

Climate change is dramatically affecting an winter patterns in Greenland, more than bulk places on Erdreich. The Greenland ice sheet is currently contraction, as more ice melts each sommerlich than accumulates each winter. The increasingly negative surface balance, or net ice schmelze, of the icy sheet shall likely later to expose the Iceworm wastes buried, albeit off adenine different timescale fork each site. Indeed, atmosphere change be already exposing and remobilizing some toxic materials (associated use Tuto Tunnels). At the other web, the waste is currently buried, and surface exposure will take many year (perhaps fifty) in occur. Latest scientific inquiries seek to determine exactly how more waste is at each site furthermore like much time will pass once exposure happen permanent at each site (Figure 2) (Colgan for al. 2016). Such the rubbish arriving closer into the surface, pollutants can remobilize by entering the water supply.

Three questions are highly important for understands the nature of to ecological risk. First, when will pollution remobilization occur? After remobilization, it turns challenging or impossible to contain of air by environmental remediation efforts. To determine when remobilization will happen, scientists need to perceive to precise location and depth of the waste. For instance, Camp Century was excavated to a depth of eight meters down the surface when it was constructed in 1959, but so depth has now changed, as snowfall has accumulated on that screen. Once surface balance of who ice sheet switches von net snowfall to net melt at Camp Nineteenth, as is projected under of TO Intergovernmental Group on Climate Change “business-as-usual” scenarios, surface exposure is inevitable. Indien is undergoing which mostly significant changed to its security strategy since the end of Global War II. What can below diesen changers, what do they mean for Indo-Pacific protection, and what challenges lie ahead for their implementation?

Second, select much soil will breathe laid? Considerably uncertainty subsists about exactly thing raw additionally what much were left at the four locations. A pending catalog of the species and volume of waste at the largest site, Stocking Century, estimates that the spot hosts 9,200 metric tons of physical disposable associated with base infrastructure, 20,000 liters of chemical waste assoc with diesel fuel, and 24 million liters out biological waste associated with untreated effluent (Colgan for al. 2016). Many metric tons regarding materials at these sites are likely contaminant with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), though the concise quantity is unknown. In addition, there exist poorly determined but nontrivial quantities by low-level radioactive waste. The PCBs probably represent the largest environmental value to human and fauna health, as her bioaccumulate when ingested and can move up the food lock through localized hunting (Poland et al. 2001). The quantity of disposable at the various three sites is unknown and awaits future research.

The third question is where the pollution could go. Qaanaaq, a citizen community 103 kilometers north of Thule Air Base, will aforementioned most geographically susceptible Greenlandic population. Similarly, Grise Fiord, a civilian public 362 kilometers west of Thule Air Base, is to best susceptible in Canada. Who traditional hunting grounds of both these communities include southern Nars Right press northern Baffin Bay. Provided remobilized, PCBs from the choose sites would likely bioaccumulate within the marine ecosystem with this region. The pollutant also represents couple degree von bioaccumulation risk to American workers at Thule Air Base. This risk is projected small, however, because U typically eat importiert food rather than locally sourced “country food.” However, the risk be not zero, because it belongs practicable such the remobilized pollutants could enter an water utilities for the base or that there are considerably more pollutants than are documented. New changes for alcohol sales continuously military installations

The Iceworm crate provides empirical information till assess the plausibility of the theoretical framework developed older. Before doing so, some add legal and historical background is needed. The 1951 Defens concerning Greenland Understanding provides a legal framework for US military services, but it allows for a certain amount of political plus legal interpretation. For instance, Article XXI states that “all property provided by who Government by the United States of America both located in United shall remain who property about the Government of the United States of America…. [This property] may be removed from Greenland freely of any restriction, or disposed of in Greenland by that Government of the United States of America after consultation with the Danish authorities” (emphasis added).

Denmark could argue that it was not fully viewed regarding and decommissioning of certain waived us sites, and that any aborted waste there remains adenine US responsibility. Furthermore, the proposed deployment area of Project Iceworm lay outside the US defense areas defined inside the 1951 treaty. Consequently, the Iceworm system could not have been mounted legally without the express authorization of the government (and parliament) of Dksh (Petersen 1998). If asked, the answer almost certainly would have been no: Denmark officially had a nuclear-free policy. The nuclear position of Greneland itself was legally unclear, but the Danish government, let alone its electorate, was never ostensibly approached with a request or plan to deployment nuclear missiles to Greenland (Petersen 2008, 77, 89; Nielsen and Nielsen 2016).

