There was a report prepared for the Pentagon a while back that said that climate change could be a bigger threat to security than terrorism - so why should Keetly disagree?

And there we were being told that freedom of speech is under threat.

Keelty is not the first person in the intell-international relations-defence-national security community to place climate change within the national security context. Dr Alan DuPont wrote a paper for the Lowy Insitute and Dr Anthony Bergin wrote a paper for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. Both academics are well-regarded among their peers. Both argued that climate change is a matter that ought to be considered in long-term strategic planning and they are concerned that the intelligence community are currently ill-equipped to make such assessements.

Climate change will have some considerable ramifications for all kinds of planning. Infrastructure in particular is one that comes to mind and changes in urban settlement, agriculture and industry are going to impact on defence/AFP planning such as recruitment and procurement. Any strategic analyst in any sphere should be anxious about the risks and opportunities that will come with climate change.

What is disturbing about Keelty's speech was the subtext.

"In their millions, people could begin to look for new land and they will cross oceans and borders to do it," he said.

"Existing cultural tensions may be exacerbated as large numbers of people undertake forced migration.

"The potential security issues are enormous and should not be underestimated." (Source ABC News Online)

Rather than presenting this as Australia's call to humanitarian interventions and assistance in the region for dislocated "eco-refugees" there is an implication that we are once again, the frightened country about to besieged by envious brown hordes. This is the kind of rhetoric that will only provide affirmation to those that are unsecure and fearful around persons with funny names and funny foods that look upon our blonde women with uncontrolled lust.

Climate change is *the* issue of the century but it may not be security issue of the century

Commissioner Keelty is probably right with his vision. It lines up very much like John's Revelation at the end of the Holy Bible. Everything points to mankind, in the massed hundreds of millions, turning back to Jesus Christ in the endtimes.

Interesting that Keelty has decided to introduce such a contentious subject into policing discussions just before an election.

If this causes problems for the Law and Order delivery of the present Government and plays into the hands of the LABOR climate change staffers then this may be Keelty's intention.

A cynic may say Keelty is working to keep his job if/when the Government changes to Labor or perhaps, as Nick says, Keelty is doing a good job looking out for future threats.

Probably a bit of both.

Pete

Navel Grazers, Keelty's statement have NOTHING to DO with ELECTIONS.

The elections make it difficult for everyone for their waste of money - properganda and dirty spin.

APATHY vs the people in status.

I have had problems with the General Peter Cosgrove's camp. There is a real need for leadership and sometimes the need to stay safe or not offend our AUSSIE PRIDE or ID (politcs) as a nation means we go overboard with the glorification of a few. Thats to get something out of the noise and spin.

I respect ALL who are working for the world to take "RESPONSIBLITY" right now.

Australians are "fair-go" bloody honest people and it is now that we must cut through to those leaders who attempt to speak out for us on the need to be mindful as individuals everywhere.

Politcs is about everyday life... our childrens and their childrens.

What do we say to those caught between war - conflict and poverty.

The inprint of our mental capacity impacts this moment and the next. I ask for once... Can We Make Ourselves each Count as Australians.

http://www.miacat.com/
.

miacat

You say "Navel Grazers, Keelty's statement have NOTHING to DO with ELECTIONS."

But your words that follow enlighten us mere mortals little. Enlighten please, in pedestrian prose, what Keelty is saying in our world.

Pet

Be it Australian generations out of kilter from WWII, in some of the inter-generations who have arrived. Be it the hungrey or poor people who have no job, those not enabled, or alienated people.

Be it families who are war torn, swelling out of refugee camps everywhere we refuse to look.

Be it isolated and rural farmers throughout the world, landless people throughout the world, the people fleeing imposed forms of crime due to debt...

Be it those exisiting for what ever reason outside the (wait for it) the sustainable development loop... working behind the scenes, in the black market, or illegally forced as child sex, drug or soilder slaves for the worlds cartel trade.

All those on the fringe where there is little resource let alone help... law and order... quality of services, discrimination and many forms of cultural hostility.

The world is over-populated. Australia's doing the same to it's own by perception (houshold stress), as to those displaced inside other boaders be it about envionmental, war - poverty or politics.

Keelty's words "with the threat of water and food shortages and refugees fleeing rising sea levels, is the greatest security risk of this century."

Or "If such problems took hold in China, millions of people would move looking for new lands," he said.

