At its root, it’s about climate change. The media will never, ever tell you this.

I’ve been very quiet for the past few months, but a potentially momentous event is brewing right now (February 21, 2022): the Russian invasion of the remainder of Ukraine that Russia doesn’t already control. (Missing from most casual reporting on this conflict is the fact that it’s been going on for 8 years; Russia seized a significant part of the Ukraine in 2014 and has been fighting a low-level war in the Donbass region ever since). If Putin pulls the trigger and the invasion goes off, which it seems likely at this point that it will, the largest war on the European continent since 1945 will begin. In the next few days you’ll see lots of “explainers” in the news trying to make sense of how we got here. But I predict that the two most important words in the background of this conflict will be missing from most, if not all, of these explainers: climate change. That’s fundamentally at the root of what Putin’s latest war is about. The world media is so skewed and twisted, however, and so conditioned to ignore all but a very narrow category of news regarding global warming, that most mainstream news outlets will never, ever, under any circumstances, link the Russia-Ukraine conflict to climate change. This is why I’m speaking up today: because no one else will.

Before I explain how and why global warming lies behind this conflict, let me explain briefly a historical concept you need to understand. When we talk about wars in history, historians often distinguish between the cause of a conflict, and its trigger. They’re two separate things. (In law school they teach this same concept in torts class as the difference between “cause in fact” and “proximate cause”). The cause of the U.S. Civil War was slavery. The trigger was Lincoln’s election in 1860 and the secession of Southern states. The causes of World War I included imperialism, alliances, income inequality and the fundamental instability of European governments. The trigger of World War I was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. See the difference?

Most public attention on the Russia-Ukraine conflict has focused very narrowly on the trigger. Does Putin want to bring Ukraine back into the Russian sphere of influence, where it had been in tsarist and later Soviet times? Yes. There has been a long chain of events, going back to 2013 and even farther back, involving the rocky relationship between Ukraine and Russia, and Putin’s broader ambitions to block, dilute or split NATO and the EU as checks to Russia’s influence. I talk about all of this, incidentally, in the online class I offer on my website about Vladimir Putin. So in the coming days, whether the Russian military buildup flares into a shooting war or not, you’ll see a lot of frothing about this kind of thing. It’s not wrong, but it misses the broader picture.

Putin is afraid of very little—but one thing, one of the only things, that deeply terrifies him is climate change, or specifically the world’s reaction to climate change. The large-scale abandonment of fossil fuels, which is absolutely necessary and inevitable, is his worst nightmare. The reason for this is simple: oil and natural gas is pretty much the sole basis of Russia’s economic power in Europe and the world. The largest and richest companies in Russia, with which Putin himself is deeply entwined, are oil and natural gas companies, like Rosneft. Those “oligarchs” you always hear talked about in connection with Putin, and with whom he has complicated deals going back to the 1990s—who are they? Mostly oil and natural gas barons. The importance of the fossil fuel sector to Russia’s economy cannot be overstated. Climate change, therefore, is an existential threat to Russia, and by extension to Putin’s own power.

Putin has done nothing about climate change. He is a climate change denier, or at least he professes to be; of course he’s smart enough to know that it’s really happening, but to admit that a changeover in the world economy from fossil fuels to renewables is necessary and inevitable would be to admit a weakness in his and Russia’s power and position. He’ll never do it. If Russia ever signs a climate change treaty, like the offensive toilet paper document that emerged from Glasgow last November (and which everyone has conveniently forgotten only three months later), it will never honor it. Putin will remain the leader of Russia for the rest of his natural life, and for all of that time he’ll defend oil and fossil fuel interests to his last breath. I absolutely guarantee this.

Ukraine is germane to Putin’s interests because it has traditionally been the breadbasket of Russia and the center of its economic gravity. If Russia is to maintain the fossil fuel order, it absolutely has to have Ukraine under its control. This is what Putin’s war is about! Whether he gains the rest of Ukraine in a Munich-style “peace in our time” surrender by Ukraine, NATO and Western powers, or whether he gains it by force of arms, he’s got to have it. Once he does have it, he’ll keep Ukraine dependent upon Russia by suckling it on Russian oil and natural gas pipelines. The wishes of the people of Ukraine mean nothing to him. They never did. He couldn’t care less about that.

