S/PV.9547 Security Council

I would like to warmly welcome the Secretary-General, the Head of State, Ministers and other high-level representatives present in the Chamber today. Their presence today underscores the importance of the subject matter under discussion. In accordance with rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the representatives of Austria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Belize, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, Croatia, Czechia, the Dominican Republic, Egypt, Ethiopia, the Federated States of Micronesia, Germany, Georgia, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Liechtenstein, Maldives, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Myanmar, Nauru, Nigeria, Norway, Pakistan, Palau, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Singapore, South Africa, South Sudan, Spain, Suriname, the Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Tonga, Türkiye, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, Vanuatu and Viet Nam to participate in this meeting. In accordance with rule 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the following briefers to participate in this meeting: Mr. Simon Stiell, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; Ms. Beth Bechdol, Deputy Director-General of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; and Ms. Jimena Leiva Roesch, Director of Global Initiatives and Head of Peace, Climate and Sustainable Development at the International Peace Institute. In accordance with rule 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I also invite the following to participate in this meeting: Mr. Stavros Lambrinidis, Head of the Delegation of the European Union to the United Nations, and Ms. Laetitia Courtois, Permanent Observer and Head of the Delegation of the International Committee of the Red Cross to the United Nations. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. I wish to draw the attention of Council members to document S/2024/146, which contains the text of a letter dated 6 February 2024 from the Permanent Representative of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana to the United Nations, transmitting a concept note on the item under consideration. I now give the floor to Secretary-General António Guterres.

I thank the Government of Guyana for bringing us together to focus on the impact of the climate crisis and food insecurity on global peace and security. Climate chaos and food crises are serious and mounting threats to global peace and security, and it is only right that they should be addressed by the Council. A global food crisis is creating a hellscape of hunger and heartache for many of the world’s poorest people, and the climate crisis is accelerating with deadly force. Last year was the hottest ever. Both of those facts undermine peace. Empty bellies fuel unrest. In Portugal we have a saying — “In a house with no bread, everyone argues, and no one is right”. Both climate disasters and conflict inflame inequalities, imperil livelihoods and force people from their homes. That can strain relations, stoke mistrust and sow discontent, while diminished resources and mass displacement can intensify competition. Conflict can easily be sparked where tensions are high, institutions are weak and people are marginalized. And women and girls pay the highest price, just as they do when food is short and climate disasters hit. At the same time, climate and conflict are two leading drivers of global food crises. Where wars rage, hunger reigns  — whether due to the displacement of people, the destruction of agriculture, damage to infrastructure or deliberate policies of denial. Meanwhile, climate chaos is imperilling food production the world over. Floods and droughts destroy crops, changes in the oceans disrupt fishing, rising seas degrade land and fresh water and shifting weather patterns ruin harvests and spawn pests. Climate and conflict were the main causes of acute food insecurity for almost 174 million people in 2022, and in many cases they collide to hit communities with a double blow. I am dismayed to say that our world today is teeming with examples of the devastating relationship between hunger and conflict. In Syria, almost 13 million people are going to bed hungry after a decade of war and a horrendous earthquake. In Myanmar, conflict and political instability have thrown progress towards ending hunger into reverse. In Gaza, no one has enough to eat. Of the 700,000 hungriest people in the world, four in five of them inhabit that tiny strip of land. In many places, climate disasters add another dimension. Every one of the 14 countries most at risk from climate change are suffering conflict. Thirteen of them are facing humanitarian crisis this year. In Haiti, hurricanes have combined with violence and lawlessness to create a humanitarian crisis for millions. In Ethiopia, drought comes hot on the heels of war. It is estimated that almost 16 million people there will require food assistance this year, and refugees from the conflict in its neighbour the Sudan are adding to the pressure on already scarce resources. In the Sahel, rising temperatures are raising tensions, drying up water resources, wrecking grazing land and ruining smallholder agriculture, the staple of local economies. Against a backdrop of long-standing political instability, the result is conflict between farmers and herders. Meanwhile, globally, we risk a resurgence of food inflation as droughts sap the Panama Canal and violence hits the Red Sea, throwing supply chains into disarray. Without action, the situation will deteriorate. Conflicts are multiplying. The climate crisis is set to spiral as emissions continue to rise, and acute food insecurity has been increasing year on year. The World Food Programme estimates that more than 330 million people were affected in 2023, and it warned of an acute deterioration in 18 hunger hotspots earlier this year. In order to avoid mounting threats to international peace and security, we must step in and act now to break the deadly links between conflict, climate and food insecurity. First, all parties to all conflicts must abide by international humanitarian law. Far too often, that is not the case. Resolution 2417 (2018), on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, makes it clear that goods essential to civilians’ survival must be protected. The starvation of civilians may constitute a war crime, and humanitarians must have unimpeded access to civilians in need. The Council has a critical role in demanding compliance and holding those who breach the resolution to account. Secondly, we must fund humanitarian operations in full in order to prevent disaster and conflict from feeding hunger. Humanitarian operations were less than 40 percent funded last year. About a third of the money for those operations was earmarked for tackling food insecurity. Thirdly, we must create the conditions necessary to resolve conflict and preserve peace within and between countries. Exclusion, inequalities and poverty all increase the risk of conflict. Turbocharging our progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals — including our goal of zero hunger  — is the answer. We need massive investment in a just transformation to healthy, equitable and sustainable food systems. And we need Governments, business and society working together to make such systems a reality. Today we are seeing a grotesque disparity between allocation and need. Almost one third of food globally is wasted, while hundreds of millions of people go to bed hungry every night. And food consumption, production and distribution are responsible for approximately one third of global greenhouse-gas emissions. We must create food systems that feed the planet without wrecking the planet. That means aligning climate action and food systems transformation — as I called for at the United Nations Food Systems Stocktaking Moment in July — in order to help secure sustainable development, good livelihoods and healthy people on a healthy planet. That requires working together, and bringing all people  — including women, young people and marginalized communities  — into decision-making. We must also build and finance social protection systems with a view to protecting livelihoods and ensuring basic access to services and resources. And we must strengthen and renew global peace and security frameworks. It is vital that we make the most of the Summit of the Future later this year, where Member States will consider the proposed New Agenda for Peace. It presents a comprehensive vision for peace in our changing world, based on prevention and international law and anchored in human rights. And it recognizes the links between sustainable development, climate action and peace. Fourthly, we must get a grip on the climate crisis to limit the rise in global temperature to 1.5°C. Because climate action is action for food security and action for peace, G20 nations must lead a just global phase-out of fossil fuels, in line with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances. And all countries must create ambitious new national climate action plans  — or nationally determined contributions — by 2025, that align with the 1.5°C limit. We must also get serious about adaptation, while ensuring that every person on Earth is protected by an early-warning system by 2027 and that early warning leads to early action, as well as delivering adequate adaptation finance. Developed countries must clarify how they will honour the promised $40 billion a year in adaptation financing by 2025. And they must show how the adaptation financing gap will be closed. We also need substantial contributions to the new loss and damage fund established at COP28. And we need to support local institutions to take the lead in reducing disaster risk in their areas. (spoke in French) Fifthly, we must take action on financing. The best conflict prevention tool, bar none, is the Sustainable Development Goals. They need investment. Today the cost-of-living crisis and unsustainable levels of debt mean that many developing countries simply cannot afford to invest in climate action, resilient food systems or other sustainable development priorities. I have proposed an SDG stimulus of $500 billion a year in affordable, long-term financing for sustainable development and climate action. That includes urgent action on debt — breathing space for countries facing crippling repayment over the next three years will be critical. We also need to recapitalize the multilateral development banks and to change their business models to enable them to leverage far more private financing at reasonable cost for developing countries. And we need developing countries to prioritize spending on the Sustainable Development Goals. It is distressing to see Governments spending heavily on weapons while starving budgets for food security, climate action and sustainable development more broadly. Finally, we need to target the points at which food insecurity, climate and conflict meet. We must create partnerships, policies and programmes that address these challenges together — for example, by taking climate risk and food security into account in peacebuilding and investing in adaptation programmes that support communities to manage shared resources. The United Nations Climate Security Mechanism is designed to address the links between climate, peace and security in our work. And the Convergence Initiative was launched last year to support countries to bring together climate action and food system transformation. We must also ensure that climate financing reaches people and places plagued by conflict. The United Nations Peacebuilding Fund can be a catalyst in mobilizing other partners to help make this a reality. And I urge the Security Council to consider how it can best address the interlinked threats to climate, food security and international peace and security. (spoke in English) The message is clear: we can break the deadly nexus of hunger, climate chaos and conflict and quell the threat they pose to international peace and security. Let us act to do so and build a liveable, sustainable future, free from hunger and free from the scourge of war.

I thank the Secretary-General for his briefing. I now give the floor to Mr. Stiell. Mr. Stiell: I want to begin today by thanking Guyana for bringing this important topic to the attention of the Security Council, because there is no two ways about it: the less that is done to tackle climate change, the more conflicts the Council will be faced with. Only a few years ago, the world believed we could eradicate hunger. Today one in 10 people on Earth already suffer from chronic hunger. That number is unacceptable. If climate change accelerates, it will only become worse. Climate change is contributing to food insecurity and to conflict. Rapid, sustained action to cut greenhouse-gas emissions and to increase resilience is needed now to help stop both from spiralling out of control. The world is heating — fast. Rainfall patterns are changing. And storms are becoming stronger and far more destructive. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, food production is already lower than it would have been without climate change. And in the not-too-distant future, we risk huge supply shocks, where harvests fail simultaneously in major producer countries. If heating continues, food production will decline across many countries. In others, little will grow at all. Food shortages, price spikes and hunger are likely. Without climate action, they are almost certain. The links between hunger and conflict are well established. Historically, bread riots have fuelled revolutions and toppled Governments. Competition for arable land becomes fiercer in times of heat and drought. Food scarcity fas fuelled intercommunal violence within countries, and between them. The combination of climate change, hunger and war is a devastating one. There is no national security without food security; and there will be no food security without enhanced action to stop climate change. But I am not here today just to present problems, because for all of these problems there are solutions and ways forward, both inside this forum and in other forums, including the process for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Under it, our mandate does not expand to decision-making on peace and security. We can — and do —acknowledge the role that climate change and food security play in driving conflict in our reports. We can build partnerships and establish collaboration to address exacerbating factors. But it is my view that the Security Council also has a role to play. We must acknowledge that more can be done, rather than hoping the problem will go away  — which, of course, it will not. The Council should be requesting a regular stream of information on climate security risks. The UNFCCC can help in the development of those updates. But ultimately, this forum should be abreast of this crisis driver in real time to aid in better decision-making. For example, where the programming of vertical funds now acknowledge conflict sensitivity, they should also be climate sensitive. From the UNFCCC’s perspective, national adaptation plans, climate finance and new and stronger nationally determined contributions can reduce our vulnerability, and together with the measures outlined by others here today, help prevent hunger and conflict. Let me go through each of those important tools. Every country needs to implement a national climate adaptation plan to protect its people, its livelihoods and nature from spiralling climate impacts. And every national adaptation plan submitted to us to date identifies the improvement of food security as a top priority. Investing in climate resilience and adaptation, including changing agricultural practices towards regenerative food production, while working to nurture and conserve nature, will not only blunt the damage from extreme climate events, but can also ensure that future food security needs are ensured sustainably and universally, while leaving no one behind. At the twenty-eighth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, held in Dubai, countries agreed that now is the time to invest in designing, piloting and delivering climate adaptation plans for food systems, from planting new crops to better meteorological information and communication. Countries need money for adaptation, particularly developing countries that are vulnerable to climate shocks. Many of those same countries are already dealing with scarcity, fragility and conflict, but we are facing significant gaps in funding for climate action. And adaptation finance needs are at least 10 times greater than the current international public financial flows. Developing countries, not including China, need $2.4 trillion every year to build clean-energy economies and adapt to climate impacts. Those are large numbers, but they are investments in the future. They pale in comparison to the spiralling costs of crisis and conflict. Unlike rebuilding after war or natural catastrophes, adaptation funding is productive. It is an investment in better societies. Climate finance is an investment in thriving economies and abundance rather than scarcity, and it is an investment in preventing the conditions that cause conflict. Done right, climate finance will benefit countries with significant humanitarian needs. But not enough finance is flowing to extremely fragile and conflict-ridden States today. That too must change. While adapting to a warming world is now imperative, we must also do our utmost to limit dangerous further rises in temperature. Our tools for that are nationally determined contributions and national climate targets and plans. The action plans must be aligned with the goals of the Paris Agreement, cover every greenhouse gas and lay out how every sector of the economy will transition. In the light of today’s conversation, they must include measures to protect food security. All countries are due to submit those new plans by early next year. They need to be ambitious and keep alive the possibility of limiting warming to 1.5°C. Investment in adaptation, resilience and clean energy can increase prosperity and food security and help prevent future conflicts. Done right, climate action can help build peace.

