Arctic warming 3.5 times faster than rest of world - as security threats to UK 'fundamentally changing'
The Arctic is warming 3.5 times faster than the global average, scientists have warned, raising new security threats for the UK.
Melting Arctic ice is opening up more routes for shipping and military vessels, and the potential to drill for new reserves of gas, oil and natural minerals in an otherwise virtually unspoilt ecosystem.
The continent has long been warming faster than the rest of the world.
As the sea ice disappears, its white surface that reflects sunlight gives way to darker ocean underneath that absorbs the heat instead.
Today the United Nations' World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) warned the Arctic is on course to warm 3.5 times faster than the rest of the world over the next five years, making it at least 2.4C warmer than the recent average.
It comes as the UK's Foreign Secretary David Lammy tours the region to assess threats from Russia and climate change, calling it an "increasingly important frontier for geopolitical competition and trade".
On Tuesday he announced new UK funding to work with Iceland on monitoring Arctic waters, for AI to detect hostile state activity and for research on the impact on the UK.
Arctic melt is expected to push up sea levels around Britain's coastline and fuel worse coastal flooding.
It will shift the jet stream, disrupting the UK's weather system in ways not yet fully understood.
Security threat 'fundamentally changed'
Klaus Dodds, geopolitics professor at Royal Holloway, said less sea ice in the Arctic will likely attract "heightened commercial and military activity by third parties that are not allies of the UK, primarily Russia and China".
He said the UK should prepare to operate in the region without the US as a reliable ally, while Russia will "continue to target critical infrastructure in the North Atlantic and European Arctic - all of which maybe ever more accessible".
Ed Arnold from security thinktank RUSI said further melt will mean "that the Russians would have more control over [the Northern Sea Route]" via which ships can access waters around Britain.
The security threat is changing "pretty fundamentally" as vessels can more easily travel through the Arctic to waters containing gas pipelines or data cables supplying Europe, he added.
1:55
'Shocking, but not shocking'
The WMO report also warned a dangerous new warming threshold was on the horizon for the first time.
Ten years ago, under the landmark Paris Agreement, world leaders promised to try to limit warming to no more than 2C above pre-industrial levels, and ideally stick to 1.5C.
At the time, both those thresholds felt a long way off.
But just 10 years later, today's report forecasts for the first time ever a chance of breaching 2C of warming at some point in the next five years.
The chances are "exceptionally unlikely", probably no more than 1%, said Prof Adam Scaife from the Met Office Hadley Centre, who worked on the report.
But such a forecast would have been "effectively impossible" just a few years ago, in a sign of how quickly the climate is changing.
Prof Scaife added: "It is shocking in that sense that two degrees is possible. However, it's not shocking [because]… we thought it might be plausible at this stage, and indeed it is."
And unless something changes dramatically, 2C will become increasingly likely, increasingly soon, the authors warned, driving more extreme weather and migration as homelands become unliveable.
The WMO also warned temperatures are likely to again hit 1.5C above pre-industrial levels over the next five years - after doing so temporarily in 2024.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Times letters: Britain and the tinderbox in the Middle East
Write to letters@ Sir, Sir Keir Starmer has called on Iran to 'return to the negotiating table' after the US bombed its nuclear sites. But treating Iran as a legitimate negotiating partner while it refuses to recognise Israel's right to exist only reinforces Tehran's rejectionist stance. History provides a clear road map: recognition leads to peace. Of the 164 countries that now recognise Israel, none are engaged in active warfare with it. Egypt's recognition in 1979 ended decades of conflict. Jordan's recognition in 1994 transformed enemies into sometime partners. The Abraham Accords demonstrated that recognition can unlock prosperity and co-operation even without resolving every regional grievance. Regional issues need and deserve resolution but they cannot be resolved in an environment where a significant power actively works towards the destruction of Israel. Negotiations remain preferable to conflict, but Israel needs to be involved in these talks as a recognised sovereign state. Without recognition and meaningful bilateral negotiations between Israel and Iran, the present situation will continue as a zero-sum game, which Israel simply cannot afford to lose. Tony Morcowitz Brighton and Hove Sir, When Sir Keir Starmer announced the Chagos Islands giveaway, he said that surrendering sovereignty was necessary because the UK had to be seen to uphold international law. Now he has gone on to publish statements in support of the US bombing of Iran. He is publicly supporting a flagrant breach of international law forbidding unprovoked attacks on other nations and, indeed, is speaking in defiance of advice from his attorney-general warning that any attack on Iran could be illegal. The government asserted