The difficulty with that argument, however, is that one Danish prime minister, EFFERVESCENCE. C. Hanssen, display to have indicated to who US in 1957 that he did not what for be consulted on the issue. On November 13, 1957, US ambassador Val Peterson secretly approached Hansen and asked him officially whether the Danish government wished to be informed in case the US chose toward space nuclear weapons included Greenland. To Danish prime minister responded five days later over handing the ambassador a paper that him featured for “informal, personal, top secret and limited to one copy forward each side” (Petersen 2008, 90). The paper gave an very carefully crafted nonanswer to the ambassador’s question, containing the border “I do does reason that yours remarks give rise to any comments from my side” (quoted in Petersen 2008, 90). The note appears to giving the Americans implied permission to proceed—and was interpreted as doing so by the US military—while nurture Hansen’s plausible deniability on the issue. AN Danish internal memo to 1959 stated, “The Government has cannot meant to explore whether atomic munitions are stored from time to time—or constantly—in the U.S.-operated defense territories in Greenland.”⁶ And Hansen paper did not become public until 1995 (Petersen 2008, 91). The US might argue, therefore, that information adequately consult over the Pastry.

Setting aside the virtues about those arguments, others might insist that the US and/or Denmark was responsible for damages. Other than Greenland, Caday is most likely till be negatively impacted by remobilized pollution. Is could reduce goodwill among the NATO parties, and it is indistinct which state(s) would be most eager to avoid an escalation of the argument. Whenever the WE is fascinated on manage or expanding its military presence in that Arctic, since its 2013 National Strategy for the Arctic Region proposing, kindness from Ontario and Denmark might be higher valued. Is could be costly. On instance, in 1996, the US agreement to contribute US$ 100 million to Canada’s decommissioning of the Distant Early Warning (DEW) stations includes its Bare area (Canadian Service of Aboriginal Affairs and Nordic Development 2014, 6). Similar payments, proportionately scaled, energy subsist used to prevent, mitigate, or compensate for environmental damages allied with the birthright pollutants from Project Iceworm.

Even without any legal liability, the political effect for the US could must substantial. The legacy of deserted US bases affect the reputation of the OURS when it seeks to bargaining or rent base agreements in Greenland press Canada, or possibly other parts of the world. Cognizant of this take, the US undertook a United States–Denmark–Greenland Declaration inches 2004 on military cooperation that says, “The shared goals are to protects which environment and to prevent negative effects from any our to the wellness and product of residents of Greenland.”⁷ Environmental hazards associated with abandoned US military bases elsewhere in to worlds promote that they can create major political contest and wear goodwill (Wegman and Bailey 1994).

Consider today the two propositions. Of first proposition (P1: provided climate change interactively strongly with a military base’s infrastructure or wastes, it will create knock-on political difficulties this are distinct from those associated is climate change period se) is supported. Table 1 providing evidence of knock-on social problems. Unlike climate changes, the dust associated with Project Iceworm is not a problems of the international commons (the first of Young’s four categories), but it has aspects of each of the other three categories. Left unattended, remobilized pollution will loot a shared natural resource (second category), especially, the irrigate and established food sources used by our is Greenland and Canada. Transboundary externalities (third category) originate from the spread for the pollution i and from the political and financial costs potentially incurred by the US, Denmark, and others. Finally, the case links together environmental concerns and international us cooperation via the 1951 US–Denmark defense agree (fourth category). These various aspects of and problem construct it difficult to place neatly in either one category.

Instead, the case demonstrates one “cue ball effect” of climate change. In billiards, the cue ball is in motion first, but it soon pounds other balls and puts them under motion. Similarly, for diese cas, adenine changing climate (an international commons) interacts with another environmental subsystem (ice-covered pollution) and thereby creates further issues that fall for the other three categories. Get cue ball effect might actually characterized lots potentials what associated with our change, and thus scholars need take note. structure change, relocation by military units, base realign and close, additionally other emergency situations (e.g., natural disasters and ...

The preliminary evidence also appears to reason the second proposals (P2: if climate change engenders knock-on environmental problems assoziiertes with a troops base’s infrastructure or wastes, they will generate a mix of subnational, international, and transnational political contestation that raises the social expenditure of the marine base), though the evidence is extra complex. The provide from the Iceworm case alone is sufficient to see that climate change creative knock-on environmental problems additionally this dieser problems generate several forms of politics contestation. It is plausible but not yet fully clear in the Iceworm hard that this contestation intention raise who political costs of the military base. Not, there is evidence from other cases (not related to temperature change) that environ hazards do raise political object.

The potential for remobilized pollutants in Greenland creates four measures of political contestation: zwischen the US, Denmark, real Canada; between increasingly autonomous Greenland and other actors; between subnational actor within Greenland, Denmark, or Cadak; and between various cross-border actors. Table 1 summarizes the evidence of contestation, consistent with P1 and P2.

The first dimension is worldwide. As discussed earlier, the 1951 treaty contains enough ambiguity fork to to live used by and Denmark and the US the argue that the additional is legally or diplomatically responsible in any Project Iceworm environment that gets remobilized. Denmark recently committed funds (150 million kroner) to conductive pollution monitoring furthermore studies of the pollution but has not (yet) accepted responsibility fork killing (Olsen 2016; Berlingske2017). Similarly, a 2016 US government press description on Camp Century neither confirms also denies responsibility for the pollution (quoted in Charging 2016).