There is a war coming—a world war—over climate change, eventually. Of this I have no doubt. On one side will be people and nations who recognize the necessity of a sudden and total change in the world’s economic basis as a means of saving humanity from impending climate catastrophe. On the other side will be people and nations like Putin and Russia, and others bought and paid for by fossil fuel interests, who will defend their fossil fuel wealth at all costs, including tens or even hundreds of millions of lives. This conflict will be the biggest war in history precisely because the stakes will be the highest in history: the survival, or the suicide, of the human race. While I continue to hope and pray that the issue of our collective response to climate change can and will be solved peacefully, if you read this blog you know that the historian in me has to conclude that the chances of this are slim and ever-diminishing. As time runs out to enact the change on the scale we need, the options to achieve that change narrow. Somebody will reach for a gun eventually, as people have done throughout the centuries when major societal-level issues are in play. I wish this wasn’t true, but as you know, I’m done with the sort of wishful thinking that suffuses the climate change movement like a noxious poison. We need clear-eyed understanding of the problems we face, and I believe that understanding comes from history.

I don’t know whether the Russian-Ukrainian war of 2022, if it goes off, will initiate that conflict. It seems a bit early; the sides haven’t crystallized into their final game-day form. But I do know that wars in history have a tendency to touch off other nascent conflicts in various places that seem, at first glance, unrelated to the trigger that starts them. World War II in Europe was triggered by Hitler’s invasion of Poland in September 1939. World War II was about the territorial integrity of Poland—for about six weeks. After that, it became about something else. Similarly, the U.S. Civil War was, in its first year or so, about whether a state could secede from the Union. After September 1862, it became explicitly about the existence of slavery and the definition of freedom in America. So, whether the narrow issues of Russian-Ukrainian politics that are being bandied about in today’s “explainers” are resolved peacefully or by war, if it’s war, don’t expect the war to remain about Russian-Ukrainian politics for long.

War is an insane policy choice as well as a deep human tragedy. It’s also disastrous in environmental terms; military conflict is carbon-intensive and a protracted ground war in Europe will send CO2 emissions off the charts. I hope it does not happen. But if it does, you should understand what lies underneath the headlines you’ll be seeing in the press or on social media. Global warming is the dominating issue of our time. Nothing big that happens in the world is unrelated to it anymore.

Source: What everyone is missing about the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Categories: Anecdote, climate, climate change, Guest Blogger, History, War and battles

Tags: , , , , ,

17 replies

  1. Thank you for this. It makes perfect sense. In fact in India oil prices have increased over the last couple of weeks due to the “war” and with that everything else has skyrocketed. While some greedy men are making money, the general public suffers once again


  2. Who is pushing this “war”?
    That would be US (owned and operated) NATO, Biden, and our rubbish UK government.
    Why? It’s nothing about climate change, international law or whatever.

    In Bidens case it’s because his ratings (and that of PM Boris Johnson).
    Why? Because as both of them are in the political mire and there is nothing like a little war to divert attention away from their failings.

    As for the EU?
    They always talk big, act small, and KNOW that they are desperately short of energy.

    As for the UN? Please don’t make me laugh, that hurts!

    Liked by 1 person

    • I’m not going to argue each point because there’s truth in every point. It’s not ONE thing — not here, not there, not in Europe. It’s MANY things and this is the result of a lot of different things going on in each country. Every leader has his/her personal reasons. I’m not privy to their thoughts — and neither is anyone else. It’s not like they tell us all about how they got to the conclusions they have reached, but I’ sure it is complicated and not even remotely straightforward.

      Wars aren’t caused by one thing ever. Many strands, many leaders, many nations find war a convenient way to deal with problems because when there’s a big war going on, who has time to figure out where its roots lay?