that the international-law principles embodied by the Chagos deal would earn Britain respect in the 'global south', but in light of the UK's support for Israeli-American actions against Iran, all that the rest of the world will now observe is that Britain's commitment to international law is equivocal and inconsistent. Robert Frazer Salford Sir, International events emphasise the paucity of the UK's air defences, in particular the capability to counter attacks by ballistic missiles. Should the situation deteriorate to the extent that we are threatened, this will be critical, with Britain's best anti-missile defence platforms being six Type 45 destroyers, one of which is deployed with HMS Queen Elizabeth. Other Type 45s may or may not be available, with a number in refit, but ship-based systems are insufficient to defend the entire nation. Recent announcements on defence, from the strategic defence review through to promises to raise spending by a few percentage points in future, will do nothing to repair our non-existent integrated air defence. The government needs to act now and procure anti-ballistic systems. Group Captain Michael Norris St Austell, Cornwall Sir, In the raid on RAF Brize Norton (news, Jun 21), one of the engines on the Voyager aircraft was so badly damaged by the red paint sprayed on it by Palestine Action activists that it is said that the tanker is out of action and a new engine will cost £25 million. Surely this is nonsense: our planes are so vulnerable than an enemy would only have to drop paint over them to make them useless in war time? Brian RJ Simpson Gosport, Hants Sir, My father, Michael Beetham, was station commander of RAF Khormaksar in Aden, Yemen, in the mid-1960s, during a period of heightened tensions. As a small boy, I watched as he set off in the evenings to drive around the perimeter fence in his Land Rover. Sometimes he took me with him. He would stop and talk to personnel and inspect fences. He went on to be the longest-serving Chief of the Air Staff since Lord Trenchard, founder of the RAF. I wonder who carries out such checks these days at bases like Brize Norton? Alex Beetham Woodditton, Cambs Sir, There are many reasons why the House of Lords may not survive in its present form. Hubris is certainly one. For unnamed peers to tell The Times that they will use 'black arts' to 'kill off' the assisted dying bill and employ 'every means possible' to prevent it becoming law is hubris of the highest order (news, Jun 21). The Lords can and should seek to improve the bill through its scrutiny. That is indeed its role. But to seek fundamentally to thwart the will of the elected Commons is not. It is not just the future of the bill that will be at stake in this regard. So too will the future of an unelected second chamber. Sir Leigh Lewis Watford Sir, In just three days the concept of laws being based on Judeo-Christian principles has been removed by the House of Commons. Aborting a full-term unborn child will no longer be a criminal offence and assisting someone to kill themselves was approved. MPs have replaced a morality based on respect for life by a culture of death. Neither these changes were in the Labour Party manifesto and the House of Lords should therefore not feel constrained in refusing to endorse them. Nicholas Bennett Minister of health for Wales, 1990-92; Bromley, Kent Sir, I am horrified by the moral ambiguity demonstrated by the government. After endless debate, the third reading of the assisted dying bill has narrowly been passed, a compassionate piece of legislation that will give terminally ill people more control over their lives. By contrast, after only two hours' debate the government has amended abortion regulations to allow women to have a termination at any stage of their pregnancy, without fear of prosecution. The 24-week limit for legal abortion was set to protect viable foetuses. This amendment sanctions the murder of babies capable of leading independent lives. I hope there is sufficient wisdom among the members of the House of Lords to persuade the Commons to rethink the unethical decision they have made. Frances MacDonald Stratford-upon-Avon Sir, The reports that HS2 may now cost £100 billion came in the same week that Nice concluded the known benefits of the new Alzheimer's drugs lecanemab and donanemab do not justify the expense of funding them through the public healthcare system (news, Jun 19; letter, Jun 21). Given that the government is likely to have to make stark choices in its next budget, the choice of either cutting 30 minutes off journey times between London to Birmingham or extending the meaningful lives of thousands of people each year could not be starker. If Rachel Reeves's repeated statements that her decisions reflect the choice of the people are true, then let's ask them directly which they'd rather have. Dr Barry Johnson Sheffield Sir, Settle to Carlisle is now seen as one of the world's greatest railway journeys. However, the line started out in difficulty and there are some interesting comparisons to be made with HS2. The estimate to build the line was £2 million, but the challenges of building a route through the Pennines resulted in the cost and time to completion doubling. The line opened to freight traffic 150 years ago (passengers a year later). The final cost was about £500 million in today's money, and it took five years to build. Admittedly it is only 72 miles long (compared with 120 miles for HS2) and the hundreds of boys employed