I thank Mr. Stiell for his briefing. I now give the floor to Ms. Bechdol. Ms. Bechdol: I too would like to start by thanking the President of Guyana for convening this meeting and inviting the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) to speak. Climate and conflict are the most important issues with regard to urgent action to address global food insecurity. The scientific evidence and the policy direction are clear. Climate change is compromising food security, and its impacts are a growing threat to international peace and security. It is having an alarming effect on people and the planet, as well as on what I would like to address this morning, which is agrifood systems  — meaning how and when we produce, harvest, process and store our food. Increasing temperatures, changing precipitation patterns and more frequent climate extremes are already a reality and are becoming more intense. The climate crisis spares no one, but it does not affect everyone equally or in the same way. We know that the populations at greatest risk are those that depend on agriculture and natural resources. They live in rural areas, and they are farmers themselves. Their livelihoods are highly exposed and vulnerable to climate change impacts, which limits their capacity to respond and makes them prone to disputes arising from any scarcity of those natural resources. Strong viable livelihoods are central to mitigating those climate-related security risks. When they are threatened, an important pathway is created for how climate change can contribute to the risk of conflict. We at FAO, as a specialized technical agency of the United Nations system focused specifically on food and agriculture, increasingly find ourselves in that very space. We have heard it said many times — there is no food security without peace, and no peace without food security. But now, more and more, we are dealing with the impacts of climate change. We have seen first-hand how conflict leads to hunger and malnutrition, and it is no coincidence that half of the world’s hungry people live in conflict-affected zones. According to the 2023 Global Report on Food Crises, the main drivers of food insecurity and hunger around the world are conflict and climate change, with 258 million people in 58 countries facing high levels of acute food insecurity — Integrated Phase Classification 3 or greater. And more than two thirds of them, or 174 million people, are at that level because of climate and conflict. While there may not be a direct causality between the two, there is clear evidence that climate change increases risks and drivers of conflict and instability such as disputes over land and water, and that conflict contributes to vulnerability to climate change, especially for people who are forced to leave their homes and migrate. As many as 70 per cent of the most climate-vulnerable countries are also among the most politically and economically fragile. Climate change will undo the progress that has been made in alleviating hunger, and as it intensifies, it will create further disruptions and continue to be a driver of conflict. It is projected that 10 per cent of the world’s area currently suitable for major crops and livestock could be climatically unsuitable by mid-century, in high-emission scenarios. That is a further reduction of an already limited area that we depend on to produce our food. That scenario concerns all farmers, including small farmers, pastoralists, foresters and fisher folk, who bear the brunt of climate impacts, owing to their dependence on natural resources, soil, water and land. I see that on my own family’s farm in the United States Midwest, and I see it first-hand in places such as Afghanistan, Kenya, Somalia, Uganda and elsewhere. Conflict affects the ability of communities to produce and access food. It reduces agricultural yields and productivity. It displaces farmers from their lands. It destroys agricultural assets, disrupts markets and services, increases prices and even introduces new risks for human health. We have to equip farmers and communities to prepare for and respond to such crises and recover quickly from them. We have to help them build resilience. We are actually seeing the results of such efforts in a place like Afghanistan, where we are starting to see a significant decrease in the number of people facing acute food insecurity. We know those approaches can work; we just need to scale them up. The Secretary-General’s Peacebuilding Fund has been responding effectively to the need to address the intersection of climate change and conflict and the effects of heightened competition over natural resources. It works. FAO remains committed to supporting those types of projects and to strengthening collaboration with partners. Let me share just a few examples illustrating the complex, context-specific and multidimensional relationship between climate change and conflict. In West and Central Africa, cross-border transhumance is a long-standing traditional pastoral practice. It is when herders migrate seasonally, crossing borders with their livestock in search of water and pasture. Historically, it has been peaceful, but climate change and environmental and security pressures have altered those migratory routes. That has led to a steady increase in tensions within agriculture between farming and herding communities, often linked to growing competition for already-scarce natural resources, such as water and land, or to damage incurred to crops in the fields. This problem exists in Burkina Faso, in Mali and the Niger, where FAO and the International Organization for Migration are working together to reduce violent conflicts linked to transhumance through an alert system and mechanisms for conflict management. That is just a glimpse of our work with herders and pastoralists. But as we know, climate change and conflict affect all agricultural sectors, not just livestock. It affects crop production, fisheries and forestry, which are intimately and inextricably linked to climate change, and it creates additional pressures on accessing natural resources. In Yemen, FAO has implemented a water-for-peace project, which has helped to mitigate water-based conflicts, with women often working as the conflict- resolution agents. The project, which functions through a cash-for-work incentive, focuses on rehabilitating irrigation canals for participating communities in protected areas where water flows during rainfall. It prioritizes engagement among farming communities under the project to resolve local conflicts over upstream and downstream water allocation. Climate change, and the security risks it presents, knows no geographical boundaries. Cooperation is therefore needed at all levels to ensure the peaceful and sustainable management of shared resources. Let me conclude by recommending five actions to take in order to continue advancing this agenda. First, we need to prioritize investments. We need to build climate-resilient agrifood systems and local approaches that help build and sustain peace, drawing on climate-change adaptation, disaster-risk reduction and community-based approaches. Secondly, we need to request United Nations entities to regularly analyse and report on the risks and links associated with climate change. Data and information are key for targeted interventions. Thirdly, we need to improve strategic coordination at all levels and leverage existing mechanisms, such as the United Nations Climate Security Mechanism and the Climate Security Coordination Mechanism of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development. Fourthly, we need to source specialized climate peace and security adviser roles in more United Nations missions, especially those susceptible to climate change. Lastly, we need to establish regional climate peace and security hubs, as was done by the Office of the Special Envoy for the Horn of Africa. Let me conclude by simply saying that we cannot neglect agriculture as a key solution to the growing threats from climate change and conflict and their effects on food security. It is time for us to focus on farmers, pastoralists, fisherfolk and foresters  — the people who feed the world. We cannot afford to leave them behind.

I thank Ms. Bechdol for her briefing. I now give the floor to Ms. Leiva Roesch. Ms. Leiva Roesch: I thank you, President Ali, for inviting me here today and for making this issue a top priority for Guyana. Ten years ago, I was sitting at this horseshoe table as an elected member of Guatemala’s delegation. It is a great honour to now be speaking here on behalf of the International Peace Institute. I know first-hand how difficult it is to figure out where climate change fits in the Security Council. It has been a very long journey, and I have been a sceptic myself. Climate change is like no other issue on the Council’s agenda. It is not boots on the ground. It is not an enemy we can condemn, name or sanction. It challenges all our known assumptions on what an enemy is, and because of that, it could actually unify humankind. Climate change is by far the issue on which there is the greatest cooperation among countries and multilateralism thrives the most. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is the central place for diplomacy on climate change, but the Convention and the Paris Agreement do not address peace and security — that is the remit of that body, and Mr. Stiell emphasized that as well. The question is, how can the Council respond to the calls made by so many developing countries, from the Niger to the Dominican Republic — whose President is here today — from Mozambique to the Pacific island States, and now Guyana — many countries keep knocking at the Council’s door. When will the Council respond? This is not a question of if, but a question of when. The planet is warming at an accelerated rate, and we are dangerously close to a 1.5°C increase. The highest scientific climate body has been unequivocal about how all our human systems will be affected once we cross that threshold. And it is not science fiction, but it is hard to imagine these scenarios because they are indeed so apocalyptic. For the many of us who are parents, or dare I say, grandparents, that should send chills through our spines. But does that mean that we prefer to ignore them? The oceans and forests  — our greatest carbon sinks  — soon will not be able to keep providing that noble service. Extreme heat will become an unbearable reality, affecting crops, waters and our own very survival. Human mobility will be unprecedented — more than we have ever experienced  — and our record on migration is appalling. Warm-water coral reefs will cease to exist, deeply affecting global fish stocks and countries that depend on them. And as rising oceans claim lands and islands, entire cultures teeter on the brink, their ancestral homes vanishing beneath the waves. What, then, is the role of the Security Council? First, we need to rethink the link between sovereignty and territory loss, enshrined in the Montevideo Principles, as island States will need to keep their sovereignty even when they lose their lands. The pushback on climate experience in the Council has left a significant gap in responsibility, particularly for small island developing States that do not have a specific agenda in the Council yet face that existential threat. As we move closer to warming beyond 1.5°C, countries will experience compounding extreme events, disasters and economic shocks. For many middle-income countries, that is coupled with high debt and unfair rules in global trade and finance, as the Secretary-General mentioned. Those climate impacts amplify inequality, leaving women, children and the disabled disproportionately affected. The poor and vulnerable will be even more poor and more vulnerable. The role of the Security Council is not to replace the UNFCCC; rather, its role is to examine how climate magnifies existing realities related to peace and security, including and beyond the countries on its agenda. To do that, it can invoke Article 34 of the Charter of the United Nations, which, to paraphrase, stipulates that the Council may investigate any situation that may lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute or situation likely to endanger the maintenance of peace and security. I would like to once again emphasize the words “may investigate any situation”. Members of the Council could set up a provisional investigative body to better understand the link between food security, climate and conflict at current warming levels. Setting up such a body under Article 34 could help clarify, in a serious and scientific manner, the role of the Council in that regard. It needs to be a space that includes the full range of views on this issue, with participation by permanent and elected members — all members need to be seized on this issue. If we were to set up such a body — and the International Peace Institute would be happy to help — it would send a new message to the world that the Council is serious about the smallest of nations, because, after all, is it not the purpose of the United Nations to protect the smallest? The Security Council is not alone in trying to figure out how to address climate change. The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund face a similar challenge. All of our institutions established in 1945 need expanded mandates. Here, the Charter provides the mandate through Article 34, so it is mostly about expanding its practice. There is good news, though, because the resources are there to transform food systems. We just need the leadership and the will to repurpose the $638 billion in subsidies that go against climate-positive investments and barely trickle down to farmers. The money is there. Climate is therefore a challenge that is not intractable, unlike many others that the Council addresses. It can be solved through cooperation, innovation and a commitment to our shared future.