And, "For China to feed its predicted 2030 population, it needs to increase its food production by about 50 per cent above today's levels,"

Answer this says Keelty; ""How does it achieve this, if its available land is dramatically shrinking and millions of people are on the move because of land and water."

Crime prevention is a humanitiarian issue, an issue in public safety which integrates a focus on - equity and health (Alma Ata) as much as border security and good governance.

Poverty - landless people because they can't grow crops or find work or have been out-skilled means they are forced to flee to new cities - places - cities, new boarders.

Connect the dots... climate change and business and the new definiations of environmental crime and world health.

http://www.miacat.com/
.

Mick Keelty is assuming that the Global warming scenario is totally correct.We have fixated too much on CO2 being the only culprit like all the other true believers.The 1930's is still the hottest decade on record.So why are we so alarmist when we do not have the scientific ability to truely determine the complexities that underpin our climatic variations?

I think we are going through a solar hot period like the 1930's and man made pollution is adding to the scenario.Don't panic chicken littles,all is not lost.Human ingenuity can also slay the dragon of our prime evil fears and deliver us to a brave new world.

I agree with Nick this whole future security environment is too important
to leave to politicians. Kelty was doing his duty with his statement.
I agree with Arjay its not global warming that will be the problem but
energy is going to be the limiting factor.

With the advent of oil and natural gas the world's population soared
from around 1,000,000,000 to the present 6,000,000,000.
The energy content of oil enabled the green revolution and the increased
population. As oil depletes there will be a lot of hungry people and
not all in undeveloped countries either.

Hungry people move, however they may not have the energy to move very far.
The world population has to fit the energy availability.
There is no way around that, it is totally fundamental.

In 2004 Australian Federal Police (AFP) Commissioner, Mick Keelty, when asked a question about the Madrid bombings said, "The reality is, if this turns out to be Islamic extremists responsible for the bombing in Spain, it's more likely to be linked to the position that Spain and other allies took on issues such as Iraq."

Mick Keelty knows his business ... in spite of the displeasure of the Howard government ... he was right.

The security 'experts' who analyse terrorism have no answers when it comes to ending this problem. Their only response is the heavy fist and the gun. They never have sociological or psychological approaches to explore the reasons for disaffection and grievance among Muslims. But now there is hope: Sidney Jones and the Indonesian police.

The very people who claim to be protecting us are making us more and more unsafe. The USA is planning to bomb Iran – if we thought we had problems before, we certainly will have problems if that happens. John Howard may have secretly agreed to the bombing without telling us – how safe does that make us feel?

Can you believe that the Russian government will happily supply the Burmese military junta with nuclear technology and most probably their spare uranium? This is after they bought some more uranium from Australia.

Commissioner Mick Keelty said, “... climate change is going to be the security issue of the 21st century”.

He is dead right again (and I bet all those 'security' careerists are fuming). What is the use of doubling the size of ASIO if they all believe in tooth fairies? We are only beginning to see what sort of problems we will experience with climate change. These problems will dwarf the problem of terrorism.

I hope that Mick Keelty will one day write a book about how the Howard government tried to silence him. We deserve to hear from Mick Keelty - the Howard team only talk about security to scare us into voting them back in. It won't work this time - we don't believe you, John!

Willy Bach
http://burmastrugglefordemocracy.blogspot.com/

Commissioner Plod is well able to look after himself and thats what should be seen behind his self serving statement.He is no idealist or visionary.
See his statement in terms of pre-election positioning and an attempt to save his para-military force otherwise known as the International Deployment Group.
Keelty's empire has grown under the patronage of Howard. Some in the Labor Party are looking askance at the IDG and the fact that it has appropriated power from DFAT.
Is he really seriously saying that his para-militaries will throw a ring of steel around Australia and keep us safe from the climate change boat people?
This issue should have been raised at APEC by Howard and might have formed the basis of a proposal to undertake regional research and study, perhaps using the CSIRO as the vehicle. Such discussions might have illicited a need for ongoing diplomacy and regular discussion.
The AFP should never be regarded as a tool of diplomacy, formulator of Foreign Policy or an armed protector of our borders offshore, ask PNG, East Timor and the Solomons.
And what exactly is their role with the corrupt TNI and Indonesian Police? I suspect their influence extends no further than the size of the gifts they proffer.
Bruce Haigh