Military-to-Military Environmental Cooperation: Still a Good Idea for China and the United States

Thursday, March 01, 2012

As Washington begins to assess the recent visit of Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping, who is expected to become president of China early next year, the search for ways to build confidence between the two powers is on the table yet again.

I say “yet again” because finding practical ways to build confidence was a theme after a similar high-level Chinese visit to Washington in 2009. The context then was a tense naval confrontation off China’s coast where Chinese vessels harassed a U.S. Navy eavesdropping ship. At the time, Presidents Obama and Hu Jintao said the nations’ militaries needed to find avenues to talk on a regular and ongoing basis.

Today, the context is the oft-cited pivot of U.S. security strategy towards the Pacific that has elevated politico-military dimensions alongside the dominant economic frame. While this heightened attention to the security sector may suggest less receptivity for military-to-military dialogue in some quarters, it is precisely the greater salience of security that should encourage more – rather than less – conversation.

Back in 2009, the U.S. Army War College’s Kent Butts and I suggested in The Christian Science Monitor that natural disasters and climate change adaptation posed mutual threats for both militaries and that efforts to address these threats could form the basis for such trust-building exchanges. Such engagement is not a silver bullet, nor should it downgrade the importance of other bilateral issues. But the very nature of environmental issues as shared problems, makes them able to serve as building blocks for wider cooperation.

While some may find our piece quaint in the wake of the emerging zero-sum frame for U.S.-China relations, the U.S. military in fact has a long history of using environmental dialogue as a means to building confidence – including with the People’s Liberation Army. And now more than ever is the time to see such dialogues as lifelines for open communication.

As we wrote in 2009:
Environmental collaboration is unlikely to hit politically sensitive buttons, and thus offers great potential to deepen dialogue and cooperation. Military-to-military dialogue can facilitate the sharing of best practices on a range of environmental security issues. It can help both nations and their regional partners prepare for natural disasters – which are expected to intensify in a warming world – and improve the ability of civilian agencies and militaries to adapt to the impacts of climate change. It can also develop personal relationships that can provide deeper understanding in times of crisis.

For nearly two decades, the U.S. military has used environmental engagement as a key strategy to reduce tensions and improve relations with both adversaries and friends. In the wake of the cold war, the U.S. collaborated with Russia by jointly assessing the threats from radioactive waste in northwestern Russia. In the 1990s, U.S. Central Command conducted exercises with the newly independent Central Asian republics to address natural disasters and the environmental legacy of the Soviet era. In 2001, Gen. Tommy Franks, then commander of U.S. Central Command, told the House Armed Services Committee, “While environmental factors can easily trigger conflict, cooperation on these issues can promote regional stability and contribute to the ongoing process of conflict resolution.”
Read the full piece on The Christian Science Monitor.

Sources: The Christian Science Monitor, Foreign Policy, The New York Times, The White House.

Photo Credit: The amphibious transport dock ship USS Denver, courtesy of U.S. Pacific Command.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Search

Loading
Across My Desk adaptation Afghan DHS Afghanistan Africa aging agriculture Algeria Arctic Asia Australia Backdraft Bangladesh Beat on the Ground biodiversity biofuels Bolivia Brazil Building Commitment Burundi Cambodia Campus Beat Canada Chad China climate change Colombia community-based conflict Congress conservation consumption cooperation COP-15 COP-16 COP-17 Crossroads Cuba democracy demography development disaster relief Dot-Mom DRC eco-tourism economics Ecuador education Egypt energy environment environmental health environmental peacemaking environmental security Ethiopia Europe Eye On family planning Feed the Future flooding FOCUS food security foreign policy forests From Durban From Ethiopia From Wilson funding GBV gender geoengineering Ghana global health GMHC-10 Haiti HIV/AIDS humanitarian ICFP India Indonesia international environmental governance Iran Iraq Israel Japan Jordan JPR Kazakhstan Kenya Korea Kyrgyzstan land Latin America Lebanon Liberia Libya livelihoods Madagascar Malawi Mali maternal health MDGs media Mexico Middle East migration military minerals mitigation Morocco Mozambique NATO natural resources NCSE 2012 Nepal Nicholas Kristof Niger Nigeria Nigeria Beyond nutrition oceans On the Beat Pakistan Papua New Guinea peace parks Peru PHE PHE Champion Philippines Planet 2012 podcast Pop Audio Pop Tweets population poverty protected areas QDDR QDR Reading Radar Reading the QDDR REDD Rio+20 Russia Rwanda Sahel sanitation Saudi Arabia security Senegal Sierra Leone Somalia South Africa South Asia Sri Lanka State Sudan SXSW Syria Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Top 10 Tunisia Turkey U.S. Uganda UK UN urbanization USAID Uzbekistan video Vietnam water World Bank Yemen Yemen Beyond the Headlines You Are Invited youth Zimbabwe