I thank Ms. Roesch for her briefing. I shall now make a statement in my capacity as President of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana. The challenges to international peace and security continue to evolve, and our understanding and approach must also continue to evolve if we are to address them effectively. I therefore welcome the perspectives offered by the Secretary-General and our briefers. The interrelationship between climate change, food security and peace and security is clear. Climate change and conflict are two of the main drivers of food insecurity and often overlap, creating a vicious cycle of instability and need. The assessment is that climate change is expected to grow significantly as a driver of conflict. We recognize, too, that armed conflict can create food insecurity and the threat of famine. Please therefore allow me to dwell for a few moments on these issues. Many may ask whether the situation is indeed a crisis, or whether these topics are even relevant for the Security Council. Are they a priority for discussion at this level? Just to allow those who may have such lingering questions an understanding of whether this is a crisis or not, I would like to point to some current facts. As we gather here today, an estimated 149 million Africans are facing acute food insecurity — an increase of 12 million people from a year ago. That equates to a risk category of three or higher — crisis, emergency and catastrophe. On the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification scale of 1 to 5, some 122 million of the people facing acute food insecurity are in countries experiencing conflict, with 82 per cent of the total accentuating the fact that conflict is a primary driver of acute food insecurity in Africa. And the same can be said for Haiti, with internal conflict being a key contributor to the food and climate insecurity that ultimately leads to governance issues. Based on the Africa Improved Foods forecast, it will cost $5 billion to eradicate the hunger caused by war. And then we have the issue of agricultural land taken out of production due to war. In Ukraine, the overall cost of the damages and losses for agricultural enterprises is estimated at almost $4 billion. Most often, those are small-to-medium-sized farmers with no insurance policies. I repeat — they have no insurance policies. That is millions of families we are sending to the poverty line as a result of war. We do not speak about it. We do not calculate it. We do not put it into the equation. But it is the reality. In Colombia in 2011, the Commission to Monitor Public Policies on Forced Displacement stated that between 1980 and July 2010, 6.6 million hectares of land had been abandoned or seized as a consequence of conflict. Those statistics and all that I am saying are publicly available. What have we done about it? We have done very little, because we do not see the interplay and we do not prioritize these issues as a consequence of war and conflict. Now let us look at the issue of war-induced displacement and forced migration. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has identified at least 108 million people who have been forcibly displaced, including 35.3 million refugees and more than 62 million who are internally displaced because of conflict and other factors. Of those individuals, 76 per cent live in low- and middle-income countries. I repeat, 76 per cent live in low- and middle-income countries. Let us look at the issue of deforestation in conflict areas. In total, and across all the conflict areas assessed, in 2020 forest loss increased by 10 per cent. Did we hear about that at the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change? Did we hear that deforestation as a result of war and conflict increased by 10 per cent in 2020? That is 3.2 million hectares. Based on the loss of woody biomass in tropical areas alone, that amounts to approximately 1.1 megatons of carbon dioxide. That is nearly four times the United Kingdom’s total emissions in 2020. That is the reality of the effect of conflict and war on deforestation and climate. How are we placing that in the equation of net zero? Is it in the equation? Because we are not seeing a decrease in conflict and wars. Let us move to another issue, that of land degradation. Go back to Ukraine. The war has destroyed $2.1 billion worth of farmland and unharvested winter crops. That is the cost — $2.1 billion worth of farmland and unharvested winter crops. Let us look at the issue of pollution. In 2019 alone, the United States military emitted 57 million tons of carbon dioxide, with the war in Iraq generating more than 141 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions in four years. I repeat, 141 million tons of emissions in four years. That is the equivalent of 25 million cars in one year. We are talking about electric vehicles — that war, over four years, was responsible for emissions equivalent to the emissions of 25 million cars in one year. The total amount of emissions after 18 months of war in Ukraine is estimated to be 150 million tons of carbon dioxide, which is more than the annual emissions of highly developed countries like Belgium. It has been estimated that, in the first 35 days of the Israel-Gaza conflict, emissions amounting to approximately 60.3 million tons of carbon equivalent were discharged. Some analysts project that the total emissions could escalate to an alarming 629 million tons of carbon, should the conflict continue for a year. I repeat: 629 million tons of carbon. And those are conflicts and wars as they exist. We have not yet calculated the impact on the environment and food in the rebuilding phase. That is another calculation that should be added to the equation. Most of the time, it is the developing world that carries the greatest burden. The question is: are we going to be bold enough to calculate those damages and assign a value to the damage as a result of conflict and war? Are we going to be bold enough to even address the level of criminality that exists in creating such damage? That is why, in Guyana, we believe that this is a matter for the Security Council. These are issues that are addressed by the Security Council, but the components that constitute food and climate are sometimes missing from the overall analysis of the impacts of war and conflict. I will not go into generational disruptions or the movement of people. The Secretary-General often speaks about the impact of that. I will not go into the dysfunctionality as a result of social costs and its impact, because most of the time social costs drive people back into subsistence living. When they have utilized one area of the forest, they move to new areas and clear them. Those are all issues that must be taken into account as we address this issue. Therefore, we strongly believe that a very targeted approach must be adopted. The Security Council, in addressing the issues of conflict and war, must take into account the consequential effects on food security and climate. Those issues are intricately linked to the rule of law, democracy and governance. They are all interconnected. We are therefore of the very strong view that the Security Council should outline a series of steps that must include a full analysis of the impacts. Just as we adopt measures to safeguard humanitarian interests, we must adopt measures in our procedures that deal with the effect on food and climate, at a minimum. We must be bold enough. We have the ability. We have the political will. We must now incorporate measures in the Security Council to deal with climate and food as it relates to wars and conflict. I now resume my functions as President of the Council. I call on the Minister of Transport of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria.

At the outset, I would like to convey you Sir, the President of Guyana, Mr. Mohamed Irfaan Ali, the greetings of your brother, the President of the Republic of Algeria, Mr. Abdelmadjid Tebboune. I would like to express to you our thanks and appreciation for convening this thematic important meeting to discuss the complex, interlinked relationships among climate, food security and conflict. I would also like to thank the Secretary- General of the United Nations, Mr. António Guterres, for his comprehensive briefing. I commend as well the valuable contributions of Mr. Simon Stiell, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; Ms. Beth Bechdol, Deputy Director- General of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; and Ms. Jimena Leiva Roesch. I thank them all for enriching our discussion. There is no doubt that climate change multiplies the threats facing our States to varying degrees. Rising temperatures, changing weather patterns and sea level rise are all factors that disrupt agricultural production, force people to move and heighten competition over vital resources such as water and lands, thereby fuelling conflict and instability, especially in vulnerable and conflict-affected areas. All of that has a negative impact on the stability and security of countries in the South and deepens growth disparities. In that vein, our countries seek to find practical solutions that enable them to provide food and address climate change to meet their sustainable development needs and to prevent our communities from spiralling into crises. Accordingly, Algeria has spared no effort to provide all the conditions necessary to ensure the development and sustainability of its national food systems and agricultural sector. That is achieved by developing strategic sectors, integrating renewable energy into rural production and developing genetic resources and resilient crops that are adapted to climate change. Algeria is also building the green belt, well aware of its positive impact on combating desertification and land degradation and on reducing dust storms and sandstorms. It also helps to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and adapt to climate change. The Security Council should be commended for its role, as its primary responsibility is the maintenance of international peace and security. By convening such important thematic debates, the Council raises public awareness and sounds the alarm in relation to some of the issues that pose a threat to international security and stability, such as the interconnection between the phenomena of climate change, food security and conflict. As my country’s contribution to today’s important discussion, the Algerian delegation would like to propose the following actions. First, conflict prevention and conflict resolution mechanisms must be promoted. Taking proactive measures for conflict prevention and addressing root causes of conflicts are crucial to reducing risks and promoting stability on the long term. Secondly, we must build resilient communities. We need to invest in building the resilience of societies and ecological systems in the face of the impacts of climate change. That is to be achieved by supporting sustainable agricultural practices and promoting water conservation, as well as through sound natural resource management. Thirdly, we must address the root causes of food insecurity by diagnosing and identifying weaknesses and imbalances in production systems and the supply chain, addressing those causes collectively, in particular through comprehensive economic development, reducing poverty and inequality and promoting good governance. The access of agricultural products from countries of the South to international markets should be promoted, and trade barriers should be lifted. Fourthly, we must enhance international cooperation by building multilateral partnerships to share knowledge and resources and support international organizations, such as the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the International Fund for Agricultural Development and the World Food Programme. Cooperation should also be enhanced in developing climate-change adaptation strategies. Fifthly, there should be mechanisms that let developing countries in particular receive enough and adequate financial support. Lastly, we must promote innovation opportunities, scientific research and development in agricultural fields related to climate change early-warning systems. Algeria firmly believes that the best solution to address climate change, food insecurity and instability throughout the world is closely linked to us upholding international law and its provisions, without discrimination or double standards. A case in point is the tragic situation in which the Palestinian people of the Gaza Strip are living. For more than five months, those people have been subjected to intense shelling and destruction of all vital facilities by the occupying Power. The result is more than 28,000 martyrs and twice the number of people wounded and displaced. The shelling left nothing alive and led to a suffocating food crisis and a deteriorating environmental situation in the region, which is proof of the occupying Power’s disregard for the most basic moral principles and its disregard for international humanitarian frameworks and binding international rules. Notwithstanding the gravity of that horrendous situation, the international community is a bystander in the face of those flagrant violations, instead of putting an end to the Zionist aggression and its ensuing serious harm on humankind, nature and the environment alike. One of the most important United Nations humanitarian relief agencies is subjected to a systematic defamation campaign aimed at undermining its credibility and drying up its sources of funding for meeting the basic needs of the people. In that context, Algeria calls on the international community, in particular the Security Council given its broad powers conferred upon it by the Charter of the United Nations in relation to international peace and security, to shoulder their responsibilities, put an immediate end to the suffering of the Palestinian people, improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza and ensure the immediate, continuous and adequate delivery of humanitarian aid to the people affected. In conclusion, I would like to recall once again that climate change, food insecurity and conflict-related challenges require firm commitment and concerted action from the international community. For our part, as a responsible member of the international community, Algeria stands ready to contribute to collective efforts in order to ensure peace, security and prosperity for all.

I now call on the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency of the United States of America.

