L’article du jour sur « les origines climatiques des conflits » :
Syria, Yemen, Libya — one factor unites these failed states, and it isn’t religion
▻http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/11/30/syria-yemen-libya-one-factor-unites-these-failed-states-and-it-isnt-r
the connection between #climate change and Islamic State — and more broadly, between climate change and political instability — is not just a coincidence. It may instead be the key reality of the 21st century.
Et une très bonne mise au point dans le Guardian :
Is climate change really to blame for Syria’s civil war ?
▻http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/29/climate-change-syria-civil-war-prince-charles
The earliest reports on the subject were not scientific studies but military-led attempts to dramatise the importance of climate change by linking it to security interests. And the recent outpouring of claims about Syria’s civil war is motivated by a similar attempt – in our view misguided – to “securitise” climate change ahead of the Paris summit. While some scientific studies do find that climate change has conflict and security implications, just as many disagree.
On y trouve aussi une critique virulente de cet article paru dans PNAS et abondamment cité, traitant du rôle du changement climatique dans la sécheresse en Syrie et la guerre.
The case for international action on climate change is strong enough without relying on dubious evidence of its impacts on civil wars. Claims such as these are mostly rhetorical moves to appeal to security interests or achieve sensational headlines, and should be recognised as such.
