t its annual meeting in The Hague, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member countries approved an increase in their target defense spending to an unprecedented 5% of GDP. Yet, as global defense budgets swell, so does a much greater, less considered threat: climate change.
In Article 5 of NATO’s founding document, an attack against one member state constitutes an attack against all. As climate change wreaks havoc on every part of our global infrastructure, militarily and otherwise, NATO needs to treat climate change with increased urgency and implement measures like a Climate Security Fund to help fill the structural gaps climate change will cause to nations across the alliance.
Traditionally, defense is constrained to the purview of weapons, borders, and armed forces. However, the threat of climate change transcends all of those things: no missile can stop rising sea levels, and no border agent can stop a wildfire. Military apparatuses cannot predict or address the multifaceted impacts of climate change. The consequences? Forced migration. Public health crises. Infrastructural collapse. As former U.S. President Eisenhower once warned, “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.” Today, as NATO nations pour ever–greater shares of their GDPs into militarization, his warning could not ring louder.
Each of the past 10 years on Earth has been the hottest on record. Across the NATO alliance, the strain has become evident. England is experiencing a record–breaking heatwave. France is in the middle of a heated battle over air conditioning. The 2025 Climate Risk Index, which analyzes impacts from 2022, ranked Italy as the third most impacted country globally. NATO nations are home to nearly 1 billion people, millions of whom are already suffering under the devastating impacts of climate change. This offers an opportunity for NATO to better integrate climate change into its frameworks through disaster-response mandates or climate–proofing its infrastructure.
Military infrastructure has long lagged behind emerging threats. In the 2012 presidential debates, Mitt Romney argued the U.S. Navy was smaller than in 1917. President Obama famously replied, “Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military’s changed.” Over a decade removed from that debate, these new threats are even more paramount.
Many U.S. agencies have begun to recognize climate as a security threat. NATO opened a Climate and Security Center of Excellence in 2024 aimed at adapting the institution and its member countries to address ways to mitigate climate change. While recognizing the threat is the first step, for NATO to truly lead in 21st century defense would mean treating rising sea levels and collapsing ecosystems with the same urgency as nuclear proliferation or cyber warfare.
Raising NATO’s spending to 5% of their respective countries’ GDPs will bring their collective military spending to $4.2 trillion by 2035. If NATO member countries were to reallocate a mere 1% of that $4.2 trillion funding (about $42 billion) to start a Climate Security Fund, both the institution and member countries could proactively address the impact of climate–induced disasters, climate–induced displacement, rising sea levels, and water and food shortages—which are invariably linked to conflict. NATO countries could even redirect these funds domestically to help member nations climate–proof military infrastructure. While climate change may not necessarily create new conflicts, it will exacerbate existing ones.
While a bolstered defense budget will shield member countries from traditional military threats, it offers no bulwark against the ever–growing threat of climate change. If NATO is to truly build 21st century infrastructure, climate change must be its first line of defense. Otherwise, NATO risks defending a world that no longer exists.
a global affairs media network
Global defense spending is up. So are sea levels.
The Afsluitdijk dam and causeway, constructed along the Netherlands coast to protect against rising sea levels. Image via Adobe Stock.
November 11, 2025
Global defense budgets are swelling, with NATO members increasing targeted defense spending to 5% of GDP. Allocating a tiny portion of that to a climate security fund would prepare NATO members for the security challenges of climate change, writes Cathleen Jeanty.
A
t its annual meeting in The Hague, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) member countries approved an increase in their target defense spending to an unprecedented 5% of GDP. Yet, as global defense budgets swell, so does a much greater, less considered threat: climate change.
In Article 5 of NATO’s founding document, an attack against one member state constitutes an attack against all. As climate change wreaks havoc on every part of our global infrastructure, militarily and otherwise, NATO needs to treat climate change with increased urgency and implement measures like a Climate Security Fund to help fill the structural gaps climate change will cause to nations across the alliance.
Traditionally, defense is constrained to the purview of weapons, borders, and armed forces. However, the threat of climate change transcends all of those things: no missile can stop rising sea levels, and no border agent can stop a wildfire. Military apparatuses cannot predict or address the multifaceted impacts of climate change. The consequences? Forced migration. Public health crises. Infrastructural collapse. As former U.S. President Eisenhower once warned, “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.” Today, as NATO nations pour ever–greater shares of their GDPs into militarization, his warning could not ring louder.
Each of the past 10 years on Earth has been the hottest on record. Across the NATO alliance, the strain has become evident. England is experiencing a record–breaking heatwave. France is in the middle of a heated battle over air conditioning. The 2025 Climate Risk Index, which analyzes impacts from 2022, ranked Italy as the third most impacted country globally. NATO nations are home to nearly 1 billion people, millions of whom are already suffering under the devastating impacts of climate change. This offers an opportunity for NATO to better integrate climate change into its frameworks through disaster-response mandates or climate–proofing its infrastructure.
Military infrastructure has long lagged behind emerging threats. In the 2012 presidential debates, Mitt Romney argued the U.S. Navy was smaller than in 1917. President Obama famously replied, “Well, Governor, we also have fewer horses and bayonets, because the nature of our military’s changed.” Over a decade removed from that debate, these new threats are even more paramount.
Many U.S. agencies have begun to recognize climate as a security threat. NATO opened a Climate and Security Center of Excellence in 2024 aimed at adapting the institution and its member countries to address ways to mitigate climate change. While recognizing the threat is the first step, for NATO to truly lead in 21st century defense would mean treating rising sea levels and collapsing ecosystems with the same urgency as nuclear proliferation or cyber warfare.
Raising NATO’s spending to 5% of their respective countries’ GDPs will bring their collective military spending to $4.2 trillion by 2035. If NATO member countries were to reallocate a mere 1% of that $4.2 trillion funding (about $42 billion) to start a Climate Security Fund, both the institution and member countries could proactively address the impact of climate–induced disasters, climate–induced displacement, rising sea levels, and water and food shortages—which are invariably linked to conflict. NATO countries could even redirect these funds domestically to help member nations climate–proof military infrastructure. While climate change may not necessarily create new conflicts, it will exacerbate existing ones.
While a bolstered defense budget will shield member countries from traditional military threats, it offers no bulwark against the ever–growing threat of climate change. If NATO is to truly build 21st century infrastructure, climate change must be its first line of defense. Otherwise, NATO risks defending a world that no longer exists.