It is an honour to be with participants today. I thank you, President Ali, for hosting us today and for your exemplary leadership in tackling climate and food insecurity through the Caribbean Community and Common Market. For years, climate change has been the topic of conversation on the world stage and its impact is far- reaching, as we can see with our very own eyes — from increased crop failures to water insecurity to increasing extreme weather events, the impacts of climate change exacerbate food insecurity for many and worsen instability for all of us. No one is exempt. Those of us around the table and in the Chamber represent every corner of the globe. I am sure Council members all are aware that last year the Horn of Africa experienced its worst drought in recorded history. The World Food Programme estimated that more than 23 million people across Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia are facing severe hunger. We know that floods in Somalia have driven close to half a million people from their homes, and approximately 4.3 million people are facing crisis or worse levels of hunger, exacerbating the security challenges Somalia is facing. Those are only a few examples of how climate change can impact lives globally. And no country is immune from those effects, not even the United States. In 2022, very low food security households in the United States increased, and roughly 36 per cent of United States households with incomes below the federal poverty line were food insecure. That is simply unacceptable. Since day one as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, I have committed tens of billions of dollars to ensuring that all people  — regardless of the colour of their skin, the community they live in or the money in their pockets  — have clean air to breathe, clean water to drink and the opportunity to live a healthy life. The impacts of climate change and food insecurity often times disproportionately affect those most vulnerable among us. And in response we have three interlinked priorities for transforming the food system. Thanks to President Biden’s leadership, the United States is supporting food security and nutrition for all, tackling climate change mitigation and adaptation, and creating inclusive and equitable food systems that address the needs of the most vulnerable communities. In December, at the twenty-eighth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, in the United Arab Emirates, I was proud to launch the National Strategy for Reducing Food Loss and Waste and Recycling Organics. Food loss and waste represent 8 per cent of global anthropogenic greenhouse-gas emissions. When food is wasted, so is the opportunity to nourish people. When food is wasted, so are the resources that were used to produce, process, distribute and prepare that food. Reducing food loss and waste is critically important for our climate and will help to provide social and economic benefits, leading to an increase in stability and security across the globe. The United States is also working with the United Nations Environment Programme to help to identify sources of food waste in rapidly urbanizing areas of developing countries. At the same time, it is essential that we ensure the most vulnerable have access to food. That is why the United States is honoured to fund more than one third of the World Food Programme’s budget. Food insecurity is present in the United States, in Guyana, in rural areas and in cities, and the impacts of climate change on reducing food security can be seen both on land and at sea. With rising temperatures and ocean acidification, critical blue economy food sources are at risk and so are the people that rely on them. As global leaders, we have a responsibility to foster conditions for increased peace and security in the world. Our work both inside and outside this Chamber is preventing and reducing food insecurity while addressing climate change and its impacts. We must continue to work together to achieve our goals, and we must remain relentless in that pursuit.

Let me congratulate you, Mr. President, on assuming the presidency of the Security Council and thank you, Sir, for convening this open debate on the highly pressing topic of climate change and food insecurity. The Council’s role in advancing prevention and sustaining peace in a world with a rapidly changing climate is essential. I would also like to thank the briefers for highlighting the complexity of the interdependence of climate change, food security and peace. Climate change-induced weather extremes, such as droughts and floods, lead to natural resource shortages and food insecurity. Already fragile communities are usually hit the hardest. Slovenia follows with great concern how climate change has exposed millions of people in the Horn of Africa to acute food insecurity. Conflict risks escalate amid food and water scarcity. The growing gap between water supply and demand might lead to even more conflicts over water resources, arable land and food, as we see across the Sahel. On the other hand, armed conflicts also often lead to the devastation of food systems. The war in the Sudan has disrupted the crops and has left the food markets empty. The war in Gaza has devastated water infrastructure and the natural environment, considerably adding to the extreme suffering of the civilian population, already facing severe food shortages. Slovenia is gravely concerned about the impact of the war in Ukraine and its long-term consequences on global food supply chains. Compliance with international humanitarian and human rights law is of paramount importance. Finally, armed conflicts affect the human and natural environment long after the guns go silent. Soil degradation, water pollution, habitat destruction and dangers posed by landmines and unexploded ordnance hinder recovery and the restoration of food systems after the war. The United Nations system must use all tools at its disposal, including the full, equal and meaningful participation of women, in addressing climate change and food insecurity. That is key to boosting inclusive, sustainable development and to building the resilience of affected societies. Millions around the world are bearing the brunt of the changing climate, with women, children and older persons hit the hardest. Eating last and eating least is a daily reality for mothers in the most fragile communities. Emergency humanitarian relief and development cooperation in the field of climate adaptation and mitigation must be complemented with endeavours for peace and security. And the Security Council must play its part. Climate change is a defining challenge of our time. It poses a direct existential threat to many United Nations Member States, and it can act as a driver of conflicts. The transboundary nature of climate change and food insecurity demands a response from the international community as a whole. We, as the members of the Security Council, have a challenging task ahead of us — preserving peace and security in the context of addressing issues related to the effects of climate change that are relevant to our mandate. We can do that by looking at all situations on the Security Council’s agenda through a climate-sensitive lens. The climate security mechanism and its network of climate security advisers can significantly contribute to that end. We can also tap into the potential of new technologies and early-warning systems. Satellite imagery and artificial intelligence, for example, revolutionized the way we predict climate threats and their impact on food and water security and migration patterns to identify potential triggers of conflict before they escalate. Prevention is key. As this debate shows, there is a strong need for the Council to address the adverse effects of climate change and food insecurity on peace and security. Slovenia stands ready to take part in all such efforts.

Since the creation of the United Nations, Member States have made remarkable progress together. For a long time, conflicts and food insecurity were on the decline. Unfortunately, we failed to stay the course. Over the past decade, acute food insecurity has massively increased. Despite the targets set by the 2030 Agenda, nearly 800 million people are facing chronic hunger. Conflict is the primary cause, as demonstrated by the risk of famine in Gaza and the growing food insecurity in the Sudan. In other contexts on the Security Council’s agenda, climate change is a destabilizing factor. To promote and consolidate peace, we need to better understand the interactions between those three dimensions. This debate is therefore very timely. We would like to thank Guyana for bringing us together to discuss this topic. We also thank the Secretary-General, as well as Mr. Stiell, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Ms. Bechdol, the Deputy Director-General of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, and Ms. Leiva Roesch, for their briefings. Their statements leave no room for doubt  — we need enhanced multilateralism. While the objective that unites us remains the same as it was nearly 80 years ago, the world has changed. Challenges are increasingly interconnected. We must therefore find new ways to consolidate peace. The New Agenda for Peace points us in the direction of prevention. Thanks to scientific progress, various early-warning systems have been developed for food insecurity, conflicts and climate emergencies. We now need to ensure that they can work together. Indeed, the related challenges call for networked systems that enable data to be linked. Only then can we avoid blind spots in prevention and act to ensure long-term food security. Better integration among the various actors is also necessary. We welcome the collaboration between the Security Council and the United Nations system as a whole, as well as with regional organizations such as the African Union, regional economic organizations, local players and science. With that objective in mind, Switzerland recently organized dialogues on the impact of climate change and conflict on food security with all those stakeholders. The New Agenda for Peace also proposes concrete paths for the Council’s action. In order to develop context-specific responses, the Council must take into account the impact of climate change on peace and security, for example, by mandating United Nations missions to analyse the risks associated with climate change. Food security must also be part of the equation. The Council must also serve as a platform for early warning and for mobilizing the efforts of the international community. Of course, conflict, hunger and climate change interact differently in each context. That is clear from discussions held in the Informal Group of Experts on climate and security that we chair with Mozambique. But the result is always the same  — more instability and insecurity. We are witnessing that trend in the Sahel, Myanmar and Haiti. To take action against conflict-induced hunger, the Council adopted a clear basis in resolution 2417 (2018). As focal points within the Council, alongside Guyana, we are committed to facilitating its implementation. With regard to the security impact of climate change, progress has been made on a case-by-case basis in several resolutions. We support the search for consensus among Council members so that a strategic framework for consistent and responsible action in the face of climate challenges can be adopted. We have the tools to reinforce prevention. What is needed is the political will to harness them. That is our duty in the face of the triple scourge of conflict, hunger and climate change. As the President mentioned in his statement, given that the most vulnerable populations are disproportionately affected, we must do our utmost to ensure that international law is respected. In the face of the suffering caused by the violations of these universal norms, we cannot simply rely on the population’s resilience. I would like to conclude by reminding the Council that interconnected challenges require integrated responses. By making prevention a political priority, the New Agenda for Peace can put us on the right track. The Summit for the Future will be an opportunity for us to embark upon it together.

Japan highly commends the President’s initiative to hold this important meeting. I would also like to thank the briefers for their insightful inputs. Climate change, food security and conflict are interlinked in complex ways. In its 2022 national security strategy, Japan clearly recognizes climate change as a security issue that affects the very existence of humankind. Japan has raised the need for efforts within the international community to address climate change. These challenges are not only critical for small island developing States and other vulnerable and developing countries, but also affects international peace and security. It is therefore important for the Council to tackle them. The Security Council must work, with the determination to leave no one behind, to achieve a world in which human dignity is protected and strengthened, by addressing emerging risks such as climate change, food and energy insecurity and infectious diseases, among others. It is insufficient to tackle each risk separately. We believe that a comprehensive approach, including enhancing the resilience of society, is the key to building and sustaining peace. From that perspective, last year, Japan held an open debate at the Council on peacebuilding (see S/PV.9250), stressing the importance of investing in people to strengthen the resilience of society for sustaining peace. In addition, last month Japan co-hosted, with Guyana and Mozambique, an Arria Formula meeting on conflict prevention last month. At these meetings, we recognized the importance of conflict prevention and sustaining peace through a humanitarian, development and peace nexus approach, which necessarily includes the empowerment of women, youth and vulnerable people. Japan will continue to work vigorously on those issues during our upcoming presidency in March. We must make full use of the functions of the United Nations to better address the issues facing the international community. In particular, the Security Council could make better use of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). The PBC should continue to broaden its scope to cover matters that can affect conflicts, such as those arising from climate change and food insecurity, and actively provide recommendations to the Council. As an informal coordinator between the Security Council and PBC this year, Japan will spare no effort to enhance close collaboration between the two entities, with a view to more effectively and sustainably maintaining peace and security. In May, we issued the Hiroshima Action Statement for Resilient Global Food Security, together with countries representing various regions around the world. The Hiroshima Action Statement is a comprehensive guideline for responding to the immediate food security crisis, as well as for establishing more sustainable and resilient agriculture and food systems in the medium and long term. In that connection, we once again emphasize that comprehensive approaches would be more effective in thwarting increases in the risks created by climate change and breaking the vicious cycles that create further risk. Based on that perspective, Japan has continued to support all efforts to lower emissions and develop climate resilience, including by assisting developing countries with both climate mitigation and adaptation. For instance, we have committed to mobilizing up to $70 billion in climate finance from both the public and private sectors over a five-year period through 2025, in order to support developing countries in combating climate change. We hope that will help to alleviate the impacts of climate change, preventing them from spilling over into food insecurity and reducing the incidence or worsening of conflicts. As I mentioned, Japan will assume the presidency of the Council next month. We will continue to contribute actively to realizing sustainable peace and stability, based on the fundamental principle that human rights and human dignity are of the utmost importance.

