While the modern state is indeed stable, environmental change has an impact even if not through apocalyptic natural disaster.
A long term drought contributed to the civil war in Syria[1]. It may be the first of many around the world.
Both Ebola and Zika are exacerbated by global climate change[2][3].
According to the link, Egypt survived as a state for a century longer before it too fell. That was after transforming from a civil society to martial law. With the threat to pregnancy posed by Zika, I'm reminded of the propaganda in "Children of Men": "The World Has Collapsed: Only Britain Soldiers On"
"A long term drought contributed to the civil war in Syria". Maybe. However, two planned competing and mutually exclusive major oil pipelines, both routing through Syria, each sponsored by a different superpower, are likely to have led to the civil war even if the area had been an environmental paradise.
People weren't protesting in the streets against the regime because they were concerned about oil prices. They were upset because they didn't have jobs or couldn't afford food, and the countries around them were having revolutions first.