MSC 2022 Recap: Climate and Energy

Between February 18-20, 2022, world leaders and decision-makers came together for the 58th Munich Security Conference at the Hotel Bayerischer Hof to discuss the most pressing security challenges of our time. For several years now, climate change has been high on the agenda of the Munich Security Conference; this year, three sessions in the main program were explicitly dedicated to climate change, complemented by numerous side events. Moreover, as the effects of global warming span regional and thematic issues, climate and energy were embedded across the conference agenda and were part of the debate in sessions such as on the Sahel, the Horn of Africa, Arctic security, or food insecurity.

Six main themes linked to climate change strongly reverberated across the sessions:

Participants at several sessions pointed to the devastating effects climate change already has on human and international security. This includes rising levels of food insecurity, water scarcity, and displacement due to extreme weather events.  The panels on the Sahel and the Horn of Africa illustrated how climate change acts as an amplifier of conflicts, with resource scarcity fuelling tensions within and between states. As the "creeping climate crisis has reached a point of planetary emergency," as formulated by Johan Rockström, Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, at the climate session in the main hall, the nexus between climate and security becomes ever more visible.

Since the implications of climate change are already heavily felt in several parts of the world, a recurring argument at the conference was that the international community has to focus more on adaptation. This includes scaling up international climate finance for adaptation costs in developing countries.

Despite the shared awareness for the threat of climate change among governments and – as demonstrated in this year's Munich Security Index – among the public, as well as bold commitments to reduce emissions, confirmed at COP26 in November last year, countries across the world are falling short of meeting these targets. As one participant put it: "The climate challenge is on the agenda, but that does not mean that we are on the road to solving it." Both US foreign minister Anthony Blinken and US Special Envoy for Climate Change John Kerry underscored that COP26 must serve as a "launching pad" rather than a "finishing moment" on the path to net zero, and that the time for "business as usual" is over. 

Panellists repeatedly referred to the cycle of inequality and the climate crisis which was also analyzed in the chapter on global inequality in this year’s Munich Security Report. While the world’s poorest countries are often the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, they have the fewest resources for adaption. At the same time, this lack of resources makes it harder for them to pursue net zero strategies, in turn hampering the global fight against climate change. As current investments in green technologies are heavily concentrated in prosperous countries, this nexus between inequality and climate change is set to increase, depriving the Global South of sustainable growth perspectives, cementing inequality, and weakening resilience to climate change. As stressed by A.K. Abdul Momen, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bangladesh, at the climate session in the main hall, to break the cycle, the world’s richest countries have to scale up their financial support as well as the transfer of technology and know-how.

Speakers at several sessions highlighted that considering the different energy mixes and trade patterns of countries, there is no "one size fits all" solution for advancing the green transition. This must be considered when developing climate finance programs and when setting up energy and climate partnerships.

Controversy emerged over the role of gas as "transition fuel," with German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock arguing at the Townhall on Climate Diplomacy that while gas might indeed serve as a bridge, "the bridge needs an ending."

In this context, participants, especially from the private sector, rebuffed the perception of a sudden "energy jump" based on an "easy" technological fix. According to them, the greatest challenge is not developing new technologies but building up the infrastructure needed for a largescale deployment of existing technologies.

There was a broad consensus that cooperation is the only way forward to tackling climate change. This has both an international and a domestic dimension. As stressed by numerous participants, including COP26 President Alok Sharma, governments have to win the support of the local population for moving ahead with the climate agenda. To form solid majorities for green policies, the added value of climate action – environmental, economic, and social – must be communicated to and felt by the citizens.

Beyond the domestic arena, just transition policies need to be strengthened at the global level. To foster trust between economically strong and developing countries, the world’s richest states have to deliver on the 100 billion US dollar climate finance pledge and have to foster the transfer of know-how and technology, as briefly on in point three.

Concerning the broader international cooperation on climate change, US Climate Envoy John Kerry made repeatedly the case for bringing together the world’s twenty major carbon polluters, accounting for 80 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, as geopolitical tensions between the respective countries, most notably China and the US, are high, deepening climate collaboration will be difficult. While market-based dynamics could facilitate a “race to the top” with those countries profiting that invest in and lead on green technologies, in the current geopolitical climate, fair competition seems unlikely and protectionist tendencies are threatening to obstruct the green transition.

Given the international tensions, speakers underlined the need for broad, innovative coalitions, encompassing different governmental levels, the industry, civil society, and international institutions.

In light of the Russia-Ukraine crisis and the spiking energy prices in Europe, the focus of the geopolitical discussions on climate and energy was very much on Europe's dependency on Russian gas imports. The purport of both US and European voices was that Europe has to enhance energy security, including by fostering gas storage systems, and by diversifying its energy imports away from Russia. Investing in renewables and energy efficiency would thus also have a geopolitical pay-off, as stressed for example in the speech of the UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson and German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock : "[W]hy is it so difficult for us to formulate strong sanctions because we are highly depending, especially my country, on fossil imports from Russia."

Yet, as also analysed in the Munich Security Report 2021, participants highlighted that the energy transition itself comes with a huge potential for disruption. In consumer countries, reducing fossil fuels while ensuring steady supply will be a major challenge, most probably accompanied by greater price volatility, putting public support for the green transition under pressure. And while the power of petrostates is fading in the long-term, questioning the viability of their socio-economic models, in the short-to midterm, low-cost supplier of fossil fuels will gain in power as global supply will concentrate in their hands.

In addition to the "old" geopolitics of fossil fuels, discussions centred around new dependencies and vulnerabilities on the path to net zero. As China dominates supply chains for minerals such as rare earths and assumes a leading position in the manufacturing of clean technologies, the debate concentrated on the role of Beijing. While some participants warned that the transatlantic partners should not "replace dependency on Russia with dependency on China," others pointed out that these new dependencies are already a reality and that it will be difficult to reduce them in the near term.

These six aspects outlined above highlight the importance of addressing the rising tides of climate change by pursuing bold, inclusive, and collaborative climate policies. Given the interconnectedness of climate and security and the manifold geopolitical implications of the energy transition, climate and energy are to stay front and centre of the MSC's agenda. Because just as pointed out by John Kerry: we have indeed "some big things to tackle."

Julia Hammelehle is a Policy Advisor with the Munich Security Conference (MSC). Before joining the MSC, she studied International Relations in Dresden and Boston and pursued a Master’s degree in EU Politics at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). During her studies, she gained work experience in, amongst others, the House of Commons, the German Bundestag, the State Parliament of Baden-Württemberg, and the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law.