were paid half a crown (12.5p) per day. The railway today is a magnificent reminder of the vision of the Midland Railway Company, which sponsored it, and the tenacity and ingenuity of those who overcame the challenges of a hostile environment to build it. I wonder if in 150 years HS2 will be as popular — assuming of course that it is completed. Dr Bryan Gray Hunsonby, Cumbria Sir, It is nothing short of insanity that elite rugby union players are about to embark on a tour to Australia with the British & Irish Lions after another very lengthy domestic season, when there is clear evidence showing a dose-response relationship between head impacts and neurodegenerative disease. The longer and more intensely one plays contact or collision sports, the higher the risk of brain damage. The Lions tour — a gruelling and commercially driven tournament — is being promoted as a pinnacle of achievement. Where is the duty of care to players? Where are the safeguards and transparent risk disclosures? Rugby cannot continue to ignore the realities of repeated brain trauma in pursuit of nostalgia and profit. It must start putting welfare above spectacle. Alix Popham Ret'd professional rugby union player; Welsh international, 33 caps; Newport Sir, You report that the late Queen did indeed carry cash, for betting on the races (news, Jun 21). As a young journalist at The Sun in the Eighties I was sent to report on the Derby. The press box was next to the royal box and we all saw Her Majesty dash down to the front to watch a winner triumph. I was designated to ask her: 'Ma'am, did you have a bet on the winning horse?' I leaned over from the box to be faced by the back of Prince Philip, who was chatting to the Queen. My first attempt was ignored and feeling embarrassed and slightly annoyed I tried again. Philip drifted off and so I repeated the question. 'Did I what?' she replied frostily. Red-faced and sweating I stumbled through it again, when she graced me with a beautiful smile and said: 'Oh no, my dear, I never bet!' The next year a barrier was erected between the two boxes so that she would not be approached again. Muriel Freeman (née Burden) South Shields Sir, Car horns don't need to be loud to be effective (letters, Jun 17-21). When I was living in Bath in the early 1970s I drove an MGB, which I had bought from a friend. He had fitted a trio of strident air horns, but I discovered that if I pressed the button very gently the horns would emit a gasping or panting sound. Being very immature at the time I occasionally made this happen while waiting as a pretty girl crossed the road. This sometimes produced an amused response, but not always. One of the recipients of this attention, a particularly pretty girl, subsequently recognised me when we met at a party and she ticked me off for my uncouth behaviour, which I never repeated. In October we will have been married for 50 years. Richard Le Masurier Milford-on-Sea, Hants Sir, My husband was lucky enough to get ten birthday cards from me last year (letters, 18, 19 & 21). After forgetting to buy one for him I simply added 'and Wendy' to the cards he had received from other people. Wendy Rayner Huddersfield Sir, Dominic Sandbrook's article on class and how to define a gentleman (comment, Jun 21) reminded me of an events notice I saw when stationed in the British Army of the Rhine with the King's Own Scottish Borderers in the mid-60s. Those invited to a Minden Day dance were: 'Officers and their Ladies, NCOs and their Wives, and Other Ranks and their Women-Folk.' Bill Wells Wisbech, Cambs Sir, I've always felt rather proud of the fact that the Yiddish word 'mensch' means much the same as 'gentleman' but without any class implications — or gender implications either; a woman can be a mensch too. Or not, as the case may be. Margaret Lesser Bowdon, Greater Manchester Sir, Mark Twain, as is so often the case, hit the nail on the head. A gentleman, he said, is someone who knows how to play the banjo and doesn't. Dr David Bogod Nottingham Write to letters@
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
We HATE to bother you on your precious weekend, Albo, but the world's on fire: PETER VAN ONSELEN on the real reasons PM and Penny Wong are so uncomfortable about the US strikes on Iran
They do say you should wait 24 hours before making big decisions, especially when they go against your natural instincts. But Australia's delay in supporting US bombings of Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend wasn't a simple case of a slow moving government taking its God-given time. When Donald Trump ordered targeted strikes on Iran most of America's key allies knew exactly what was required: a prompt show of support. The UK and EU delivered, endorsing the importance of preventing Iran developing nuclear weapons. Australia did not. Instead, Penny Wong and Anthony Albanese reached for a generic line about 'de-escalation and diplomacy', issued by an unnamed government spokesperson, ahead of any official statements out of London or Brussels. It was a misfire, both diplomatically and politically. And worst of all it was entirely avoidable, giving at least the impression that even tacit support might not be forthcoming. The government's explanation? They were waiting until the National Security Committee could meet on Monday, with the PM due to speak afterwards. In a moment that called for decisive alignment with our closest ally Australia defaulted to bureaucratic procedure. It is a Monday-to-Friday