������Ƶ

On January 13^th, Admiral Jim Stavrides will be
speaking at a Natural Security Forum at the Army-Navy Club in Washington, DC. I’m
not involved in this particular event, but I would encourage folks to go,
nonetheless.

The event, hosted by the Stimson Center, is defining
“natural security” somewhat differently than I do (they’re relating it to
environmental crime), so I thought it might be a good idea to write about how I
came up with the concept and what it means to me.

When I first established the Natural Security Program at the
Center for a ������Ƶn Security (CNAS) back in 2008, we researched the term
to make sure we weren’t inadvertently borrowing it from someone else. We found
that scientist and energy policy thinker had
once used the term in an article, back in 1988. I later met Hal, and he didn’t
really remember the article, but was delighted we were using the moniker. Around
the time we established our program, Marine Ecologist Rafe Sagarin also wrote a
book called . In his use of the
term, Sagarin was referring to defenses in the natural world (think a squid’s
ink or a skunk’s spray), and specifically those that might inform technology
development for humans. It was a great , which he
continued at the University of Arizona until his tragic and untimely death in
2015. Rafe and I discussed our program back in 2008, and he had no problem with
our using the term, as long as we didn’t try to copyright it. In fact, even
though we were using the term in different ways, we had discussed the
possibility of collaboration. I’m sorry we never had the chance.

In 2009, CNAS released “,” my report laying out the parameters of our program. In that
report, I defined natural security as the confluence of natural resources and
national security – how resources shape security and geopolitics, and vice
versa. We were looking at the consumption of resources – energy, water,
minerals, and land – and the consequences of changing consumption patterns,
such as climate change and biodiversity loss. The goal was a policy, not
scholarly, research program, one that might inform legislation and decisions at
the Pentagon, State Department, Executive Office of the President, and other
relevant national security agencies. My intent was to raise the profile of
these issues and ensure they were being incorporated into national security
decisions. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to grow that program as I intended,
given that I entered the Obama Administration soon after as an Assistant
Secretary of Defense. Others (Christine Parthemore and Will Rogers) continued
the work at CNAS for some time, but eventually the program was retired. Today,
does a great job of running a kindred but unique program at CNAS called “Energy,
Economics, and Security.”

When I left government in 2014 and came to ������Ƶ, I had
originally intended to focus on energy security research of my own, with the
goal of publishing a book on “the energy of war”. That research continues,
albeit more slowly than I had hoped, but I’ve also started to build programming
for ������Ƶ on natural resource security. This includes this occasional blog,
which I am calling Natural Security, with the blessing of CNAS. I still see
“natural security” as a question of the link between national security and
natural resources, and how access to and consumption of resources affects
stability, prosperity, and conflict. We’re focusing right now on disaster
readiness in the United States, climate security around the world, and critical
minerals, while exploring possible topics on energy, food, water, and trade
patterns. Again, the goal is to identify policy-relevant challenges and
opportunities, and ������Ƶ’s focus is not just the Federal government and
foreign relations, but state and local governments across the country, as well.

We don’t look at environmental crime, but it’s
certainly an important topic, and I’m glad Stimson is taking it on. As the
saying goes, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery – or perhaps Rafe
Sagarin would have pointed out that imitation can be a great force mulitplier.  In that light, you can’t have too much natural
security!