UK urges UN Security Council to act on climate–conflict

At the UN Security Council in New York on 6 November 2025, the UK’s Deputy Permanent Representative, Ambassador Archie Young, set out three practical steps to tackle the climate–conflict link: stronger risk analytics and early warnings; climate‑smart UN operations; and more finance for resilience. The statement framed climate action as essential to peace and security, not just the environment.

Why is this on the Security Council’s agenda? Climate shocks disrupt harvests and water supplies, push families to move, and stoke tensions; conflict then damages land, infrastructure and institutions, making it harder to adapt. The two problems reinforce one another, especially where communities are already vulnerable. The UN now treats these links as part of its peace and security work.

Step one is better early warning. The speech pointed to the UN’s Complex Risk Analytics Fund (CRAF’d), which finances shared data, modelling and AI so agencies can spot when drought, price spikes and political stress may combine into danger. CRAF’d says over $40 million has been committed so far, helping to shape roughly $12 billion in crisis funding so support arrives earlier and is better targeted.

As a classroom example, imagine combining rainfall maps with market prices and conflict reports to flag a hotspot weeks ahead. That gives local officials time to move water tankers, open cash support or adjust patrol routes-small decisions that lower frictions. Early warning isn’t fortune‑telling; it’s a shared picture that helps people act in time.

Step two is integrating climate risk into UN operations. Through the Climate Security Mechanism, UN teams receive technical advice, training and tools to run climate risk assessments and design programmes that reduce risks to communities while supporting peace efforts. In short, climate‑informed peacebuilding is becoming standard practice across the system.

The UK also backed efforts to shrink the environmental footprint of missions, including using renewable power. UN data show that field operations now generate about 10% of their electricity from renewables and have cut diesel use for power by around 13% per person since 2017, improving resilience and cutting costs linked to fuel convoys.

Step three is finance. Since 2011, the UK’s International Climate Finance reports helping 137 million people cope with climate impacts, giving 89 million people improved access to clean energy, and improving the resilience of 33 million people, with more reached through technical assistance. The argument is that adaptation funding can ease pressure points that otherwise fuel conflict.

Here’s the longer arc. The Council’s first debate on climate and security took place on 17 April 2007, led by the UK. Some states backed the move; others questioned whether the Council was the right place. That mixed picture explains today’s emphasis on practical steps that both climate and security actors can accept.

If you’re discussing this in class, three ideas help to ground the topic. Climate does not automatically cause conflict; it multiplies pressures like inequality, weak institutions and sudden price shocks. Responses should be peace‑positive and climate‑smart at the same time. The IPCC even groups ‘peace and human mobility’ as a representative key risk, which is a useful frame for debate and coursework.