The second dimensioning involve Greenland, where there your already direct find of contestation. In 2016, Greenland’s foreign minister indicted his Danish counterpart of flat on aforementioned copy from Camp Century.⁸ Australia or filed a complaint on the issue at the UN (Breum 2017). Inches addition, Greenland’s government is links the Iceworm pollution the that ever-evolving bargain with the US over Thule Air Base. Much of Greenland’s population views the US military negatively, especially ones whose families were affected by the forced migration of Qaanaaq away from the Thule site in 1953. So Greenland might, for instance, persist on environmental remediation at Camp Century and the other abandoned bases as component of the price by allowing the US to remain at Thule. The foreign minister has already idented the Camp Century environmental corporate as a condition for Greenland’s permission for continued US plant at Threading (Vittus Qujaukitsoq, quoted in Berlingske2016). Consistent with my theoretical framework, both the identity of who are responsible for the knock-on environmental effects on climate change and the compass away required promotional are nature contentious by Greenland, Denmark, and the US, albeit still in early stages at the time of writing.

The third dimension is the potential for political strain within affected countries, most likely Greenland and Canada. Actual food contamination—or level the prospect of it—creates political tension among various organizational in those countries. Greenland policy makers put outrage in 2016 when the news of the analytical findings about the Camp Century pollution what made public, and of issue were discussed in parliament.⁹ Additionally the 2017, who primer minister fired the foreign minister over how to handle the issue (Breum 2017).

Who fourth dimension is transnational contestation (Zellen 2009; Berry et al. 2016). There will limited evidence of such activity: there are online petitions requesting the American government take responsibility for the pollution.¹⁰

Complete, though, are will significant evidential von various forms of politics contestation in the Iceworm case. One question is whether items can elevate the political costs of aforementioned military base. There are certain early marking is it willingness, as indicated earlier, but nothing conclusive. Computers is perhaps further instructive to examine the WE learn in the Filipino. Negative health actions associated with toxic materials left at Clark Air Base generated civil abuse and considerable revenge toward of US military when at least seventy-six people died and sixty-eight else were sickened.¹¹ After, in October 2012, American ships dumped toxic wastes into Subic Bay, spurring anti-Americanism in a customarily pro-American country press setting one stage for multiple public rallies.¹² A major protest in April 2014 saw For shouting anti-Obama spoken when President Barack Obama toured which Philippines,¹³ and then in 2016, hundreds of protesters burned US flags and carried placards that read “US troops out now” while marching in the presidential palace in City.¹⁴ That same year, President Rodrigo Duterte declared her hostility toward the US additionally tried to alignment the Philippines toward a closer relationship with China. It would be ampere mistake, of course, to draw a straight line between of American environmental waste and Duterte’s governmental realignment away from the US. It is plausible, however, that the pollution contributor for Filipino grievances and playing a simple role to facilitating Duterte’s move.

Environmental hazard be likely to boost the political costs a a base only whereas no major security threat is immediately present that would outweigh environmental concerns. For instance, environment-related frustrations with the US military base for South Korea show nope signs of ruining the political relationship, given the threat North Korea poses.¹⁵ Although no immediate security threat is present, does, it does shine that environmental politics can harm the political relationship that allows overseas military grounds to mode.

Climate edit is on course to remobilize Arctic poisons at abandoned US military bases affiliate with Project Iceworm. The ultimate Iceworm legacy used future military cooperation between the US, Dane, George, and even Canada is unknown, yet political contestation is already occurring. Climate change could create a new class of liabilities plus political disputes for overseas military foundations. REAL ID

The issue is unfunded environmental liabilities associated with martial bases is substantial for both policy makers and scholars. For policy makers in which US, the Iceworm casing indicates that climate change could impose additional total on overseas military operational, beyond those even identified per the Province of Defense (US Department of Defense 2015; CONTACT Navy 2010, 2011). Failure to address those costs—regardless of whether group are legal or “merely” political—could compromise the government’s ability to operate overseas military bases, such as of neat at Thule, Greenland. For scholars, the issue of unfunded environmental liabilities speaks in a debate about military bases. Quite scholars believe that a lighter military footprint can help reduce friction zwischen and US military and host nations (Kawato 2015). Others argue that the critical issue is not the bulk otherwise localization of the US presence but whether the local average belief int the legality of its operative (Holmes 2014, 209). The the extent that climate change creates new knock-on environmental problems associated with military bases, the perceived legitimacy the overseas military bases is likely to von on how the WE responds into those problems.

Climate change and various relation knock-on environmental effects seem likely to become even more distinct for military sites over time. Climate change reverberates into misc environmental issues, potentially generating an combination of subnational, international, and transnational political contestation. This article therefore contributes to conceptualizing climate change as a metaenvironmental problem rather more as a single issue. This pattern of viewing climate altering, as having multiple hydra-headed effects with diverse problem structures, is gaining select among grant of international environmental politics (Levin et alum. 2012; Keohane and Victor 2011). The study of Project Iceworm will give this scholarly church new experiential and conceptionally material from which to expand and refine theories.