COP30 Cannot Meet the 1.5ºC Goal while Military Emissions Stay Uncounted
ENVIRONMENT, 24 Nov 2025
Prof. Brendan Mackey | Climate Action Beacon/Al Jazeera - TRANSCEND Media Service
Smoke rises after an explosion in the Gaza Strip as seen from the Israeli side of the border on 31 Aug 2025, in southern Israel.
[Amir Levy/Getty Images]
Militaries are major global polluters, yet they remain exempt from climate reporting, creating a blind spot that threatens the entire COP30 roadmap—and the whole world by association; a cancer.
20 Nov 2025 – As COP30 negotiations in Belem enter their final stretch, there is hope that countries might finally agree on a roadmap to phase out fossil fuels — a breakthrough that is crucial if we are serious about keeping 1.5C alive. Yet even at this pivotal moment, one major highway is still missing from that roadmap that could undermine the progress made in Brazil: the carbon emissions of the military.
Under the Paris Agreement, governments are not required to report their militaries’ emissions, and most simply don’t. Recent analysis by the Military Emissions Gap project shows that what little data exists is patchy, inconsistent or missing entirely. This “military emissions gap” is the gulf between what governments disclose and the true scale of military pollution. The result is stark: militaries remain largely invisible in the Belem negotiations, creating a dangerous blind spot in global climate action.
The size of that blind spot is staggering. Militaries account for an estimated 5.5 percent of global emissions. This share is set to rise further as defence spending surges while the rest of society decarbonises. If militaries were a country, they would be the fifth-largest emitter on Earth, ahead of Russia with 5 percent. Yet only five countries follow the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change’s (UNFCCC) voluntary reporting guidelines for military emissions, and those cover fuel use alone. The reality is far broader: munitions production and disposal, waste management and fugitive emissions from refrigeration, air-conditioning, radar and electrical equipment are left out. And operations in international waters and airspace are not reported at all, leaving massive gaps in both climate accountability and action.
The military emissions gap widens further still when we consider the climate impact of armed conflicts. As if the horror and human suffering from fighting wars were not enough, wars also destroy ecosystems, leave a toxic legacy on lands for decades to follow, and result in significant CO2 emissions, including from the rebuilding following the destruction of buildings and infrastructure. But without any internationally agreed framework to measure conflict emissions, these additional emissions risk going unreported, meaning that we don’t know how much wars are setting back climate action.
But despite this, momentum for accountability is finally building. Nearly 100 organisations have signed the War on Climate initiative’s pledges ahead of COP30, and protesters and civil society groups in Belem are demanding the UNFCCC confront this long-ignored source of pollution. Policymakers are starting to shift, too. The European Union has taken steps towards more transparent reporting and decarbonisation in the defence sector, though this progress is now threatened by rapid rearmament. Combined with NATO’s new target for members to spend 5 percent of gross domestic product on militaries, these pledges could produce up to 200 million tonnes of CO2 and trigger as much as $298bn in climate damages annually, putting Europe’s own climate goals at risk.
International law reinforces the urgency and demand for accountability. The International Court of Justice’s recent landmark advisory opinion reminded states that they are obliged under climate treaties to assess, report and mitigate harms, including those caused by armed conflict and military activity. Ignoring these emissions doesn’t just undercount global warming; it masks the scale of the crisis and weakens the world’s ability to tackle its root causes.
The gap between current emission-reduction plans and what is needed to stay below the 1.5C limit remains catastrophic. If COP30 negotiators agree on a roadmap for phasing out fossil fuels, what happens next will determine whether it delivers real progress or remains symbolic. No sector can be exempt from climate action, and military emissions cannot continue to remain hidden.
Mandatory reporting of all military emissions to the UNFCCC – from combat and training activities to the long-lasting climate damage inflicted on communities – is essential. That data must form the baseline for urgent, science-aligned reductions, embedded in national climate plans, and consistent with the 1.5C limit.
Security cannot come at the cost of the climate. Tackling climate change is now essential to our collective safety and the survival of our planet.
____________________________________________
Prof. Brendan Mackey is Director of the Climate Action Beacon at Griffith University, Queensland, Australia. Professor Mackey has over 300 academic publications, including in related fields of climate science and policy. He is an IPCC AR7 review editor. Griffith’s Climate Action Beacon develops knowledge, leadership, capacity, and responses to support effective and fair climate action through interdisciplinary research and partnerships that promote change in practice and drive climate initiatives.
Go to Original – aljazeera.com
Tags: Arms Industry, Arms Trade, COP30, Demilitarization, Military, Military Carbon Footprint, Military Industrial Technological Complex, WMD, War Economy
DISCLAIMER: The statements, views and opinions expressed in pieces republished here are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of TMS. In accordance with title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. TMS has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is TMS endorsed or sponsored by the originator. “GO TO ORIGINAL” links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the “GO TO ORIGINAL” links. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Join the discussion!
We welcome debate and dissent, but personal — ad hominem — attacks (on authors, other users or any individual), abuse and defamatory language will not be tolerated. Nor will we tolerate attempts to deliberately disrupt discussions. We aim to maintain an inviting space to focus on intelligent interactions and debates.