I pulled my horse to a stop along the banks of a little stream, which was wedged between two grassy hills speckled with wildflowers and pika holes, to admire the view of the Tibetan-Qinghai Plateau’s rolling hills evolving into snowcapped mountains.

“Conflicts are 35 percent more likely to be resolved and remain peaceful for 15 years if women are involved,” said Carla Koppell, vice president of the Center for Applied Conflict Transformation at the United States Institute of Peace, at a recent Wilson Center event on the role of women in war, security, and peace.

Global warming is not just an environmental problem.

Goodman: “It is one of the most serious national security challenges we face. This is a risk issue.”

“Water security and management represent the cornerstone of global conflict prevention,” said President Danilo Türk, chair of the Global High-Level Panel on Water and Peace and former president of Slovenia, at a recent Wilson Center event on water and peace. “The only alternative to water is water, and therefore, the matter of water is a matter of survival,” said Sundeep Waslekar, president of Strategic Foresight Group.

For the first time, the Joint Doctrine of the Indian Armed Forces acknowledges that the “environment has emerged as a critical area of the security paradigm,” and warns that if environmental degradation and related issues increase security risks, the military will need to respond. Released in 2017, the doctrine lists a series of non-traditional security challenges linked to the environment that could influence conflict and war, including “climate change, ecosystem disruption, energy issues, population issues, food-related problems, economic issues of unsustainable modes of production, and civil strife related to environment.” While the military has taken steps to address its impacts on the environment, it can do much more to support the nation’s environmental goals and mitigate environment-related security risks.

The Trump administration’s first National Defense Strategy, which was released last Friday, outlines the U.S. Department of Defense’s national security goals in a world it describes as rife with great power competition between the United States, Russia, and China. Climate change – which some military leaders warn poses a looming threat to the effectiveness of American military power – was not mentioned, in stark contrast to the previous administration’s strategic priorities. National security and defense strategies issued by the Obama Administration highlighted the dangers climate change poses to national security, including “increased national disasters, refugee flows, and conflicts over basic resources like food and water.”

The new year promises some big changes for the field of environmental security—and some big moves for the Environmental Change and Security Program (ECSP). As we say hello to 2018, we wave goodbye to Roger-Mark De Souza, and welcome him to our team of advisors and fellows. And I’m excited (if a bit daunted) to step into his shoes as our Acting Director and tackle the challenges to come.

Fisheries are a surprisingly common reason for conflict between countries. Between 1993 and 2010, 11 percent of militarized interstate disputes (MIDs) – conflicts short of war between two sovereign states – involved fisheries, fishers, or fishing vessels. While the conflicts often involve fresh fish, the implications for global peace and prosperity stink like fermented herring. As climate change threatens to change fish habitats, new governance strategies may be needed to prevent these “fishy MIDs” from sparking broader conflicts.