government in a world that increasingly demands responsiveness around the clock. Former PM Scott Morrison took to morning radio today to point out that he regularly called national security meetings over the weekend on important issues. What was so important this past weekend that Albo and Wong couldn't do the same? There's nothing inherently wrong with caution, of course. In complex security situations there's value in waiting 24 hours before making sweeping public statements. It probably doesn't happen often enough in modern politics. But the government didn't stay silent. As the Prime Minister noted today - responding to criticism - 'we issued a statement yesterday'. They said something very quickly, and it turned out to be out of step with our allies - they misread the room by trying to get ahead of the story and conform with their ideological opposition. They wouldn't be alone in their discomfort on this issue. Trump remains a deeply divisive figure across much of the West. But this wasn't about Trump's domestic politics or his often offensive adversarial style. It was about enforcing red lines on nuclear proliferation, regardless of who sits in the Oval Office. Others understood that, Australia did not, and the misstep could well come with consequences for AUKUS and other entwined relations with the US during the Trump era. Endorsing American military action, particularly under Trump, cuts against Albo and Wong's political instincts. They hail from the now dominant Left wing of the Labor party. That same wing persuaded Simon Crean, as opposition leader, to oppose Australian involvement in the Iraq war at the beginning of this century when John Howard pledged his support to George W Bush. Australia's alliance with the United States isn't conditional on who the president is. If anything, it matters more when the president is unpredictable to affirm our historical ties to the US to help preserve them, years from now, when Trump is gone. Allies as a general rule shouldn't hedge their bets as Albo and Wong tried to do. Trump almost certainly would have noticed the slight. He rewards loyalty and punishes perceived indifference. Whether that's fair or wise is ultimately somewhat beside the point. It's how he operates. The government eventually walked back its initial response, with Wong this morning pledging Australian support in more forthright terms that either the UK or EU had done over the weekend, probably to make up for the misstep. And doing so before the all important National Security Committee meeting anyway. Wong told Channel Nine she backed the attack: 'We support action to prevent Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon', she said, adding 'and that is what this is.' It is no hanging offence from Wong. But it is a clear mistake, and one that reinforces the growing view that this government struggles when events fall outside its curated schedule. Albanese wants to run a stable, measured administration. Fair enough.
North Wales Chronicle
3 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Farage plans to charge non-doms £250,000 fee which will be given to poor
On Monday, the party leader and MP for Clacton will reveal the policy which he said would 'encourage the return of wealth and talent to the United Kingdom', according to the Telegraph. The Labour Government abolished the non-dom tax status in April, which is where UK residents whose permanent home or domicile for tax purposes is outside the UK. Last year, former Conservative chancellor Jeremy Hunt revealed plans to scrap the tax status before successor Rachel Reeves sped up the process. Reform UK's policy would mean 'every high-net-worth newcoming (or returning leaver)' would pay a £250,000 one-off fee 'in return for a stable, indefinite remittance-style regime on offshore income and a 20-year inheritance-tax shield', Mr Farage wrote in an article for the Telegraph. All of this fee would be given to Britain's lowest-paid full-time workers through an automatic tax-free dividend via HMRC, the party leader added. In response, Labour said the policy was a 'golden ticket for foreign billionaires to avoid the tax they owe in this country'. Mr Farage wrote: 'Our policy is simple – Britain must be a place where success is celebrated, not punished with excessive taxes, crippling energy costs, or punitive inheritance levies. 'We will actively encourage the return of wealth and talent to the United Kingdom, on the clear condition that those who come here deliver immediate, visible benefits to our workers.' The plan would mean around 2.5 million 'hard-working Britons' would receive an 'annual cash bonus', the Reform UK leader claimed. He added: 'Our policy is not a 'golden visa' or a backdoor to citizenship. 'It is a one-time flat tax paid by newcomers in exchange for the certainty of a favourable tax status. 'Individuals will still be liable for all standard UK taxes on UK-sourced income, property and spending. 'But they won't be taxed on offshore income and gains for the duration of their agreed status.' A Labour spokesperson said: 'Nigel Farage can brand this whatever he wants – the reality is his first proper policy is a golden ticket for foreign billionaires to avoid the tax they owe in this country. 'As ever with Reform, the devil is in the detail. 'This giveaway would reduce revenues raised from the rich that would have to be made up elsewhere – through tax hikes on working families or through Farage's promise to charge them to use the NHS.'