Mozambique highly commends the presidency of Guyana for convening today’s crucial high-level open debate on the impact of climate change and food insecurity on the maintenance of international peace and security. I have the honour to convey warm greetings from President Filipe Jacinto Nyusi of Mozambique to you, Mr. President, as President of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana and the Security Council. We welcome your participation and leadership in this debate. It is a testimony to the importance that Guyana attaches to the topic of climate change as a global challenge to international peace and security. We pay tribute to your country’s presidency in steering the difficult agenda of the Security Council during this month of February. We are also grateful to the Secretary-General for his insightful statement on the topic. We thank Mr. Simon Stiell, the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Ms. Beth Bechdol, the Deputy Director-General of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, and the civil society briefer, Ms. Jimena Leiva Roesch, for their important briefings to the Council. We are all aware that climate change exacerbates food insecurity, leading to social disruption and displacement. As a consequence, the numbers of people suffering acute food insecurity have risen significantly, emphasizing the interconnectedness of climate, conflict and food systems. The interplay between those issues creates a serious challenge to the maintenance of international peace and security. In fact, it is one of the most pressing confronting the global community today. We in Mozambique are witnesses to the disproportionate impact that climate change and food insecurity have had on our own people. Like Mozambique, the most vulnerable countries of Africa and small island States have been seriously threatened by weather events and disasters. Our countries are facing acute security and development challenges, particularly with regard to food security and the cyclical occurrence of extreme events. The natural phenomena affecting them exacerbate tensions and conflicts among communities, with a disproportionate impact on women and children. In that context, Mozambique associates itself with those voices and initiatives, as reflected in resolutions 2349 (2017) and 2417 (2018). They are calling for us to redouble our collective efforts to promote a greater understanding of the linkages between climate and peace and security. In our view, that is critical to fostering a common understanding on the need for a better coordination of responses and solutions. We need to change the paradigm of perceptions on the maintenance of international peace and security globally so that our peoples and their rights are respected and protected against conflict-induced situations. Effectively combating the impact of climate change and pursuing prospects for reducing food insecurity are critical global challenges that must be addressed collectively, with a sense of urgency and responsibility. In that regard, we commend the recent decision at the twenty-eighth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change whereby the world stressed the importance of seriously addressing climate change by providing financial and technical support to the most vulnerable nations in order to enable them to respond to adaptation challenges. We therefore believe that cooperation among the various United Nations organs, agencies and programmes, including the Security Council, will strengthen our capacity to address climate change and food insecurity in order to achieve the noble goal of maintaining international peace and security. Mozambique would like to emphasize that addressing climate-related security risks requires a holistic approach that among other things ought to take into account environmental, economic, social and political dimensions in an integrated manner. It is a collective responsibility to safeguard peace and security in the face of climate challenges. By recognizing the interconnectedness of those challenges, we can work to find sustainable solutions that promote resilience, equity and stability on a global scale. We believe that all organs of the United Nations are duty-bound to work together for that shared objective. In the words of the Preamble to the United Nations Charter, this is how we can “employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples”. Dame Barbara Woodward (United Kingdom): I thank you, Mr. President, for organizing this debate, and I thank our briefers for their briefings, which underlined the interdependence of climate, security and peace. Climate change, environmental degradation and biodiversity loss are exacerbating conflict, contributing to global food insecurity and threatening international peace and security. As Executive Secretary Stiell said earlier, the less action that is taken to address climate change, the more conflicts the Security Council will find on its agenda. Those who are impacted by conflict, or facing severe humanitarian needs, are often the least resourced to adapt to the climate and environment crises. These linked challenges require a coordinated international response. I offer three approaches in that regard. First, we take early action to prevent and resolve food security crises. That was a key theme of last year’s Global Food Security Summit, co-hosted by the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates and Somalia, where the United Kingdom announced its new Resilience and Adaptation Fund to help climate adaptation and increase anticipatory approaches. We should also build on the successes of the twenty-eighth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and increase climate financing to fragile and conflict-affected states. The United Kingdom endorsed the United Arab Emirates declaration on sustainable agriculture, resilient food systems and climate action and pledged $126 million to help vulnerable countries tackle climate change, including support for early-warning systems and disaster risk finance. Secondly, we invest in innovation to increase sustainable, climate-resilient food production. The benefits of scientific advancements should also be accessible to all, especially to smallholder farmers, whose plight the President highlighted earlier. The United Kingdom is driving scientific advances in food and agriculture, including through the CGIAR agricultural research organization and the Gilbert Initiative. Finally, we support humanitarian, development, peacebuilding and climate actors to take a holistic and integrated approach to resilience, development, security and climate change. As the President said earlier, collectively, we should ensure that current and projected climate impacts be fully integrated into conflict risk assessments. And we should target climate work in fragile and conflict-affected countries in a way that addresses the causes of crisis, while also ensuring climate financing is conflict-sensitive. The United Nations system, including its cadre of climate security advisers, is well-positioned to coordinate climate, food security and peace efforts. The Council can support that by encouraging a coherent, integrated response, including within Council mandates. The number of participants in today’s debate serves to underline the concern among the United Nations membership about the threat these interlinked challenges pose to international peace and security. It is incumbent on the Council to respond to those challenges.

I have the high honour of conveying the highest and warmest sentiments of President Julius Maada Bio and to extend congratulations to Guyana on assuming the Presidency of the Security Council, as well as for its excellent stewardship of the Council this month. I thank you, Mr. President, for organizing this high-level open debate on the impact of climate and food insecurity on the maintenance of international peace and security. Also, allow me to thank you for the reflections you proffered in your national capacity. I join Council members in thanking the Secretary-General for his sobering and important briefing and for his leading voice on this issue. Let me also thank Mr. Simon Stiell, Ms. Beth Bechdol, and Ms. Jimena Leiva Roesch for their very valuable and informative briefings. Climate change and food insecurity should not only be discussed in terms of environmental and humanitarian contexts, but also as an emerging threat to international peace and security. Let me highlight in this statement the cross-regional nature of the effects of climate change and food insecurity in Africa to bring out clearly the threat to international peace and security. The scientific evidence is becoming clearer with every passing day. Climate change is altering our planet at an alarming rate, leading to rising temperatures, extreme weather events and disruptions in ecosystems. Those changes have far-reaching consequences, and one of the most pressing challenges we face is the threat to food security. As climate-related disruptions intensify, agricultural systems are increasingly susceptible to failure, exacerbating existing problems and creating new hotspots of conflict. The nexus between climate change, food insecurity and conflict is evident in various regions across the globe. Changing weather patterns disrupt traditional agricultural practices, leading to crop failures, water scarcity and the displacement of communities. In the face of such challenges, competition for dwindling resources often escalates tensions, heightening the risk of conflict within and between nations. From the Horn of Africa to the Sahel, there is evidence of the links between, on the one hand, the adverse impacts of climate change on livelihoods and, on the other, increased conflict risk. The most common type of conflict risk linked to increased livelihood insecurity is among farmers and herders over access to resources, grazing areas, agricultural land and water, as we also heard from the representative of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. In the Sahel, climate change disproportionately affects 50 million people who depend on agriculture and livestock, while livelihood deterioration has increased the risk of farmer-herder conflicts over diminishing resources in the region. As increasingly frequent droughts and floods compound livelihood insecurity, farmers and herders are now using violence to protect their existing resources, or to secure new resources. Factors such as capacities to manage disputes, the legitimacy of rule of law institutions and the availability of small arms all play a role in the scale of related violence. As we heard, world hunger is an issue of global concern. A combination of factors, including famine, the effects of armed conflicts, climate change and global inequalities, have become leading causes of food insecurity in our world and have driven millions of people to the brink of starvation. This scenario is characterized by unprecedented numbers of people being displaced by conflict, catastrophic weather events and natural disasters. Many people cannot afford enough food due to famine or conflict. It is estimated that approximately 70 per cent of food-insecure countries are also fragile. According to the Global Report on Food Crises 2023, in West Africa and the Sahel and parts of Central Africa, the levels of acute food insecurity during the June to August 2023 lean season were projected to be the highest on record, driven by worsening conflict and insecurity, particularly in the Central Sahel and Lake Chad basin areas. Other instances have been characterized by increased economic shocks, including widespread inflation and currency depreciation. In the light of the foregoing, Sierra Leone is of the firm view that the following actions, in addition to others, need to be taken to address climate change and food insecurity in order to maintain international peace and security. First, it is imperative to integrate climate and food security into conflict prevention. That can be done through the conduct of risk assessments to identify regions vulnerable to climate-driven conflict, such as the Sahel. Building dialogue and cooperation between communities competing for resources and support for mediation and conflict resolution efforts in climate-affected regions should also be facilitated. That also involves addressing underlying grievances that can be exacerbated by climate change. Secondly, we need to invest in conflict resolution mechanisms and peacebuilding initiatives, while, at the same time, encouraging regional cooperation and collective action on climate and food security. Thirdly, it is necessary to invest in climate-resilient agriculture practices such as drought-resistant crops, water-efficient irrigation, and agroforestry. In addition, Member States should support the establishment of early-warning systems for extreme weather events. Furthermore, assistance should be provided to communities to be relocated from areas prone to climate disasters. That resonates with the multidimensional and whole-of-system approach. In Sierra Leone, we have recognized that sustainable and climate-smart techniques are essential for a resilient food system. In that regard, under the Feed Salone programme, we are promoting agriculture techniques that enrich soil fertility, improve water retention, diversify crop production and encourage the cultivation of climate-resistant crop varieties. The main objective of the Feed Salone programme is to boost agriculture productivity to fuel inclusive growth, increase access to and the availability of locally produced nutrient-dense and safe food, reduce our dependence on food imports, reduce hunger, increase export earnings, create jobs and build a resilient food system. Let me conclude by noting that the Security Council has a crucial role to play in addressing the intertwined threats of climate change, food insecurity and their impact on international peace and security. The Security Council has adopted products in the past recognizing the security risks of climate change and food insecurity and urging action from Member States. That should continue reflecting changing circumstances and situations. Finally, the Economic and Social Council and the relevant United Nations funds, programmes and specialized agencies can provide the Security Council with regular briefings to inform its work on the potential security implications of climate change and food insecurity, drawing on its expertise in sustainable development, humanitarian affairs and human rights.

I thank you, Mr. President, and commend you for having taken the initiative of convening this debate on the topic of climate, food security and conflict, which is a subject that must indeed be addressed within the Security Council. I would also like to join others in thanking the briefers for their extremely complementary and informative presentations. As we all know, climate change exacerbates already-fragile situations and is often one of the root, and sometimes immediate, causes of armed conflict. Conflicts are also the primary cause of food crises. They also have a cost in terms of environmental impact, climate change and the loss of biodiversity. Of the 20 countries most affected by conflict in the world, 12 are among those most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, while 9 out of the 10 countries most sensitive to those risks are food insecure. Stability, peace, security, food security and climate change are intrinsically linked. None can ignore that — nor should they. That is why it is of the utmost important that the Council seriously address these interlinked causes and effects. The Council knows full well that Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has severely exacerbated the global food crisis. Russia’s attempts to block the passage of foodstuffs by plundering the Ukrainian agricultural system are to the detriment of the countries suffering the most from the food crisis. As the Council is also aware, we are still a long way from reaching the goals that we set in General Assembly resolution 63/281 of 2009, which called on the United Nations to redouble its efforts to address the impact of climate change on international peace and security. It is also imperative that we fully implement resolution 2417 (2018). Now is not the time for words, but action — this requires the Council’s full engagement. It must be able to better assess, anticipate and prevent the impact of climate change on international peace and security, in particular in terms of food security. We must also systematically call on all parties to conflict to respect international humanitarian law, which prohibits the use of hunger as a weapon of war. I would like to make the following three recommendations. First, the Council must be kept fully informed, in a detailed manner, of the impact of climate crises and conflicts on the food situation in the most vulnerable regions. We call on the Special Representatives of the Secretary-General in particular to provide us with detailed information during their briefings and to provide recommendations for targeted action in certain areas, in particular in Africa, where ambitious initiatives, such as the Great Green Wall Initiative, are arising. Secondly, the Council must place greater emphasis on risk prevention. We must strengthen the mandates of United Nations missions so that they can support the most vulnerable countries in terms of risk assessment and management and propose concrete measures. Lastly, we must continue to support the work of the United Nations on the ground. The climate, peace and security advisers who are deployed to certain United Nations missions play an extremely useful role. They support countries in strengthening their risk assessment and management capacities, and they work to reinforce partnerships with local and regional actors. France is working to that end, in particular through its support to the United Nations Regional Office for Central Africa. We also encourage the United Nations, together with troop-contributing countries, to pursue the implementation of environmental strategies within peacekeeping operations themselves. We call on Member States to join the collective efforts by joining the interagency Climate Security Mechanism, the goal of which is to integrate climate change in a cross-cutting way within the various areas of United Nations peace and security work, in a holistic approach focused on needs on the ground. France is actively involved in that initiative. We must act together, without delay, in all these areas and step up our collective efforts to implement the Paris Agreement and rise to the climate challenge. The Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs of France will devote himself to that end in leading ambitious climate diplomacy efforts for the sake of development for peace, security and our common survival.

