Environmental consequences of U.S. imperialism

Dear Editor,

Despite the developing world producing a negligible fraction of carbon emissions, countries that comprise the Global South ultimately bear the brunt of the adverse health outcomes associated with pollution. Of the 9 million deaths secondary to exposure to pollution that occur worldwide, nearly 92% of these climate fatalities occur in low- and middle-income countries.

These nations are often struggling against long histories of colonialism, leaving them under-resourced as imperialist nations extracted wealth and resources. Thus, the solutions to climate change must be generated within a framework of decolonization and dismantling systems of oppression. If we prioritize equity throughout this process, we can start to turn the tide on our global climate crisis.

In addition to the social and political harms caused by the U.S. war machine around the world, environmental concerns abound. The U.S. military is currently the largest institutional polluter on the planet. Since the war on terror began in 2001, the U.S. military has created 1.2 metric tons of greenhouse gases. Over 400 million metric tons of these emissions were the direct result of “war-related fuel consumption.” Simply put, imperialism from the United States generates disastrous results for the planet.

In addition to being the world’s largest institutional polluter, the United States also happens to be spending far more on military operations than any other country in the world, the second-largest military spender on Earth being China. According to the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, even if the U.S. were to cut its military spending in half, it would still be spending more than China. This bloating of the military budget is entirely unnecessary, beyond the U.S. needing to flex its military might as a bully on the international stage.

So what can be done? An antiimperialist perspective would necessitate that the U.S. reduce its military operations globally. Less military spending would mean a smaller military, which in turn requires less military actions that cause emissions. Ultimately, this means less fossil fuels burned overall. But at that point, where can the U.S. prioritize reducing its operations?

The answer, in my opinion, would be to abandon military operations specifically in the Persian Gulf. Military actions in the Gulf not only serve as massive producers of emissions, but U.S. presence in the region is nothing more than a thinly-veiled attempt to assert control over fossil-fuel producing nations.

The issue then, remains, of what to do with all the funds that will be diverted from military spending. I believe the U.S. war machine must pay reparations to previously colonized nations that are currently suffering from a lack of resources and economic stimuli. Much of the former military spending can be used to provide investment capital for developing formerly colonized nations to shift their fuel use to greener alternatives. This is a crucial step in the fight to reduce global fossil fuel emissions, and generate wealth in nations whose resources have been exploited in the past.

— Charles Solidum

Ulster Park, N.Y.