A Critical Approach to International Relations and the Climate Crisis

From the industrial revolution to today and, likely, far into the future, the acceleration of anthropogenic climate change has been and will continue to be a central issue in global politics. No single state actor or collection of states can satisfactorily restrict global emissions to the point where it will have a measurable positive impact without the entirety of the global community buying into the systemic changes necessary for human and non-human life to flourish today and into the future. In 2017, China led the world with 9.8 billion tonnes of CO2 emissions (29% of global emissions), with the United States emitting 5.3 billion tonnes of CO2 emissions (15% of global carbon emissions). (Ritchie et al., 2020) Even if the world's two most advanced economies went to 0 carbon emissions today, human society would still release upwards of 20 billion tonnes a year. Realist approaches to the climate crisis, alongside performative Liberal attempts to curtail disaster, have failed due to the capitalistic doctrine inherent in these approaches. Only a critical approach can begin to unwind the tragedy that will inevitably continue to occur around the globe as people die and are forced to migrate due to climate change. 

In order to find a solution, we must understand what the problems are. Climate change is a serious international issue that affects all life on Earth. According to the World Health Organization, climate change is expected to cause approximately 250,000 additional deaths annually between 2030 and 2050 from malnutrition, malaria, diarrhea and heat stress. (WHO, 2021) The human cost alone should be enough for states to come together to end fossil fuel usage as soon as possible, and yet, we have little to no progress despite numerous international treaties and agreements. Additionally, the world has surpassed an increase of 2 degrees Fahrenheit since the early 19th Century, primarily due to human activities. (NASA, 2023) The states most responsible for the emissions have the least incentive to reduce them. Why is this the case? Economic and Political Power. The states whom produce the most emissions are also the states with the highest GDP, therefore reducing emissions would likely have a correlation with reduction in national wealth. Wealth and standard of living combined with the political control a state has by controlling the energy supply of another state are significant and relevant control mechanisms. Russian natural gas has become the primary source of energy for many European countries, and since the beginning of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the power Russia has over these states cannot be understated.

American foreign policy alongside most western allies has been one of extraction, accumulation of wealth, and therefore power. The wars in Iraq, Afganistan, and Syria, alongside the attempted or successful coups in Venezuela, Peru and Chile have shown how the Western bloc views cooperation and control. The world will never have peace or climate security while the dominate states of the North exploit the Global South for resources. Peaceful alliances prepare the ground for wars, and in their turn grow out of wars; the one conditions the other, producing alternating forms of peaceful and non-peaceful struggle on one and the same basis of imperialist connections and relations within world economics and world politics. (Lenin, 1916) Combined with the idea of relative power being more important that absolute power, especially if you have powerful allies, the realist approach to resource extraction, climate destruction and exploitation have all been relatively successful for the West, especially the United States and Canada. The issue is not that the relative gains are not important. They are. The issue is that these kinds of extractive enterprises and siphoning of funds, resources and labour from the developing world has allowed the continued extraction and burning of fossil fuels to support global empire. 

The tacit endorsement of climate change protocols such as Kyoto, the Paris Climate Agreement and membership in COP has failed to bring about any measurable improvements in environmental stability. Instead these states have used these agreements to hold other smaller, less powerful states accountable and reliant on, the energy produced in the West. These Liberal cooperative agreements never even get to the root of the problem: that fossil fuel extraction and utilization are unnecessarily bringing the entire planet closer to climate disaster. Profits and power of these controlling states have overshadowed any realistic chance we have to reverse course in time to stop complete climactic annihilation. 

So, what can be done? In an anarchic international system with states having their own sovereignty over the land and resources they produce, alongside the emissions that are necessary for their survival cannot be unilaterally eliminated. A global capitalist system of economic and political power generation is simply not amenable to reducing emissions and saving the planet for future generations. Capitalism is the root of the problem. Without complete and total systemic reorganization of the global economy, we are essentially running out the clock on human civilization. The exploitation of the global south alongside war and extractive corporate activities in these states has allowed the hegemonic powers of the the United States and China to grow and prosper while leaving billions of people in harms way for the benefit of profit and consumerist living standards. As time progresses, we will continue to see wars for the precious resources necessary to maintain this global capitalist economy fueled by carbon emitting fossil fuels and the blood of millions in imperialist and counter-imperialist wars. 

Realist and Liberal approaches in the international system have caused more climate damage than they have helped solve. Extraction and exploitation of the land, people, and resources has led and will continue to lead to conflict, both economic and militarily. Marxian and Gramscian approaches to the climate crisis are the best approaches we have yet to realize. (Pevehouse & Goldstein, 2013) Critical support of liberation and anti-imperialist movements alongside land defenders, environmental activists and scholars of the downfall of human society will hopefully allow future generations to learn from the mistakes of the past several hundred years. As we accelerate towards disaster, it is up to those who survive to create a better world out of the ashes of the existing world we live in today.

By Micah Dewey