Comment: Rising Military Spending Risks Undermining Climate Action, New Research Warns
Security vs sustainability? Dr Erwei (David) Xiang shares his expert opinion on military expenditure versus meeting international climate goals.
16 September 2025
A recent study by Dr Erwei (David) Xiang, Senior Lecturer in Accounting at Newcastle University Business School, in collaboration with international partners, highlights how growing global military expenditure poses a direct threat to international climate goals. The study, also reported by The Guardian, reveals that increased defence spending by NATO and other major powers could drive up greenhouse gas emissions at a time when urgent reductions are needed to meet the targets of the Paris Agreement.
The research warns that military-related emissions remain largely hidden from public reporting. Despite the defence sector being one of the world’s largest institutional emitters, military emissions are often exempted from international climate agreements, making it difficult to track progress. With NATO members pledging to raise their defence budgets, these blind spots could hinder the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG 13): Climate Action.
Recent global context
The findings come at a time when climate risks are already intensifying. Summer 2025 shattered records across Europe, with the UK experiencing its hottest season since records began. Simultaneously, a devastating European heatwave from June to July is estimated to have caused over 2,300 deaths — about 65% attributable to human-induced climate change. At the same time, the wars in Ukraine and Gaza continue to heighten global geopolitical tensions, driving further military mobilisation.
This study underscores a profound paradox: while escalating geopolitical instability demands stronger defence postures, such militarisation may accelerate the very climate risks we seek to manage. If military emissions remain untracked and unregulated, they will forever remain a blind spot — and a serious one.
In recent months, diplomatic and strategic moves — from NATO’s spending increase to EU rearmament drives — have reinforced collective security postures but risk crowding out investment in climate resilience, low-carbon infrastructure, and sustainable development.
What needs to change
- Transparency and accounting: military emissions should be integrated into national reporting and climate targets, closing a key data blind spot
- Balanced budgets: fiscal planning must weigh defence needs alongside urgent climate mitigation and adaptation priorities
- Policy integration: defence strategies and climate policies must converge, with investments favouring dual-use infrastructure and technologies that map onto both resilience and security goals
Without such reform, we risk entering a future where security and sustainability are locked in conflict — when one cannot exist without the other.