The Nexus of War and Climate Change: Peace as a Pre-requisite for Climate Justice?

Context and Importance of the Topic

The relationship between climate change and conflict is complex and intertwined, both rooted in the exploitation of resources and vulnerable populations. The structures that drive climate crisis —such as unsustainable resource extraction, deforestation, and environmental degradation—often mirror those fuelling wars, embargoes, and conflicts. The dynamics of conflict have evolved since the end of the Cold War, with local and regional conflicts increasingly dominating the global stage, however the impacts are no longer localized[1]. The transboundary nature of conflict impacts—whether through displaced populations, disrupted trade, or environmental damage—means the effects can extend far beyond national borders. Climate change also adds another layer of complexity to these crises, acting as a threat multiplier that intensifies social, economic, and environmental pressures. As the world shifts towards energy transitions, control over the remaining reserves of oil, gas, and minerals becomes a geopolitical priority, fuelling tensions and proxy wars[2]. Analysts suggest that external interference in a rush for natural resources—often through the direct or indirect funding of warring factions—plays a crucial role in sustaining the violence[3].

Sudan is a powerful example of this entanglement. Since April 2023, the country has been consumed by war between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). Once allies in the military government that ousted a civilian transitional government in 2021, they now vie for control, inflicting untold suffering on civilians and drawing international condemnation for war crimes. The conflict, rooted in both local and international power struggles, has resulted in widespread destruction and a severe humanitarian crisis. More than 9 million people have been displaced, marking Sudan the largest displacement crisis[4], and with nearly 14.7 million in urgent need of humanitarian aid[5]. While the conflict is often framed as a political power struggle between military factions, the deeper reality is far more complex. The war has unfolded along resource-rich trade routes, fertile lands, and vital water sources, highlighting the competition for scarce resources beneath the political rhetoric. Fossil fuel giants are accused of fuelling and sustaining the conflict to secure access to resources that are critical for their energy transitions and geopolitical dominance[6], primarily through the exploitations of the vastly underutilised reserves of gold, and Liquefied Natural Gas off the Sudanese coast[7].  

Meanwhile, climate change continues to exert pressure on Sudan. In 2024 alone, record-breaking heatwaves claimed the lives of over 50 people attempting to cross the border into Egypt[8]. By August, severe floods struck the country, with the catastrophic burst of the Arbaat Dam standing out as the peak event, destroying 20 villages, with many more severely damaged, with thousands displaced, and vital supply routes cut[9]. Even before the war, Sudan ranked 5^th among the most vulnerable nations to climate change[10], where climate adaptation recognized as a key political priority with the view that climate change is a serious threat to the country’s development.[11] Despite this, Sudan remained one of the least recipients of climate finance, with an even smaller share allocated for adaptation[12].

This convergence of threats—war, climate change, and external interference—raises fundamental questions about climate justice and conflict resolution. Is peace a prerequisite for achieving climate justice, or can justice be pursued even in the midst of instability?

Rethinking Climate and Conflict Response

Grounding this debate in the realities on the ground, we see that Sudan’s crisis requires more than theoretical discussions; it demands practical, adaptive governance and financing strategies that recognize the multifaceted nature of the conflict. Climate resilience efforts must run parallel to peacebuilding but be designed for conflict conditions. For example, programs supporting smallholder farmers or securing access to water in contested areas must operate within fluid power structures and shifting territorial control. The international community must move away from the assumption that resilience projects can be easily scaled; they must be hyper-localized, flexible, and prepared for constant disruption.

Further, there is a clear gap in the global climate discourse when it comes to addressing climate impacts in conflict zones. Sudan’s experience illustrates how conflict and climate stressors compound each other, making traditional climate response programming nearly impossible. Addressing this gap requires both political will and innovative intervention designs that move away from the donor-recipient model and toward equitable partnerships that value local knowledge and experiences. An example of operationalizing this at the international policy level could be through the recently established Loss and Damage Fund. The finance allocation mechanism should intentionally prioritize vulnerability over readiness as a proxy for allocation, with a special consideration for conflict states. Further, in the absence of formal governance structures, local initiatives leading response, reconstruction and rehabilitation should be empowered with direct access to climate finance. These initiatives must not be viewed as secondary alternatives but as frontline solutions in complex environments. A similar approach should also be reflected in other climate funds such as the Green Climate Fund, and the Global Environment Facility.

