ABSTRACT
Yet this view has come under increasing pressure. The challenge is both empirical and normative. Empirically, a 2012 study conducted by the Marshall Institute concludes that “the climate-security argument is dangerously overstated and designed to serve a domestic political purpose more than filling a void in strategic thinking”.7 The linkage between security and climate change may lend legitimisation to the expansion of military activities and budgets while not actually tackling the root causes of climate change, and it is therefore, in the words of Rita Floyd, often seen as not being “just” in a normative sense.8
