Climate Bill Supporters Say Global Warming Fuels Terrorism

While supporters of the Climate Bill have long touted that the proposed legislation is a vital boost for green economy jobs like solar panel and wind turbine manufacturing, the marketing strategists and lobbyists are pushing a new angle: national security.

According to activist and lobbying groups like Clean Energy Works, American Security Project, and the Truman National Security Project, global warming is a major contributor for feelings of unrest in middle-eastern countries as water resources dwindle and crop yields falter. For this reason, these groups are urging Americans to view global warming as one of the largest threats to national security.

TV Ads Promote Global Warming as National Security Risk

New television advertisements, created by a coalition named Clean Energy Works, show veterans from the Iraq and Afghanistan war imploring to US citizens to fight climate change. Their television spot, which aired after President Obama’s recent healthcare address, shows videos of angry middle-easterners and a woman pumping gas into an SUV to describe how climate change causes hardship and unrest that leads to a grim future. This commercial is part of a new talking point being pushed by climate bill supporters that would promote global warming to the top of the list of national security risks.

Though Clean Energy Works claims to be a group consisting of “millions of real Americans,” the coalition has had very little presence up to the launch of their television advertisements. The group does not have a web page, or even an address or phone number listed for a central office; their representation on Facebook and Twitter only has 7 and 12 updates, respectively. Despite this, the group calls out the “astroturf” Energy Citizens group and uses their Facebook page to call their 662 fans to rally in DC to support a renewed focus on the climate bill.

The Los Angeles Times quoted James Jay Carafano, a researcher from the conservative-backed Heritage Foundation who mocked the talking points of Clean Energy Works:

“Passing the bill would create far more severe, dangerous and imminent global crises… The law would ensure a steep decline in U.S. economic competitiveness and military preparedness. The consequences of a weak America would inevitably lead to a string of national security crises and an undermining of the nation’s capacity to deal with natural disasters here and abroad.”

The American Security Project, a bi-partisan group focused on domestic security and international business, countered the points given by the Heritage Foundation with another commercial showing global warming as a precursor to war. The group, chaired political leaders like Senator John Kerry, Richard Armitage, and former Colorado Senator Gary Hart, contends that the next “hotspot” for terrorism will encompass the earth. In a new press release, the American Security Project warns that areas like the Middle East and North Africa will see a temperature increase of about 6°F by the end of the century, which will lead to food shortages and political unrest. This echos remarks made by the liberal Truman National Security Project, whose “Operation: FREE” campaign is using a message of urgency and security to convey the importance of climate change to moderate voters and politicians.

Sponsored Research Suggests Increased Responsiveness to Security Issues

The American Security Project commissioned research that revealed that when global warming is explained in context to national security, 58% of Americans strongly favor “taking action.” According to the research, this message is much more compelling to most Americans than the argument that taking action against global warming will rejuvenate the American economy.

Carafano criticized this issue as a talking point for climate bill supporters in the LA Times, writing “As the Arctic ice melts and the environment becomes more benign, Arctic waters will become more available for fishing, mineral and energy exploitation, and maritime transport. Nations will compete over these resources, but it is how they choose to compete — not the change in the weather — that will determine whether war breaks out.”

Comments (0) · Leave a Comment

There are currently no comments.