2018 Security Framework Characterizes Geoengineering as Weapon of War
2 May 2025 | ZeroGeoengineering.com | Strategic Studies Quarterly article, “A New Security Framework for Geoengineering,” acknowledges Geoengineering is a weapon which could be perceived as an act of war.
“… geoengineering technologies are not like other weapons due to their unique combination of global reach, potential for nonlinear effect, and fundamental implications for the livability of our planet.”
While the authors maintain typical academic framing of the topic, the discussion provides valuable insight, such as the controversial notion that the UN Security Council would be a legitimate instrument of geoengineering governance.
“Any type of weapon used in modern conflict can be subject to the just war constraints of proportionality and discrimination; geoengineering technologies should be as well. Barring formation of a new body, the only standing body that could provide such consent, and hence legitimacy under our just geoengineering theory criteria, is the UN Security Council.”
“…geoengineering on any but the smallest scale means that one state may be able to substantially change the material conditions in another state or even globally on a unilateral basis.”
“A modification of just war theory will serve as a framework for restraining the use of environmental force…”
Sulfur Aerosol Dispersal
“Dispersal of sulfur dioxide particulates into the upper atmosphere is the most commonly discussed SRM method. Using airplanes, high altitude balloons, airships, or other means, injected aerosol particulates would then create a global haze…”
Costs and Implications
“In terms of security-related changes to the environment, ecological collateral damage during combat is one of the most significant costs of war, because disruption or destruction of the environment and its resources hinders the recovery of the civilian population…“
“Furthermore, this damage would be perpetrated knowingly upon other states without their consent.”
“Sulfur aerosols in particular may accelerate depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer, and since sulfur dioxide is the main corrosive component in acid precipitation, any sulfur artificially added to the atmosphere via geoengineering will eventually rain out in some form, causing localized ecosystem damage and human health concerns. Additionally, early computer models suggest that cloud brightening may interfere with existing precipitation patterns.”
“…since geoengineering technologies have the potential to disrupt the global physical status quo, they mount a potentially coercive threat with implications as serious as those in wartime.”
“The reasoning behind both ENMOD and Protocol I is that the health of the natural environment is critical to the survival of the civilian population and should not be prejudiced by war.”
“Just war theory provides ethical guidance for decision making about the destructive forces of war.”
“Finally, the principle of discrimination distinguishes between morally acceptable and unacceptable targets: combatants are legitimate targets; noncombatants are not.”
“…In considering geoengineering as a use of force, the principle of discrimination forces us to redefine who are considered combatants and noncombatants…
… “noncombatants” are normally those civilians who are not party to the conflict; in this parallel, we might term everyone else on Earth to be the noncombatants, since the action is not taken for their benefit, nor are they necessarily even considered.”
“Because of the global and possibly irreversible effects, all precautions must be taken by the decision makers to maximize transparency and represent all stakeholder views.”
“… geoengineering technologies are not like other weapons due to their unique combination of global reach, potential for nonlinear effect, and fundamental implications for the livability of our planet.”
“…geoengineering will alter the global climate…”
“…If done hastily or with no ecological care, a reckless deployment attempt could be perceived as an act of war by one aggrieved or desperate nation or party against the rest of humanity or the earth.”
“… insisting against evidence that a technique will work in the undetermined future can become a cover for faulty technology, scientific experimentation, or profit seeking.”
“…the extensive environmental alteration inherent in any scale geoengineering attempt could easily result in “widespread, long-lasting, and severe” damage…”
“…there would be no justifiable distinction between experimentation and actual use…
…These methods are indiscriminate, nonproportional, and possibly irreversible…”
Link To Summer 2018 Strategic Studies Quarterly
Related
German Environment Agency Report on SRM Geoengineering Governance
WEF Promotes Guiding Principles for Governance of Geoengineering Experimentation
Pakistan Policy Brief: Governance of Solar Radiation Modification
Send a message to urge your elected legislators to ban weather modification and polluting atmospheric interventions HERE
Research State Legislations HERE
Americans4aCleanAtmosphere.com