Turning Climate Risk into Joint Action:

Turning Climate Risk into Joint Action: Reflections from the Montreal Climate Security Summit 

On 8 to 9 October 2025, CGIAR Climate Security joined military leaders, policymakers, researchers, and industry partners in Montreal for the 4th Climate Security Summit organized by NATO CCASCOE and the CDA Institute. The summit’s purpose was to strengthen military adaptation to climate risks and turn cross‑sector dialogue into operational solutions. Plenaries, roundtables, and workshops created an honest space to compare notes on what is changing, what is already breaking, and what we can do together.

The state of climate security today

The opening panel captured a shift many of us see on the ground: climate change is not a “threat multiplier.” It is creating new risks and new insecurities in their own right, through water scarcity, land degradation, climate volatility, and displacement, especially across Africa and MENA. Speakers warned that impacts are accelerating while geopolitical tensions make cooperation harder. 

In line with chaos theory, climate shocks are reshaping the operating environment in non‑linear ways, which means spillovers are harder to predict and to contain.

Several messages stood out:

• Interconnected risks are now the rule, not the exception. Resource competition, livelihood disruption, and governance stress can interact to raise the likelihood of conflict and displacement.
• Disinformation and hybrid threats are growing. Climate disasters can fuel information vacuums, price spikes, and public frustration, all of which are exploitable by hostile actors.
• Armed forces need strategic adaptation, not only better disaster response. Participants called for NATO climate effects advisors, the systematic inclusion of climate in exercises and simulations, and stronger buffers across supply chains, energy, health, and critical infrastructure.
• Not every climate shock leads to conflict. Intervening factors matter. Investments in agricultural resilience, natural resource management, and good governance still change outcomes.

This framing set the stage for the discussion on the Middle East and North Africa region.

Inside the MENA roundtable

Across the MENA region, water scarcity is a core stressor. However, participants underlined a crucial point - scarcity does not automatically produce conflict. Many of the most instructive examples are cases of transboundary cooperation because water risks force governments to sit at the same table. At the same time, specific flashpoints deserve close attention, including the security implications of major dams and basin politics as in the case of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD). We also noted that it is not only scarcity that destabilizes; sudden abundance, poorly governed or captured by elites, can spark contention as well.

Soil health and locally led adaptation came through strongly. Colleagues highlighted farmer‑led initiatives in Jordan and the reality that every harvest is now climate affected. Investing in what already works in communities is often the fastest way to build buffers against shocks. 

The region’s youthful population is central. With 55 percent of the population in some places under 25, climate stress can intersect with unemployment to create openings for political manipulation or recruitment by violent actors if opportunities are not created.

On migration and displacement, we heard how climate impacts often drive internal movement first, straining local services and infrastructure. Internal displacement and the pressures on border management in Lebanon and Iraq are reminders that the humanitarian, security, and development communities must plan together. Refugees in Jordan and across the region face also limited access to land and long‑term prospects, which undermines self‑reliance. Mobility constraints in the West Bank and settler violence that affects water quantity and quality add another layer of environmental insecurity.

Energy security is part of the climate security picture. Russia’s growing engagement on nuclear energy and China’s expanding footprint in renewables and supply chains matter for resilience and for geopolitics. 

Finally, as mentioned by Lieutenant-General Peter Scott, Deputy Command Allied Joint Force Command Naples, NATO’s presence in MENA is not as strong as in Europe, but NATO’s Joint Force Command Naples is aimed at enhancing its understanding of the Region through cooperation with regional actors, research and monitoring, and collaboration with organizations such as the CCASCOE. Participants agreed that stronger bridges with local and international research institutes working in MENA are essential.

Five priorities that emerged

1. Invest in locally led adaptation at scale: Soil health, water management, rangeland restoration, and climate‑smart agriculture are not only development wins. If done correctly, they are stability investments that reduce livelihood shocks and the pressures that can feed disorder. Backing what communities already do, and matching it with public finance and private sector tools, is the most reliable way to build resilience quickly.
2. Treat mobility as a predictable feature of climate risk, not an exception: Most movement is internal at first. Planning for safe mobility, service delivery in receiving areas, and dignified economic opportunities reduces friction between newcomers and host communities. Where cross‑border movement occurs, early cooperation on border management, data sharing, and labor pathways helps avoid reactive crisis responses.
3. Strengthen climate‑security foresight and early warning: Integrate climate indicators into security planning, and pair them with social and economic signals. Having climate effects advisors inside security institutions, climate modules in war games, and joint analysis cells that include local researchers can move us from episodic warning to continuous situational awareness.
4. Counter hybrid threats that exploit climate shocks: Disasters create opportunity spaces for disinformation, grievance amplification, and criminal or terrorist activity. Resilience means more than sandbags. It includes transparent risk communication, rapid restoration of basic services, and partnerships with trusted local actors who can address rumors before they spread.
5. Put energy security into the climate security conversation: Diversifying supply, protecting critical infrastructure, and understanding geopolitical dependencies in nuclear and renewable value chains are now part of risk management in MENA. Technical cooperation that improves efficiency and grid stability can deliver near‑term security dividends.

What this means for partners

For NATO and defense actors, the roundtable reinforced that climate is now a transnational challenge that demands vigilance and deterrence, and also smarter cooperation. Defense readiness should not be hollowed out by ad hoc disaster response. Civilian agencies and international partners should carry more of that load, while militaries focus on adaptation of missions, bases, logistics, and exercises.

For governments and development partners, the message is to double down on institutions that manage land, water, and energy fairly. This is where climate action intersects most directly with peace dividends. For the research community, it is time to deepen collaboration with NATO, and to co‑produce tools that security and peacebuilding decision‑makers can use.

Looking ahead

Moderating the MENA session in Montreal was a reminder that the region’s climate security agenda is complex yet solvable. Cooperation on shared water risks can be a platform for broader confidence building. Youth can be an engine for adaptation and innovation if we invest in skills and livelihoods. Refugees and displaced people can be included in solutions that strengthen host communities rather than strain them. Energy transitions can reduce vulnerabilities if the governance is right.

Our takeaway is simple. Climate security in MENA will improve when we turn analysis into joint action that is local, people centered, and institutionally grounded. The conversations in Montreal showed real willingness to do exactly that. 

Authors: Grazia Pacillo, Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT; Francesco Corvaro, Special Envoy for Climate Change of the Italian Government. 

This work is carried out with support from the CGIAR Climate Action Science Program (CASP) and the CGIAR Food Frontiers and Security (FFS) Science Program. We would like to thank all funders who supported this research through their contributions to the CGIAR Trust Fund: https://www.cgiar.org/funders/