On the bilateral level, Sudan’s experience also offers lessons for how not to design partnerships. The EU’s Khartoum Process for instance, initiated in 2014 to curb human trafficking along migration routes, inadvertently empowered the RSF[13], which is now a central actor in the conflict. This misstep underscores the importance of building partnerships based on the key principles of equity and accountability. Such partnerships should include safeguards to prevent the empowerment of authoritarian regimes or violent factions, with human rights and a clear understanding of local dynamics at the forefront.

Regional cooperation is critical to both peacebuilding and climate resilience building. Neighbouring countries, particularly those affected by refugee flows, disrupted trade, and shared environmental stresses, must be involved in any long-term solutions. In Sudan’s case, the African Union, IGAD, and Arab allies could take on a more strategic and genuine role, ensuring regional dynamics contribute to stability rather than exacerbate the ongoing crisis.

Beyond the immediate state of conflict, breaking the cycles of dependency is crucial for building a better and a more resilient future. Analysts suggest that structural deficiencies—crippling external debt, energy deficits, food insecurity, and low-value industrialization— perpetuate the cycles of vulnerability in countries like Sudan[14], and eventually leading to conflict. The ongoing war is rooted in deep-seated divisions from the colonial legacy and decades of political and economic fragmentation. Fossil fuel actors exacerbate instability by prioritizing resource access over community welfare. To break this cycle, strategic investments and genuine partnerships focused on long-term sustainability and self-sufficiency are crucial. Key areas include promoting food sovereignty through agroecological practices, achieving renewable energy independence, and implementing industrial and trade policies that curb illegal critical mineral exports while fostering high-value production beyond low-skill assembly work.

[1]Sudan: is this an even more geopolitical conflict than Ukraine or Gaza?, Jamie Shea, 13 Sep 2024 https://www.friendsofeurope.org/insights/critical-thinking-sudan-is-this-an-even-more-geopolitical-conflict-than-ukraine-or-gaza/

[2] The Uncomfortable Geopolitics of the Clean Energy Transition, Matt Ince, Erin Sikorsky, 13 Dec 2023, https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-uncomfortable-geopolitics-of-the-clean-energy-transition

[3]Natural Resources and Violent Conflict, The World Bank,2003,  https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/es/578321468762592831/pdf/Natural-resources-and-violent-conflict-options-and-actions.pdf

[4] IOM, Displacment Tracking Matrix in Sudan, https://dtm.iom.int/sudan

[5] Reports about Sudan in reliefweb, https://reports.unocha.org/en/country/sudan/card/4gmjn6nmZs/

[6] It’s an open secret: the UAE is fuelling Sudan’s war – and there’ll be no peace until we call it out , The Guardian , 24 May 2024, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/may/24/uae-sudan-war-peace-emirates-uk-us-officials

[7] Climate wars fuelling genocide in Sudan, Rachel Donald, 12 Feb 2024, https://www.planetcritical.com/p/climate-wars-fuelling-genocide-in

[8] Heatwave kills dozens of Sudanese en route to Egypt, reliefweb, 11 Jun 2024,https://reliefweb.int/report/egypt/heatwave-kills-dozens-sudanese-en-route-egypt

[9] Sudan’s Dam Disaster: Where Climate Change Meets War, Abdalftah Hamed Ali, 15 Sep 2024, https://mecouncil.org/blog_posts/sudans-dam-disaster-where-climate-change-meets-war/

[10] ND-GAIN Country Index Scores, Updated Ahgust 2024, https://gain.nd.edu/our-work/country-index/

[11] National Adaptation Plan, July 2016, https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/NAPC/Documents%20NAP/National%20Reports/Sudan%20NAP.pdf

[12] Beyond Climate Finance Pledges: A Critical Exploration of Adaptation Finance Allocation and Access to Sudan, Lund University LUP Student Papers, 2022, https://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/search/publication/9097173

[13] The Khartoum Process, https://www.khartoumprocess.net/about/the-khartoum-process

[14] Climate Finance for the Global North, Fadhel Kaboub, 24 Apr 2024, https://globalsouthperspectives.substack.com/p/climate-finance-for-the-global-north