A key aspect of the US National Security Strategy released in November 2025 is its commitment to “energy dominance.” The document states, “We reject the disastrous ‘climate change’ and ‘Net Zero’ ideologies that have so greatly harmed Europe, threaten the United States and subsidize our adversaries.” It further asserts, “Restoring American energy dominance (in oil, gas, coal and nuclear) and re-shoring the necessary key energy components is a top strategic priority.”
This prioritisation of oil, gas, coal, and nuclear power in the name of “cheap and abundant energy” is explicit, while renewable energy and conservation receive no mention.
For those committed to building a safer future, this approach is deeply troubling, and even more so for coming generations. How can climate change be dismissed as a harmful “ideology” when its impacts are visible across the world, including in the United States? The mounting threat has been documented by thousands of scientists and scientific panels whose evidence-based work is globally recognised. Disagreement may exist in policy details, but the basic reality of climate change is no longer in doubt.
More disturbing is that this dismissal of climate science is paired with a celebratory push to expand the fossil fuel industry, alongside open promotion of corporate oil interests and corruption-prone deal-making. The strategy appears willing to justify foreign interventions and regime change operations in pursuit of energy dominance—policies that further threaten global peace.
If the most-discussed environmental threat—climate change—is not only neglected but negated, it is likely that other serious ecological challenges will also be sidelined wherever they inconvenience powerful economic interests.
Scientists warn that climate change is only one element of a much wider environmental emergency. Together, these threats form what has increasingly been described as a survival crisis. Effective solutions require cooperation and stability among nations, yet international conditions are moving toward greater arbitrariness and confrontation. Meanwhile, the risk of destructive conflict—including nuclear war—is increasing, potentially destroying life far sooner than environmental degradation alone. Inequalities continue to deepen, pushing the poorest populations into worsening hardship. The 239 million people trapped in humanitarian crises are among the most affected.
What the world needs most is a protective agenda—one that places the needs of vulnerable people and the natural environment at its center. Equally urgent is recognition that life-sustaining conditions are threatened in ways that could spiral beyond human control.
Environmental devastation and the growing threat of armed conflict together constitute a survival crisis unprecedented in human history. These threats have escalated steadily while meaningful corrective action lags far behind.
This crisis arises from multiple interacting causes. The first set includes a dozen or so grave environmental dangers: freshwater depletion, ocean acidification, toxic contamination, air pollution, biodiversity loss and species extinction, forest destruction, food system disruption, and climate change among others. A second set relates to nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, the emergence of weaponised robotics, planned space warfare, and terrorist access to destructive technologies. Leading scientists have repeatedly warned that these dangers, separately or combined, amount to an existential risk.
In researching this issue over decades, I became convinced that even modest efforts to counter these trends can matter when multiplied across millions of people. Between 2018–19, I focused fully on this subject and wrote four books—Protecting Earth for Children, Earth Without Borders, Planet in Peril, and Dharti Ki Raksha Ke Liye Nirnayak Hoga Agla Dashak—along with a volume on non-violence titled Man Over Machine.
My core conclusions are:
Resolving the survival crisis must become central to future planning; many problems are nearing irreversible tipping points.
Solutions must be grounded in justice, democracy, peace and non-violence, as these are essential for addressing global threats.
The next decade is likely the last window of opportunity before risks grow uncontrollably.
Fundamental reforms may require re-imagining the world beyond current nation-state competition, toward cooperation, justice and environmental care.
All wars must be avoided, as eco-solutions cannot emerge amid conflict.
Nuclear and other WMDs must be steadily eliminated, with only minimal tightly controlled reserves.
Warming must be limited within a justice framework, reducing inequality and curbing wasteful consumption.
Economies must shift toward sustainability, inclusivity, and livelihood protection.
Social change must prioritise cooperation, sincerity and equality, steering people away from destructive consumerism.
Human relationships with all living beings must be protective, particularly regarding forests, water, biodiversity and small-scale farming.
A major shift in values is necessary, and youth and children must be central to shaping these changes.
People’s movements—especially youth movements—must work together across peace, environment, justice, gender and animal rights causes, united by the need to end the survival crisis.
Children, future generations, and all forms of life have the right to a safe and secure planet. Achieving this will require persistence, unity and a willingness to challenge powerful structures.
Building such a future is difficult, but growing public awareness and people’s movements offer hope. As the survival crisis worsens, ordinary citizens will increasingly seek meaningful solutions, and collective efforts will matter more than ever.
I have attempted to advance this work through the Save the Earth Now Campaign, which calls for observing the next decade as one dedicated to protecting the planet and its life systems. The campaign has received support from several individuals and social movements (see: www.bharatdogra.in).
---
The writer has authored around 400 booklets/books and 11,000 articles and field reports in English and Hindi, in addition to fiction and poetry
Comments