THE GEOPOLITICS OF CLIMATE CHANGE

Broadly speaking, national governments are conscious of their responsibility to act on climate change. Since 2008, natural disasters have forced an average of twenty-eight million people to leave their homes each year. Meanwhile, just as demand for food is growing, farms are regularly threatened with floods or droughts¹. Because of this, many governments believe action needs to be taken at a higher, global level.

So in 2015, 197 countries made an agreement at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris. The Paris Agreement asked countries to work together to limit global warming to an increase of no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius and to achieve a carbon-neutral world by 2050. The industrialized nations that joined fully included China, the US, and all the member states² of the EU. At the time, Iran, Iraq, Libya, and the eleven other members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) signed the agreement, but did not make it law in their countries. These countries' economies rely very heavily on selling oil. The developed countries that did make it law agreed to share finances and technology with each other and to support developing countries, which might struggle to act alone.

However, in 2017, the US withdrew³ from the agreement as some in the country believed it was unfair. They thought it allowed developing countries to industrialize more than the US and that the US was paying for them to do so. The US once had large car and steel industries, but these were heavily reduced in size from the 1980s onwards, causing high unemployment in some areas. Many wanted to bring these industries back to life, and some thought that membership in the Paris Agreement would prevent this from happening.

Even with this reduction in manufacturing, in 2020, the US was responsible for fifteen percent of the carbon created across the world-despite having only four percent of the global population. Among other things, this was caused by power stations burning fossil fuels⁴ and by extensive use of cars and airplanes. Some world leaders criticized the US for its position, and in 2021 it joined the Paris Agreement again.

The only country responsible for producing more carbon than the US is China. In 2020, the Asian superpower⁵ contributed twenty-eight percent of global carbon emissions. Even so, it remains a member of the Paris Agreement. While it does burn huge amounts of fossil fuels, China is also investing record amounts in renewable⁶ energy sources like wind, solar, hydroelectric, and tidal power. A 2020 directive by its government saw $360 million invested and thirteen million jobs created in the sector⁷.

These investments not only suggest that China cares about climate change; they are also a means of promoting China globally. When the US withdrew from the agreement, China was quick to affirm its commitment because it showed the world that China was progressive. This is likely to encourage foreign investment. China also hopes that being energy self-sufficient⁸ will reduce its reliance⁹ on other countries and the disagreements this causes. As things stand, oil-producing countries set prices and control resources. And, in the past, international disputes¹⁰ over oil have often led to conflict.

However, renewable energy resources will likely also cause conflict. The rare- earth minerals required to produce them are mostly found in less developed, less powerful nations. Lithium batteries contain graphite, of which Mozambique is the world's second-biggest producer. Solar panels require cobalt, which is mostly found in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Competition for these minerals, and for influence in the countries where they are produced, is bound to increase. Agreements on climate cannot end the geopolitics¹¹ of energy, only change its rules.

• economies rely
• rare-earth minerals
• affirmed its commitment
• but later withdrew
• aims to limit
• natural disasters

• progressive
• broadly
• directive
• industrialized
• affirm
• conference

The Century of Oil

As countries move away from oil to renewable energy sources, international relations will also change greatly. For over a century, oil has been a cause of tensions and conflicts around the world, and controlling oil has also been a way to keep or take power.

Used in industrialized countries from the late 1800s, oil took on a new importance with the start of World War I (WWI). For the first time, armies used vehicles such as tanks and submarines, which required large amounts of oil-based fuel. The Allied Powers had access to around seventy percent of the world's oil: Russia had large oil fields, and the British Navy controlled many of the routes in and out of the oil-producing Middle East. The US also contributed oil from its Texan wells.

On the opposite side, Germany and Austria-Hungary had few domestic oil reserves and relied heavily on imports from their allies in the Middle East. This meant a battle for control of the region. Germany also attacked US ships as they delivered oil and other supplies to the Allies. This, in turn, led to the US entering the war and contributing to the Allied victory.

WWI marked the beginning of what some have called "the century of oil," with many later conflicts occurring over its control. As the twenty-first century unfolds, the question for governments will not only be how to reduce carbon emissions but also how to secure access to the rare-earth minerals needed to do so. Unfortunately, this new century may see just as much conflict as the last.