      I think Sean is right. I also think you are right and I am right. It’s NEVER EVER ONE THING. Thinking that way gets us even deeper in trouble. It is never simple. Simple explanations are inherently wrong. There is a lot of stuff at work. It’s not one guy looking for votes. Not TWO guys looking for power. Not NATO looking to expand. NOT ONE THING. Add up all the things that every country is experiencing, all the fear, all the trauma, all the failures and fears and HISTORY — and maybe — just maybe — you’ll have a piece of the pie, but you won’t have the whole thing because there is so much we don’t know. And never will know.

      Liked by 3 people

      • This is real life Tom Clancy stuff.

        Do we have a Jack Ryan to come to our rescue?

        Liked by 1 person

      • I would reply “Long live world peace”.
        Only it will never happen.
        Money and politics will see to that.

        Liked by 1 person

        • I used to think when we got out of a war, that we would stop them. Find other ways to figure things out because war is the last and most brutal way. And now I’m 75 and there has been a state of war somewhere for my entire life. It will never end because the people who can make war have their own reasons for wanting them — and they have nothing to do with any of us. I’m pretty sure no war has ever been caused by a regular person who just wants to make sure he/she and her family and friends are fed and housed and safe. War-makers are not US.

          Liked by 1 person

  3. Thank you, Marilyn, for sharing. I had been reading articles in The Economist, had friends send posts from FB (I’m not on it), and just have trust issues with so much I read and hear. I understand and believe what you have written. I have the same view of war. Greed, ego, power, money,…Not to be a simpleton, but I’m so glad I have faith in a future after this ends. Meanwhile…the pipeline from Germany to Russia impacts us here…Sanctions are here, will be coming, and skyrocketing costs of living is slowly killing hope among millions. Let’s add war???? Really?

    Liked by 1 person

    • I can’t begin to imagine what is going on in the brains of the people making wars. Now? Didn’t we just end a 20-year war? Mind you, I’m sure there are plenty more wars going on around the world. There never seems to be any fewer wars. I have waited my entire adulthood to see war stop — entirely stop — even for a single YEAR. It never has. If we were not in it, we were supplying arms or funds of something. If major powers like us and Russia and Germany and England would not supply the money and the arms, war would stop for lack of resources.

      So much of our national resources are tied up in PRODUCING weaponry, not to mention paying vast amounts of money to one — or in many cases, both sides — in any war.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Just heard a program on NPR regarding this very issue, along with other related factors.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. At first I thought you had maybe lost the plot with this post and then it made sense. War is waste and a depletion of resources to gain an objective. It degrades our environmental position with no tangible gains for humanity in that regard besides reducing populationto a degree. As you know I am scathing with the climate change debate as it focusses on just one thing and ignores all the other things that have created a diminished environment. War contributes to all those other things that damage the planet and yet this is just fine and dandy with all those virtual signalling elites who only care about themselves.

    Liked by 1 person

    • For me, the cutting down of the forests worldwide has as much to do with earth’s destruction as any other thing. It isn’t one thing that has made the mess we are in. It is many things. There are a lot of books written about how World War I was the fire that ignited much of the heavy industry and the beginnings of today’s technology — as well as the universal drive for oil and gas. WWII was the direct child of WWI — and all the wars that have happened since were spin offs of other wars that never solved any problems but surely caused more wars.

      How come no one gets it? War doesn’t fix things. Sometimes we fight because we are attacked, but most wars are at their roots far more complicated than protection and the damage is mind boggling.

      Endless, endless wars. i cannot remember more than a couple of years of my life when we were not at war and if WE were not in a war, then there was war we were not in — yet — but were supplying the weaponry for it because war makes people rich. Not you, not me, but other people.

      One thing has not caused everything nor will one thing fix it. My fear is not that we aren’t doing the one thing we need to do. My fear is that we aren’t doing ANYTHING. The single thing we do NOT need is war. But it sure does look like we are priming our weapons again.

      Liked by 2 people

  6. It is demoralizing that the central issue of our times is not even talked about and no serious efforts are being made to deal with it. We are marching, lemming-style, into our own oblivion.


%d bloggers like this: