Since its adoption after COP-21 in December 2015, the Paris Agreement has received mixed reviews. Some stakeholders, mostly industrialized countries, see the climate deal as a success. Developing countries have generally been more cautiously optimistic, welcoming the agreement as the best option under the circumstances.

Climate change is the world’s greatest environmental threat. It is also increasingly understood as a threat to domestic and international peace and security – recognized by the Department of Defense as a “threat multiplier,” by Secretary of State John Kerry as “perhaps the world’s most fearsome weapon of mass destruction,” and by President Obama, in an address to graduates of the United States Military Academy, as “a creeping national security crisis.” The Supreme Court’s temporary blocking of the Clean Power Plan highlights the Federal-State divide over how to address climate change, but because of its national security dimension, climate change also raises unique separation of powers issues between the president and Congress with regard to how the military can respond.

Despite evidence that natural resources play a major role in many conflicts – 40 percent of all civil wars since the end of the Cold War, according to an estimate by the UN Environment Program – a study conducted by Arthur G. Blundell and Emily E. Harwell for the NGO Forest Trends reveals that most ceasefire and peace agreements do not address natural resources.

It is “not sufficient to look at history for lessons on how we should prepare for and prevent future security risks in a climate change world,” said Swathi Veeravalli, research scientist at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Geospatial Research Laboratory, at the Wilson Center on January 14. Climate change and the extreme weather events it brings pose an “unprecedented” threat to human security. [Video Below]