It is our pleasure to welcome you, Sir, as the President of the Security Council. We would like to thank the Secretary-General for his briefing, and we listened closely to the other briefers. We have been provided with the opportunity today to discuss how it is that, in 2024, in some countries, the triumph of advanced technology is being heralded, competition is heating up over statistics related to gross domestic product and issues related to artificial intelligence are being discussed, while in other countries, millions of people continue to suffer from the horrific and age-old problem of hunger, which harkens back to the darkest chapters of human history. Everyone here is well aware of Russia’s position that there is no direct link between the area of climate and socioeconomic issues and the mandate of the Security Council, of which the principal element is the maintenance of international peace and security. We believe that those issues would be more productively discussed in specialized forums, but we realize how important they are for developing States and the global South, which is why today we are willing to discuss from a political perspective the real root causes of the problems confronting the populations of developing countries. However, they should not be discussed generically, but in a way that is tethered to countries’ specific and regional situations and takes into account every aspect and underlying cause of a conflict. Our Western colleagues talk a lot about climate change, technological structures, the risks of disrupting food supply chains, investment in development and other trendy topics that are also convenient to the Western narrative. But let us ponder this. Did people in the global South really live better lives 50 or 70 years ago, before anybody was talking about climate change? Hardly. Back then, at the dawn of the United Nations, the developing world, which had been plundered for centuries by the “civilized” West, was just beginning to free itself from the shackles of colonialism and was filled with hope that a new chapter of history was being written in which there would be no place for the exploitation of its sovereign resources or the political dictates of colonial Powers. At the time, the Soviet Union, which championed the ideals of social and economic justice, made a significant contribution to those national liberation movements that is still remembered with gratitude in many countries of the world to this day. Seven decades ago, the new Member States of the United Nations were promised the right to realize their sovereignty, determine their own fate and build their own political and economic systems so as to reflect the interests of their peoples. The duty of the international community, and first and foremost the former colonial Powers, was to help the new members of the international community stand on their own feet and to do everything possible to compensate them for the damage caused by centuries of colonial exploitation. Have those hopes been realized? Unfortunately, they have not. The West has never acknowledged its historical blame for centuries of colonialism  — or, more simply, their oppression of the peoples of Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean. There have been no systematic, genuine reparations policies for the damage done to their development. The former colonial Powers decided to take a different path. They would continue to siphon resources from their former colonies and use political pressure and blackmail — what they hypocritically call “special bilateral relations”  — to impose their vision of development, exploiting their financial and technological advantages. Although colonialism is formally a thing of the past, in reality all of its ugliest manifestations continue to flourish to this day. They include the exploitation of sovereign natural resources by Western transnational companies, the transformation of developing countries’ territories into arenas for geopolitical struggle and sometimes even direct military aggression against uncooperative sovereign countries with the aim of destroying their statehood. That is exactly what we have seen in Yugoslavia, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. The Anglo-Saxon military coalitions act like lords in the former mandated territories, forgetting that it is 2024, not 1904, and that they are dealing with sovereign Governments that may have their own point of view about the processes taking place in the region. It is therefore neocolonial practices that are the real cause of the socioeconomic problems facing the developing world. After all, according to United Nations estimates, there are technically no acute food shortages in the world. The problem is one of uneven distribution, with surplus stocks accumulating in the West and shortages in the developing world. The second reason, as economists refer to it, is the pricing market, in which the biggest agro-industrial producers benefit from maintaining high prices. Against that backdrop, the West, indiscriminately and duplicitously blaming Russia for the global food crisis, glosses over the fact that the major leading Western corporations are the main beneficiaries of increasing food prices. We are talking about the so-called big four — the United States companies Archer Daniels Midland, Bunge and Cargill, and the Dutch Louis Dreyfus Company  — which account for 75 to 90 per cent of global trade in the agro-industrial complex. Their subsidiaries in Ukraine, directly or through intermediaries, own more than 17 million of the 32 million hectares of Ukraine’s arable land, and they have taken advantage of the crisis situation in the country to buy up increasing amounts of Ukrainian farmland at low prices. According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, over the years, global food markets have developed a systemic nexus between major agricultural companies and Western stock dealers, who have contrived to artificially drive up prices. That is why these food crises are largely speculative in nature. Let us once again consider the question as to why, against the background of the astronomical profits being made by the Western agro-industrial complex, the threat of hunger is hitting developing countries with growing populations the hardest. It is because Western colonizers in the past deliberately configured them to extract maximum profits for the colonial Powers rather than to ensure that they were capable of feeding their own populations. The vast majority of countries, including in Africa — where the current trend in food security is a worrisome one — have sufficient fertile land to establish their own food sovereignty. That has been repeatedly emphasized by the Office of the Special Adviser of the Secretary-General on Africa. Over the past five years, donors have allocated only 4 per cent of the funds needed to support agriculture, although today we have heard and will continue to hear about large donor contributions. However, when it comes to the returns on those contributions, the complaints from the recipient countries have been growing. Western delegations constantly bombard us with the numbers for their humanitarian assistance to developing countries. Whether that is enough to compensate for the damage caused by centuries of brutal colonial policies of plundering natural resources and exploiting populations is not for us to judge but rather for those States that have suffered as a result. I also want to point out that the amount of aid provided by the United States and its allies to the countries of the global South pales in comparison to what the West has spent in less than two years on weapons for its proxy war on Russia down to the last Ukrainian, which according to the most conservative estimates amounts to €200 billion. And that is despite the fact that the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has requested $55 billion from donors all humanitarian operations for 2023, and so far only $22.4 billion has been allocated. Let us imagine how much could be accomplished in the world if the United States and its allies spent money on development assistance as readily as they sponsor wars around the world. But now we want to draw attention to something else. Despite all the noble slogans, donor assistance from Western countries always comes with strings attached and subject to political conditions. Clear examples of that include the use of humanitarian aid and cruel unilateral coercive measures to blackmail the Syrian people, and Western donors’ suspension, on political pretexts, of their funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East in the context of the horrific humanitarian disaster in Gaza. In that context, we would like to draw attention to yet another threat to global food security, which is the threat of illegal unilateral sanctions imposed by Western countries, primarily the United States, affecting the populations of States whose leadership pursue independent and autonomous policies that are therefore not to Washington’s liking. The American authorities are moving towards adopting a bill under the cynical name “The No Russian Agriculture Act” in order to decrease the so-called “reliance” of third countries on Russian food. If approved, that initiative, which has already passed in the House of Representatives, will remain in effect for five years. That merely confirms the fact that the United States and its satellites have no intention of abandoning their neocolonialist methods. To my colleagues from developing countries: do not get your hopes up. The habits and methods of the former colonial Powers have not changed; only their “packaging” has changed. For every dollar they allegedly spend on assistance, they will demand that developing countries sacrifice their sovereignty and political independence. Many African States have already experienced that for themselves in a striking way, and they do not wish to tolerate those approaches. Russia has never considered Africa, Asia or Latin America as an arena for profit generation. Despite all the obstacles put in place by the United States and its allies, we have helped, continue to help and will continue to help, free of charge, those in need across the world. The Russian Federation has assumed an obligation to allocate assistance, financially or in-kind, through bilateral and multilateral channels and we are successfully carrying this out. Through the World Food Programme alone, over the past five years, we have provided assistance to 30 States in various parts of the world to the tune of over $300 million. We have accumulated considerable experience in delivering technical assistance to developing countries in the area of building and developing national school meals systems. For more than 13 years, the World Food Programme has been our main international partner in that area. To date, we have implemented a series of such projects to the tune of more than $120 million in Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Cambodia, Laos, Sri Lanka, Nicaragua and Cuba. From 2017 to the present day, also together with the World Food Programme, we have been implementing the “Debt for Development” project in Mozambique, with a budget of $40 million. Pursuant to a decision of the Russian President taken during the second Russia-Africa Summit in 2023, 200 thousand tons of grain in food assistance have already been delivered, free of charge, to Burkina Faso, Zimbabwe, Mali, Somalia, the Central African Republic and Eritrea. In addition to development assistance, in recent years Russia has proactively been strengthening food sovereignty and has significantly stepped- up food exports on the global markets. In 2023, that already resulted in the reduction of the Global Food Price Index, which is calculated by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. We have been contributing, not in word but in deed, to mitigating the food crisis. Despite the unprecedented sanctions pressure, we remain a conscientious supplier of grain, offering our partners high-quality goods at attractive prices.

Let me start by thanking you, Mr. President, for coming to the United Nations to preside over this high-level meeting. I thank Secretary-General Guterres, Executive Secretary Stiell and Deputy Director-General Bechdol for their briefings. I also listened carefully to the statement by Ms. Roesch. Climate change is a critical issue that is closely linked to humankind’s survival and development. China supports the international community in taking robust action to respond effectively to the challenges posed by climate change. With regard to the link between climate change and security, the Council has devoted its attention to this issue on many occasions in recent years and some consensus has emerged. However, we need greater understanding on the interplay between those two factors. Some conflicts obviously do not have a direct linkage to climate change. Each situation should therefore be studied on its own merit in order to determine its causes and the points of intervention. At the same time, we are increasingly aware that more and more extreme weather patterns are bringing big shocks to global food production, with developing countries bearing a heavy brunt. Such a negative impact should not be overlooked. China has always emphasized that targeted action should be taken to help developing countries enhance climate resilience, ensure food security and break the vicious cycle of climate, hunger and conflict. First, global humanitarian assistance must be strengthened. The right to food is a basic human right and should therefore be respected and guaranteed by all countries. At present, some countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America are facing severe food crises and are in urgent need of international assistance. China calls on developed countries to provide more emergency humanitarian assistance in terms of food and finance to those developing countries in need. It must be emphasized that humanitarian assistance should not be used as a tool to exert pressure, and neither should it be subject to any political conditions. In Gaza, access to humanitarian supplies, including food, of which there is a severe shortage, still faces mounting hurdles. In Afghanistan, tens of millions of people are suffering from lack of food and clothing in the middle of winter. That tragic reality is unacceptable. We call on the countries concerned to heed the international community’s call for justice and to act responsibly to avoid greater humanitarian disasters. Secondly, accelerated action must be taken to bridge the developmental divide between the North and the South. Currently, global food production is fully sufficient to feed everyone, yet nearly 800 million people go hungry. That is a concrete manifestation of the imbalanced and inadequate global development that can only be fundamentally resolved through common development. The international community should take full advantage of the Summit of the Future and other important opportunities to seriously address the prominent issues faced by developing countries. Developed countries should not be satisfied only with pronouncing slogans. They should effectively deliver on their official development assistance and climate financing commitments and eliminate unreasonable agriculture subsidies. We must firmly reject unilateral sanctions and oppose neo-imperialistic attempts to decouple and break up the chain and technology blockades. We must create a fair and favourable international environment for developing countries to participate in the global market, share the dividends of emerging industries and upgrade their agricultural industries. Thirdly, the global food and agriculture governance system must be improved. The entrenched ills, such as the pricing power monopoly by big international food dealers and the high degree of financialization of agriculture products, have created turbulence and an imbalance in local food markets. The international community must remove the blockages and the break points in the food production and supply chain and build a safe, stable, smooth, efficient, open, inclusive and mutually beneficial system of food production and supply. It is necessary to enhance the representation, voice and decision-making power of developing countries in the promotion of more fair and reasonable international food and agriculture governance. The United Nations food and agriculture agencies and the international financial institutions should orient towards developing countries in terms of situation analysis, policy recommendations and assistance coordination so as to enhance the latter’s ability to participate in the global food and agriculture governance structure. It is necessary to help developing countries to build climate-resilient modern agriculture and enhance their agricultural efficiency and their ability to cope with disasters. Whether with regard to climate responses or maintaining food security, China attaches great importance to this issue and has taken active and robust action. We have 9 per cent of the world’s arable land and 6 per cent of its freshwater resources. China produces one fourth of the world’s food and feeds one fifth of its population. We have adopted the National Climate Change Adaptation Strategy 2035, which focuses on developing green industries and climate-smart agriculture while promoting our rural revitalization strategy and our carbon peaking and carbon neutrality goals. China has put forward its Global Development and International Food Security Cooperation initiatives with a view to helping developing countries improve their capacities in the areas of food production and storage and reducing food spoilage and loss. Under the South-South Cooperation Gateway of the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, China ranks first among developing countries in terms of the amount of financial assistance provided and the numbers of experts dispatched and projects executed. At the end of last year in Dubai, China was among the more than 130 countries that signed the United Arab Emirates Declaration on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems and Climate Action. We can say with confidence that China truly walks the talk in that regard. We are ready to work with other countries to implement the outcomes of the twenty- eighth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and to make a greater contribution to addressing climate change and maintaining global food security.

