Antalya, Turkiye ( 6th November 2026) — ‘ A world increasingly organised around military competition and spheres of influence is fundamentally incompatible with the unprecedented level of international cooperation required to avert the worst impacts of the climate crisis, warns the 2026 Civil Society Equity Review, Militarism in the Time of Climate Emergency, endorsed by 320 organizations.
The report highlights how deeply the fossil fuel economy is intertwined with systems of military power, geopolitical domination, and resource competition. Since the US coup in Venezuela, oil production has increased dramatically and the burgeoning revenues have unsurprisingly flowed into US coffers, while democracy – the nominal rationale for the invasion – has made no visible progress. Russia’s war in Ukraine, combined with wars in the Middle East have disrupted global energy supplies and amplified price shocks in electricity, transport, food, and other essentials.
Published ahead of COP31 in Türkiye, the report argues that militarism and “me-first” geopolitics are undermining international cooperation and climate action. Global military spending reached $2.9 trillion in 2025, diverting resources from climate finance, while military emissions—estimated at 5% of global annual greenhouse gas emissions—remain largely unaccounted for in national inventories. Meanwhile, war destroys ecosystems, weakens institutions and uproots communities, undermining climate resilience and leaving people more vulnerable to climate impacts. As the report warns, “If war is hell, war within a disrupted climate is yet a deeper, unimagined circle of hell.”
As the world moves towards a period of temperature overshoot, it is increasingly clear that returning the Earth system to 1.5°C within the coming decades will require an unprecedented global mobilisation – one that is virtually impossible without a fundamental transformation of the existing political, economic and institutional order. The report makes the case for allocating the effort of phasing out fossil fuel production and consumption according to countries’ fair shares, recognising that responsibility must reflect their historical contributions to the climate crisis, capacity to act and dependence on fossil fuel extraction
The report proposes a differentiated approach to fossil fuel extraction phaseout: production should decline fastest in countries where doing so would cause the least social and economic disruption, while countries more dependent on extraction and with fewer resources to manage the transition should be afforded more time and international support Applying this principle, the analysis finds that global fossil fuel extraction must decline by 90% by 2040, with even the countries facing the greatest transition challenges completing their phaseout within 25 years (by 2050).
The Civil society equity analysis of how national climate pledges compare with their fair share of the global mitigation effort taking account of historical responsibility and capacity finds that the NDCs, taken cumulatively, are grossly insufficient compared to the mitigation effort needed to hold warming below 1.5 C or even 2.0 C and if not updated keeps these goals out of reach. They are also inconsistent with any credible approach to fairly sharing the global climate mitigation effort.
The analysis finds that wealthy countries, despite having the greatest capacity to act and bearing the greatest historical responsibility for the climate crisis, are falling dramatically short of their fair share. Their climate pledges expose a widening gap between national commitments and global responsibility. The US, EU, Japan and Australia would each need to more than double, or even triple, the mitigation ambition of their stated NDC targets just to reach the lower end of their respective fair share ranges. On the other hand, the analysis finds that many Pledges from global south countries approach or even exceed their national fair-share obligation. To close the ambition gap, global north countries must drastically increase their national mitigation efforts and provide climate finance to the global south. Without financial support to the global south to carry out additional mitigation the arithmetic of global mitigation simply does not add up. The report also highlights inequalities within countries, arguing that climate action should account for disparities in income and wealth. It finds that the wealthiest 5% of the global population should bear 78% of the global mitigation effort required under a fair distribution of climate responsibility.
Rich countries are spending trillions on war but somehow can never find enough to tackle the climate crisis. That is not a lack of money but a political choice. The countries most responsible for this crisis are furthest from meeting their fair share, while communities across the Global South lose their homes, livelihoods and lives. And yet many Global South countries are doing their fair share, or more. At COP31, wealthy governments must stop making excuses: cut emissions faster, lead the phaseout of fossil fuels, and provide the public, grant-based finance developing countries need for a just transition. There is no pathway back to 1.5°C in a world organised for war.” — Tasneem Essop, Climate action Network International
As planetary warming hurtles past the 1.5C redline, it’s past time to realize that muddling incrementally forward isn’t going to suffice. Climate stabilization demands a fundamental break with the emerging world order, and the drift towards militarism is a key case in point. Around the world, military buildouts are exploding, and this couldn’t come at a worse time. Nor do most people realize the scale of the stupidity – global military spending reached $2.9 trillion in 2025, a sum that would quite suffice to finance a hard international push for fair and rapid decarbonization.” Tom Athanasiou, the executive director of EcoEquity and one of the authors of the report
National fossil fuel phaseout roadmaps must not become another set of vague voluntary pledges with no accounting for whether they actually add up to a fair and effective global climate response. A just global phaseout requires real actions that are commensurate with countries’ relative responsibilities and capacities, in light of their socio-economic dependence on extraction. The fair phaseout framework presented in this report illustrates how wealthier and less fossil fuel extraction-dependent countries can transition more rapidly, rather than continuing to deplete the remaining phaseout room, leaving poorer, more dependent countries with with impossibly little time to transition. Crucially, since there is so little carbon budget remaining, wealthy countries must also include international support so poorer, more extraction-dependent countries can transition, too. Each country muddling along its own path would be unfair, impractical, and doomed to failure.” – Sivan Kartha, Senior Scientist, Stockholm Environment Institute and Extraction Equity Working Group
This report exposes a fundamental contradiction: while the world urgently needs unprecedented international cooperation to confront the climate crisis, fossil fuel dependence continues to fuel geopolitical tensions, resource competition and global inequalities. A Fossil Fuel Treaty offers a concrete pathway to overcome this contradiction by establishing a framework for international cooperation to phase out fossil fuel production and consumption in a fair, orderly and financed manner. Such an instrument must recognise countries’ historical responsibilities, different capacities and levels of dependence on fossil fuels, ensuring that those most vulnerable to the transition receive the support they need. Moving beyond fossil fuels is not only a climate imperative, but also an opportunity to strengthen peace, energy security and international solidarity.” - Andrés Gómez, Latin America lead for the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative
