Thats a really good question, thank you. I agree re Syria and have written on this also. It is a good example of how climate change acts as a 'threat multiplier'. In regards to selecting Himalaya / South Asia region. We felt that this was a region where the story was not told. It is particularly relevant given that the weight of history - if I can put it that way - is shifting to this region. India, Pakistan, China, and so on. All major players where climate change will impact. We want to tease this story out more from a security perspective. But, certainly, to your point, the Middle East is critical also. Maybe if the funding arises we can cover this also.

Thanks for the question. As saying goes, we are champions of our own destiny. So, in many respects, the answer to your first question is 'no'. They are not fait accompli - we have the ability to shape our own future. To avoid the climate stresses, first priority is decarbonisation of the global economy. This is happening, but the rate of change is slow. The basic equation is that a reduction in global emissions reduces the threat posed by climate change. So, that is key.

You are correct in what you write; oceans are absorbing majority of heat from a warming planet. This is having all sorts of impacts on marine ecosystems (infact, this aspect is really one of the forgotten areas of climate change, somewhat 'out of sight, out of mind'). To your point, a warming ocean will impact submarine operations - that is a dimension that this film would explore, particularly in the Arctic. Interestingly, one security expert we spoke with mentioned that the melting Arctic and break up of surface ice is impacting operations right now (whereas once they could use the 'cover of ice', this is no longer feasible).

In regards to expanding thermal ocean. This is one of the contributions to sea level rise. It is especially pronounced in the tropics for obvious reasons. From memory - and I would need to fact check - but it contributes something like 20% of sea level rise (or something like that). The majority, of course, being from melt-water of glaciers / ice and so on. All told, rising sea levels are a major global challenge. this includes militaries that have vast infrastructure and other bases that will be (and are being) impacted by sea level rise.

>dmiral, sounded one of the major early warnings with a long list of future strategic risks related to the changes they recognized happening, based on the Ocean temperature trends the navy had recorded. Can you confirm this any part of this account of early recognition of climate change as a threat stimulus?

Thanks for the question min0nim. I agree, much of the focus has been on impacts across the northern hemisphere. Age of Consequences in this genre is also an example, documentary wise. And, on your point, I too have read Gwynn Dyer's book. In regards to Australia, lets take some top line impacts: (1) water security. It may not seem like it now, but signficant drying out (decades scales) across South East and West since the 1970s. Many cities are moving to desalination ("manufactured" water) but you cannot do desal across the food bowl of the Murray Darling basin! 2) Extreme weather - fires, floods, drought. Take your pick here. 2019/20 bushfires were just devastating to communities, wildlife, infrastructure and so on. A sign of things to come right there. 3) Broader and wider impacts on large scale systems like Great Barrier Reef (coral bleaching events and so on), kelp-forest 'kills', migration of fish (and other) species. These have both economic, but also cultural impacts. 4) Critical infrastructure and resilience. As stresses increase, the capacity for communities to cope is really challenges (as is the ability for governments to respond).

Health considerations are definitely an impact. I live in Australia and during the 2019/20 bushfires the ash cloud was enormous and hung over South East Australia for 5 days. In 2009, the bushfires directly killed around 200 people. Three times as many, however, died as a result of respiratory health related issues. So, indeed, health is a real consequence of a warming climate.

That is a really good question. Another angle to this question is to also ask: are their / will their be any "winners" from a changing climate (that is, does a once unproductive area or region become fertile for agricultural or other purposes?). To your question: climate change is a global phenomena so in many respects the environmental impacts are ubiquitous - it does not discriminate with borders etc. This said, some nations are more wealthy, live in more stable geopolitical regions, and are not as climatically vulnerable. Globally, I cannot think of too many 'regions' as being unaffected. However, there are some countries that are better positioned (in the short term) to adapt (example I might include are: New Zealand, possibly southern areas of South America, smaller wealthy countries (Brunei) ... but these are selective and have their own challenges).

Many and varied. Lets take two perspectives. The first is that climate change is considered a threat multiplier. That is, it is an additional thing to deal with by countries already under / experiencing stress. It can increase instability through water shortages, food (in)security, extreme events, degrading critical infrastructure, placing pressure on health systems and so on. This can lead to instability, to increase tensions, and in extremis to conflict. So, this is clearly an important element for militaries that need to weigh-up what they need to be prepared for, how they train, what type and balance of capability they have (and so on). The other dimension for militaries are impacts on their own infrastructure, bases, estate and so on. As a collective, militaries forces are worlds largest land holder and capital holder; sprawling, vast, global, and employing missions. So, climate change impacts this also - militaries are already assessing and evaluating this.

The overarching global requirement and priority is to drive down emissions. A reduction in emissions reduces the security risks. That is clear. In the absence of this - and noting that emissions have more than doubled since 1990 and at present no abatement - then we must adapt. What does this involve? Increased cooperation on resources, increased cooperation on disaster relief. An important consideration is for the larger better placed regional countries to assist near neighbours at greater risk and vulnerability. An example is Australia in relation to Pacific Island countries - this could take the form of assisting with financing (one example) of adaptation efforts.

G'day, thanks for the question. The regions under investigation are the Arctic, the Pacific, and South Asia (broadly defined - more specifically Bangladesh, India, Pakistan).