The Republic of Korea commends Guyana for holding today’s timely open debate, Mr. President, and welcomes your presence here today in steering it. I thank the Secretary-General for his remarks and Mr. Simon Stiell, Ms. Beth Bechdol and Ms. Jimena Leiva Roesch for their well-grounded and insightful briefings. The Republic of Korea aligns itself with the statement to be delivered by the representative of Nauru on behalf of the Group of Friends on Climate and Security. In our national capacity, my delegation’s remarks will revolve around the following three questions. The first question is about how the interlinkages between climate change, food insecurity and peace and security play out in the situations on the Security Council’s agenda. To start with Asia, in Myanmar, Cyclone Mocha hit conflict-affected and food-insecure areas, including Rakhine state, last May. The devastating impacts of the cyclone on livelihoods and housing were exacerbated by the dynamics of the conflict there, which involved restrictions on humanitarian access. In Afghanistan, continuing droughts have amplified food and water insecurity and contributed to displacement. Women and girls have been left particularly vulnerable due to the Taliban’s violations of human rights and restrictions on the delivery of aid. Research also shows that prolonged droughts and hunger have led to increased gender- based violence in the country. And in South Sudan, the United Nations Mission in South Sudan reports that the El Niño effect is driving acute hunger in some parts of the country. In addition, shifting rainfall patterns have intensified conflicts between farmers and herders. Those are only a few examples, and it is clear that those dynamics deserve the Security Council’s thorough consideration. My second question is about how the Council can better coordinate with other mechanisms, both in and outside the United Nations. Solutions require long-term approaches and partnerships. We need early-warning systems that incorporate climate and environmental data and socioeconomic factors related to food systems and conflict. We also need climate-sensitive peacemaking efforts and conflict-sensitive adaptation. In that regard, the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) has great potential. We encourage the PBC to convene climate-focused country- or region-specific meetings with the participation of United Nations missions and agencies, the Climate Security Mechanism and multilateral development banks. That would be particularly relevant for countries and regions that are being discussed in both the Council and the PBC, or those planning transitions along the peace continuum. By sharing their respective analyses and best practices for addressing climate-food-peace linkages in specific contexts, agencies could streamline and complement their activities, while funding mechanisms could identify needs for resources. Meetings could sometimes take the format of joint meetings of the PBC and the Economic and Social Council, and the results could be sent to the Security Council as PBC advice. The third question is about the support that the wider United Nations membership could provide in that context. Building local-level resilience in vulnerable areas is not only effective but a cost-efficient path towards both conflict prevention and peacebuilding. In that connection, I would like to introduce the K-Ricebelt initiative that my President, Yoon Suk Yeol, announced at the Group of Seven summit last year. That innovative project currently aims to assist 10 sub-Saharan African countries in localizing and improving their rice production capacity by sharing high-yield rice varieties and agricultural technology. My delegation would also like to bring up the unique and existential threats facing low-lying coastal communities and small island States. It is a fact that sea level rise and its impacts, such as soil erosion, salinization and land loss, will destroy agricultural livelihoods and may even cause mass displacement. As a champion country of the Coalition for Addressing Sea-level Rise and its Existential Threat and as a proud sponsor of the Rising Nations Initiative for Pacific atoll countries, the Republic of Korea continues to be active in efforts to address that urgent challenge. The Republic of Korea announced that climate and peace and security would be one of its guiding priorities during its Council term. That is in line with our ongoing efforts to strengthen our partnership with the global South in its transition to clean energy and adaptation to climate change, including by scaling up our green official development assistance. As a new pledger to the joint pledges related to climate and peace and security, we hereby reaffirm our commitment to advancing that agenda in the Council and, more importantly, translating it into actual results on the ground.

Malta thanks Guyana for organizing today’s timely debate and for putting a spotlight on the nexus between climate change and food insecurity. We also thank the briefers for their insights. Malta aligns itself with the statement to be delivered by the representative of Nauru on behalf of the Group of Friends on Climate and Security. As a threat multiplier, climate change has increased resource-based conflicts in several parts of the world, exacerbating instability and challenging resilience among vulnerable populations. The evidence shows that people living in conflict-affected areas either face or are at risk of facing acute food and water insecurity or starvation. Women and girls currently account for 70 per cent of the world’s hungry, with the climate crisis further deepening pre-existing gender inequalities. Seventy-five per cent of all stunted children under the age of 5 live in countries affected by armed conflict. Those figures speak for themselves. Understanding the link between agriculture and food systems and the impact of climate change on that link is central to today’s discussion. Climate-related impacts jeopardize agrifood systems and water resources, which in turn fuel competition over limited natural resources, driving population mobility and displacement. When coupled with a vicious cycle of rising temperatures, flooding, drought and other extreme weather events, the reality becomes devastating, and is felt across the globe in various ways. Rising ocean temperatures and sea levels are affecting livelihoods in small island developing States in the Caribbean and the Pacific. The El Niño-driven drought in the Horn of Africa has been ravaging millions of people and their livelihoods with severe water shortages and dry pastures. The ongoing conflict in the Sudan has left almost 18 million people facing acute hunger  — 10 million more than last year. The situation has been further exacerbated by compromised food production. Food insecurity in the Sahel has tripled, leading to the fastest-growing displacement crisis. We therefore require a holistic and integrated approach within the United Nations system, including at the Security Council. We recall, among other initiatives, the Council’s unanimous recognition, through resolution 2417 (2018), of the need to break the vicious cycle between armed conflict and food insecurity, as well as the unlawful denial of humanitarian access. We also thank humanitarian workers for their tireless efforts. Their selfless actions deserve our full respect and recognition. Malta’s commitment remains steadfast in addressing those challenges. As initiators of the Statement of Joint Pledges on Climate, Peace and Security, Malta reiterates its call for synergies to be met with concrete solutions, with a focus on strengthening early-warning, anticipatory actions and climate-resilient agriculture and food systems. We support the work of climate and peace and security advisers engaged with select United Nations peacekeeping missions and special political missions, whose role remains crucial in identifying climate-related impacts on the ground. In all our actions we must involve local actors. They include women human rights and environmental defenders. We encourage that climate financing also reaches grassroots women’s organizations that are leading local adaptation and mitigation efforts. Traditional and religious leaders also have an important role to play in ensuring cooperation. In conclusion, we remain firm in our belief that we must seek to immediately respond to the root causes of food insecurity. They include breaking the cycle of conflict and addressing climate change. The Council has a responsibility to bear.

Allow me to begin my statement by acknowledging your presence, Mr. President, in this forum, which gives greater visibility to the work of the international community and the Security Council. I also thank your country for organizing today’s open debate, which addresses a subject that is of concern to the international community as a whole. I also thank the briefers for their valuable briefings. Ecuador aligns itself with the statement to be made by the representative of Ireland on behalf of the Group of Friends of Action on Conflict and Hunger, which we are honoured to co-chair. Conflicts reduce agricultural productivity, destroy infrastructure and change agri-food markets by disrupting supply chain logistics. With more than 250 million people suffering from acute hunger in a third of the Members of the Organization  — the majority of them in situations of conflict and armed violence — focusing on this subject is crucial. The unanimous adoption of resolution 2417 (2018) in 2018 gave the Council one of the most valuable early- warning and response tools. In conflict situations, the adverse effects of climate change and food insecurity exacerbate migration and forced displacement. In that context, humanitarian aid cannot wait. The Council must ensure compliance with resolution 2573 (2021), on the protection of essential goods, co-sponsored by my country in 2021. We condemn any practice aimed at starving a population and the use of starvation as a tactic of war. In our region, we can see the devastating impact of the deteriorating security situation and its impact on the food crisis — for example, in Haiti. For that reason, in July 2023, through resolution 2692 (2023), the Council urged all parties, including those with influence on armed groups, to take measures to stop blocking access to food and damaging the sources of food. The impact of conflicts on food security has now been worsened by the climate crisis. It acts as a threat multiplier, jeopardizing the security of agri-food systems, means of livelihood and water resources. Ecuador supports the Secretary-General’s initiatives, such as Early Warnings for All and accelerated climate-change adaptation, designed for the most vulnerable countries. We also support the activities carried out by the World Food Programme. Access to financing is also a priority. Robust climate action for developing countries will be possible only with the provision of climate financing by developed countries, in line with the principle of shared but differentiated responsibilities. We must operationalize the loss and damage fund by providing new, additional and predictable funding. Furthermore, as we work with existing tools, such as the Peacebuilding Fund and the Peacebuilding Commission, the mandates of peacekeeping missions must include data on weather events that can jeopardize the food security of populations and data that can identify possible hotbeds of violence. This must be a joint effort between country offices and United Nations programmes, such as the United Nations Development Programme and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, so that implementing the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its 17 Goals will go hand in hand with peacebuilding. We see no other option. Lastly, we must recognize that we live in a world of conflict and war and, therefore, ensuring respect for international humanitarian law is essential to preventing the natural breakdown of the system and food insecurity in conflict situations. The warring parties must conduct hostilities while respecting the provisions of international humanitarian law on the protection of the natural environment, which is directly linked to food security, including the contamination or loss of access to arable land and water resources. Against that backdrop, our challenge is to renew the collective security system with proposals to reduce threats and address challenges and put prevention at the heart of our strategy.

