Climate change is already realigning global power - here's why

Making sweeping statements about how the world works is dangerous academic business, but Arthur Snell does it convincingly in his new book, Elemental, How We Will Live on a Warming Planet which demonstrates how climate change coincides with a collapse of geopolitical order. He begins the introduction to his book by making a distinction between the oversimplification that “everything is because of climate change” and the truth that “climate change changes everything.” As a diplomat, Snell worked in conflict zones across the Middle East and Africa, where he witnessed first hand how changes in weather patterns were often the catalysts sparking global upheaval. Events such as the Arab Spring began with migration patterns into cities as drought and heat pushed Syrians off their lands and into crowded urban areas. Likewise, civil conflict in Sudan can be partially explained by a battle between warring forces over diminishing arable land. 

In his book, Snell uses the word “epochal” to describe how climate change will alter the way we live our lives, and for many people on the planet, where they can live their lives. Although there is scientific agreement that the planet is changing, humans have been unable to reach consensus on how to stop it. Western countries have elected populist anti-climate leaders who refer to climate change as a “hoax”. Major fossil fuel countries such as Norway and Saudi Arabia play lip service to the green transition while insisting that fossil fuel exports will continue. And although many ordinary people do their best to reduce their individual carbon footprints, they read headlines describing breakdowns of climate treaties. “This means our world is going to change in profound ways and that is going to happen in the lifetime of many readers of this book,” Snell warns in his introduction.  

On Tuesday, Peter Frankopan, professor of Global History at Oxford, joined Snell at the Conduit to discuss his new book and how we can live in a quickly changing planet. Frankopan began the conversation by asking how it is that the public seems to pay less attention to issues of climate change than it did a few years ago. Could it be that other stories of international conflicts and their impact on business and cost of living have captivated global attention? Or could the concerns of climate change have become something so heavy that we no longer want to read about them? 

“We have lived in an era of American dominance,” Snell answered. By that, he explained that America has maintained dominance over countries that produce energy and has likewise dominated the global scene as a producer of energy. That era is now coming to an end. Snell argued that we are now living in a time when many once-dominant countries can see the end of their relevance in sight. “Trump visited China and it was taken as axiomatic that America is a declining power and China is a rising power.” 

America’s choice to back hydrocarbons over the past decade has been matched by China’s lead in electrification. The country’s investment in solar power helped emissions from energy and industry fall slightly in 2025, demonstrating China’s commitment to renewable and clean-tech industries. Snell argued that progress in green technology, combined with Beijing’s willingness to invest heavily in the green transition, will mean that countries that once generated most of their income from fossil fuels will see their influence wane in the coming decades. He pointed specifically to Gulf countries with large populations, such as Saudi Arabia, that are quickly running toward a cliff edge. “There is no Plan B to oil production,” he added. 

This waning influence over energy production, Snell argued, is causing the leaders of petro-states to focus on two things: maintaining their economic models of relying on hydrocarbons for as long as possible; and maintaining autocratic control over their countries for as long as possible. “You see this with MBS [Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud] taking a much more aggressive approach, particularly towards Iran, but also regionally with countries like Yemen and Qatar,” Snell said. “To me this means he is trying to maximize this sort of last lap of this extraordinary economic hand Saudi has been dealt.”  

Unlike democratically elected leaders who come and go with the whims of their citizens, MBS will live through the green transition. For Snell this explains why the future Saudi ruler tried to introduce the Vision 2030 that described fantastical economic projects such as a ski resort and a 170km- long mirrored skyscraper.  The project obviously failed, which for Snell means the best the kingdom can hope for is to hold out with oil for as long as possible and to push for regime change in Iran. 

With all the obvious evidence supporting the need for green technology, Frankopan asked why countries in the West are facing such a populist backlash against financing the transition away from fossil fuels. Although climate deniers are relatively rare in Britain, Reform UK has threatened to cut subsidies for green energy. And in the US, Trump was elected partially due to a Libertarian ethos in rural communities that deeply resents any talk of climate change.

Part of the explanation, Snell feels, is that information about climate change is coming from scientific experts who describe how it will change our lives in very inconvenient and expensive ways.  “A part of populist politics is fear,” Snell said. “Disasters need weaponisation, and fearful events feed the kind of paranoia that goes along with a rising populist agenda.” 

One of the biggest causes of fear is the increased threat of food insecurity. As a professor of global history, Frankopan asked how a risk of food shortages could upset the future global order. Although dire Malthusian predictions of famine have not yet come to pass, there are indications that the planet could be heading toward a tipping point where it can no longer produce enough for the caloric needs of a growing population.

According to Snell, anxiety over food supply is behind many current conflicts. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine can be partially explained by his desire to gain control over eastern farmland in the country’s Donbas region. “Big tracks of prime agricultural land were portioned off to some of Russia’s richest oligarchs. It reminded me of William the Conqueror parcelling out parts of England to lords,” said Snell.  

While much of the conversation focused on how climate change is a cause of global conflict, Snell pointed out that sometimes it can be a reason for cooperation. He pointed to the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam situated on the Blue Nile. When fully operational it will provide nearly 49% of Ethiopia’s power needs. In addition to electricity, the dam has also given the country significant political leverage over Sudan and Egypt which rely on the Nile for drinking water, and over Tanzania which receives power from Ethiopia’s dam.

“We could say the dam would lead to war,” Snell mused, “but what is interesting is they are doing everything they can to avoid that.” The dam was funded with Chinese finance, and China has lent significant sums to Egypt. In the section in his book on water, Snell explained that “by binding both countries into a Chinese-led order, Beijing may be in a position to manage future conflicts according to its own interests.”  

Predicting the future has always been a dangerous exercise, particularly in geopolitics, where technological breakthroughs, political upheavals and human decisions can rapidly reshape the global landscape. Few analysts foresaw the speed of the Soviet Union’s collapse or the scale of globalisation that followed the Cold War. Climate change introduces even greater uncertainty because it intersects with every aspect of modern life, from migration and agriculture to energy production and national security.

Yet while the precise contours of the future remain impossible to map, one conclusion appears increasingly unavoidable: climate change will alter not only how we live, but also the balance of global power itself. Nations that adapt quickly may gain influence, while those that remain dependent on fading economic models risk instability and decline.