On behalf of the Council, I would like to welcome His Excellency Mr. Abinader Corona, President of the Dominican Republic. I now give him the floor. President Abinader Corona (spoke in Spanish): We welcome the holding of today’s crucial debate and the valuable contribution of today’s briefers. During its term on the Security Council, the Dominican Republic supported a comprehensive review of all threats to global peace and security, including climate change and food insecurity. In 2020, we spearheaded the adoption of a presidential statement (S/PRST/2020/6) that was a milestone in addressing food security, underscoring the importance of early- warning systems. We make every effort to protect our food production from climate challenges and crises that threaten the global supply and agro-industry. Our official policy is supported by Law No. 589-16, which created a National System for Food and Nutrition Sovereignty and Security. In the same vein and together with President Ali, my Government has promoted a strategic alliance with Guyana that seeks to ensure the autonomy of our countries in strategic areas for food and energy. We are aware that global development depends on adequately satisfying food and nutritional needs — something that no country can do in isolation. Consequently, for the Dominican Republic, the fourth International Conference on Small Island Developing States, to be held in Antigua and Barbuda in May, is essential. In that regard, I take the opportunity to thank my friend Prime Minister Gaston Browne for convening it. It is an opportunity to call on those responsible for climate change to take urgent action to address the crisis and strengthen global food security. In fact, according to scientific research recently published in the specialized journal Science Advances, the temperature regulation system of currents in the Atlantic Ocean is approaching a devastating tipping point, owing to the melting of Arctic glaciers and ice sheets faster than expected. That means that sea levels in the Atlantic will rise by one metre in some regions, flooding many coastal cities, as is already happening on our Caribbean island. Climate vulnerabilities and food shortages increase the risk of violence, especially where poverty, hunger and inequality are prevalent. The use of hunger as a weapon of war to subjugate a population is alarming and unjustifiable. Sadly, that appalling practice is becoming more widespread around the world every year. The Council has debated at length with regard to robust responses to that crime, which threatens global stability, but we must redouble our actions. According to the Global Report on Food Crises 2023, nearly 258 million people faced acute levels of hunger in 58 countries or territories in 2022, and far too many of those people were on the brink of starvation. Over the past seven years, the number of people living with hunger increased by 146 per cent. It will therefore be very difficult to meet the second Sustainable Development Goal of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, namely, to achieve a world free of hunger. One of the countries to which that applies is Haiti, with which the Dominican Republic shares the same island. According to the World Food Programme, almost half of the population of that neighbouring country  — that is, 5 million people  — are currently suffering from acute food insecurity. That situation is largely attributable to two factors: first, the escalation of violence created by criminal gangs which control much of Haiti’s territory and which deliberately hinder humanitarian access, and secondly, the persistent impact of climatic phenomena that cannot be properly addressed and prevented by the Haitian authorities owing to terrorist violence and institutional breakdown. Through its resolutions 2645 (2022), 2653 (2022), 2692 (2023), 2699 (2023) and 2700 (2023), the Security Council approved the Multinational Security Support Mission in Haiti, an arms and ammunition embargo and a sanctions regime for bad actors in the domestic conflict. However, it has not yet acted with sufficient force and urgency to deploy the Mission or to give it the strength that the sanctions regime warrants. The international community must not allow the catastrophe that the Haitian people are suffering from to continue for another day. We must take preventive, sensitive and timely action on conflicts. We need tools for data, analysis and joint action to address food insecurity exacerbated by climate change and severe domestic conflicts. The active engagement of the Secretary-General, Member States, specialized agencies, humanitarian non-governmental organizations and affected communities is key to making progress on that front. I call on the Security Council to redouble its efforts to create those tools and to put in place an early-warning system that allows us to act in time, before situations become crises which are more difficult to resolve. I conclude by reaffirming the Dominican Republic’s commitment to ensure stable food security, appropriate management of climate change and lasting peace throughout the world.

I thank the President Abinader Corona for his statement. I now give the floor to the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Hellenic Republic.

I would like, first of all, to thank the Permanent Mission of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana to the United Nations for the invitation to participate in today’s debate, as well as the briefers for their stimulating remarks. In the contemporary world, there is not a single challenge that does not interact with others. Climate crisis threatens food security, and they jointly threaten stability and social cohesion. And there is not a single challenge that applies merely to a country or a region. The collapse of the Black Sea Grain Initiative in Ukraine threatens the grain chain altogether, and the fast ice melting in Antarctica affects the globe. And that, while more than 600 million people worldwide are projected to face hunger in 2030. The Mediterranean Sea, a crossroads of three continents, is an illustrative example of interaction and spillover of such phenomena. The annual temperature of the Sea is 1.54°C higher than pre-1990 levels and approximately 0.5°C more than the average for global warming. Temperature increase has caused serious environmental damage. The Mediterranean basin has become, in the past year, the hotspot of the climate crisis, with extensive wildfires and catastrophic floods. Furthermore, the rise of the sea level endangers the quantity and quality of fisheries and fish stocks, and in turn, peoples’ lives and health. Mitigating global warming, advancing sustainable tourism and green shipping and reducing microplastic pollution will be on the agenda of the ninth Our Ocean Conference, which we will be hosting in Athens on 16 and 17 April. The Conference will be the bridge between the twenty-eighth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the United Nations Conference to Support the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development next year, aspiring to produce tangible milestones and credible commitments. In the same vein, Greece will take the initiative of the nexus between climate, peace and security and set it as a priority of its candidacy as a non-permanent member of the Security Council for 2025-2026. However, no conference or single State intervention can bring astonishing results. That is equivalent to Sisyphus eternally and repeatedly rolling a heavy rock up a hill. The complexity and extraterritoriality of the challenges call for the collective response of Governments and peoples of the world with a view to the future. What we need is a different mindset when it comes to environmental protection and food security. Such a cross-cutting policy is the World Health Organization’s One Health project, an integrated, unifying approach to holistically balance and optimize the health of people, animals and the environment. We need this type of new vision of global solidarity and intergenerational sustainability through ethical and rules-based global governance and fair burden-sharing among States. That is why we call for a universal alliance for sustainability, and we endorse the proposal for the appointment of a United Nations special envoy for a sustainable future. We owe it to the future generations from whom we have, admittedly, detached a significant portion of their natural dividends. After all, we must not forget — we are not owners, but merely caretakers on Earth.

I now give the floor to the representative of Thailand.

I wish to congratulate Guyana for assuming the presidency of the Security Council for this month of February. I also wish to thank Secretary-General António Guterres and all the briefers for their valuable insights and recommendations. Despite decades of progress in development, our sense of safety and security remains low. The 2022 special report of the United Nations Development Programme, entitled New threats to human security in the Anthropocene, explains such a development paradox, which we are all facing. From the pandemic, inequalities and rising geopolitical tensions to devastating climate-related weather events and food insecurity, these challenges have reversed decades of development gains. I concur with the report’s recommendations that addressing those threats would require policymakers to consider protection, empowerment and solidarity alongside one another so that human security, planetary considerations and human development all work together. Without sustainable development, a sustainable planet and human rights, peace and security will be out of reach. That is why this open debate, focusing on climate change, food insecurity and peace, is so timely. As policymakers, what can we do? I wish to offer three points. First, we should ensure that our institutions, policies and priorities match the people’s needs and expectations. People expect to be protected from violent conflicts, the adverse impacts of climate change and food insecurity. People also expect to be empowered with basic human rights, be they health care or education, so that they can attain better living standards. Therefore, a people-centred approach should be at the core of our efforts, in all aspects, to ensure human development and human security for all peoples. If peace and security is to be sustained, the Security Council should include human security as part of its deliberations. With human security as our goal, there can be a stronger integrated response within the United Nations to our present-day challenges. Strengthened coordination between the Security Council and other relevant United Nations entities, especially the Economic and Social Council, is vital. Secondly, climate change is the defining crisis of our time and will continue to affect our lives in multiple dimensions. Climate change is a threat multiplier, respects no borders and poses an urgent and serious threat to all of us, especially to least developed countries and small island developing States. Our approach should therefore also be planet-centric. We must work together to address this crisis under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The UNFCCC, together with its Paris Agreement on Climate Change, remains the cornerstone of global climate governance and should be upheld. However, developing countries need support to enhance their capacity to adapt and become more resilient to the adverse impacts of climate change. Thailand reiterates the call of developing countries, echoed by the Secretary-General at the third South Summit, for existing financial commitments to be met by developed countries to deliver $100 billion annually and to double adaptation financing. That is not only an investment in the future of the planet but also in human security and the peace and stability of States and societies. Thirdly, global challenges such as climate change, food insecurity and conflicts are interconnected. They require systematic and integrated consideration to envision solutions for the people and the planet. People-centred and planet-centric approaches should be the way forward for our sustainable and peaceful future. Our efforts to overcome today’s global challenges and new threats in future require global solidarity, commitment and partnership. Multilateralism and international cooperation are the most viable solutions to addressing such challenges. In that light, we look forward to the Summit of the Future as an opportunity to reinvigorate the multilateral system, with the United Nations at its core, and to renew our vision for peace, which should be a comprehensive one, taking into account sustainable development and human rights. As a candidate to the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) for the 2025 to 2027 term, Thailand hopes to make the work of the HRC more impactful, especially for individuals on the ground, many of whom are in conflict situations. It is our belief that United Nations organs and mechanisms need to work to complement one another in the light of multifaceted challenges we are facing.

I now give the floor to the representative of Norway.

I have honour to speak on behalf of the eight Nordic and Baltic countries, namely, Denmark, Finland, Estonia, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden and my own country, Norway. I would like to start by thanking the Co-operative Republic of Guyana for organizing this very timely debate. We agree with several of the previous speakers that food security has become a global and national security issue, exacerbated by climate change, conflict and economic downturns. Those common challenges can be addressed only by dedicated multilateral action. That is what makes it such a highly relevant topic for the Security Council’s agenda. The intertwined crises of climate change, conflict and food insecurity are unfolding at a time of increasing instability and growing geopolitical tensions. Climate change and conflicts are both, in many ways, causing food insecurity, for example by destroying livelihoods, increasing resource scarcity and disrupting supply chains. Many countries and regions that are the most vulnerable to the negative effects of climate change are also those that are suffering from conflicts and instability and hence facing increased risks of food insecurity. Among the most severely affected are often women and girls. In ongoing conflicts, food is being used as a weapon. Recalling resolution 2417 (2018), there is a clear obligation not to attack civilians or civilian objects necessary for food production. The obligation to facilitate full, safe and unimpeded humanitarian access to those in need must always be respected. Upholding peace and security is the main responsibility of the Security Council and, for the Nordic and Baltic countries, it is clear that conflict prevention should be front and centre of those efforts. That means that all countries need to redouble their efforts to tackle climate change and prevent and resolve conflicts in order to decrease risks of food insecurity. Let me now emphasize what we consider to be the six most important among preventive measures to fight hunger. First is taking action to prevent conflict related to climate change and food insecurity, which can be done by mitigation and adaptation, by strengthening early warning and early action, and by risk reduction. We need to generate sophisticated data and analysis. We therefore support the Secretary-General’s call for early warnings for all and universal access to climate information systems. Secondly, climate-robust agricultural development among small-scale food producers must be scaled up. Local food sector value chains and markets must be strengthened. The effects will be increased food security in the poorest rural areas, new jobs, more stability and reduced forced migration. Thirdly, climate finance to develop sustainable agriculture must be increased. Fourthly, healthy soil is a prerequisite to fight hunger and strengthen national and global security, and seeds and fertilizer need to reach small-scale farmers. We therefore welcome the Africa fertilizer and soil health summit that will take place in Nairobi in May. Fifthly, the empowerment of women is crucial to fostering food security. Women’s full, equal and meaningful participation in all peacebuilding efforts and in climate mitigation and resilience-building is an essential part of comprehensive security efforts. Sixthly, we need to integrate our humanitarian assistance and our long-term development assistance much better in order to stop negative trends in hunger and poverty. Finally, we welcome Brazil’s global leadership in its role as the Chair of the Group of 20 and the important initiative to establish a global alliance against hunger and poverty.

There are still a number of speakers remaining on my list for this meeting. Given the lateness of the hour, I intend, with the concurrence of members of the Council, to suspend the meeting until 3 p.m.