U.S. Military's Pragmatic Response to Climate Change Amid Political Resistance

Despite the U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's dismissal of climate change as "crap," the U.S. military is actively adapting its infrastructure to address the realities of climate change. This adaptation occurs even as official language avoids the term "climate change," reflecting a significant tension between political directives and operational necessities.

U.S. military officials take steps to address climate crisis, even as they avoid the term

Under Hegseth's leadership, the Pentagon has reversed previous commitments to climate action, scrapping nearly 100 research studies related to global warming and removing references to climate change from the 2025 National Security Strategy. This shift marks a departure from earlier acknowledgments of climate change as a national security threat, as articulated in the 2008 National Defense Strategy and by former Defense Secretary James Mattis in 2017.

Honolulu Star-Advertiser

• Pete Hegseth: U.S. Secretary of Defense, known for his controversial stance on climate change.

Honolulu Star-Advertiser

• John Conger: Former director of the Center for Climate and Security, emphasizing the military's pragmatic approach to operational readiness.

Honolulu Star-Advertiser

• Sherri Goodman: Secretary general of the International Military Council on Climate and Security, highlighting the implications of reduced climate research.

Honolulu Star-Advertiser

Significant projects are underway to enhance military installations against climate-related threats. For instance, Tyndall Air Force Base, which suffered extensive damage from Hurricane Michael in 2018, is being rebuilt with structures elevated to withstand future sea-level rise and storms. Other initiatives include flood walls at the U.S. Naval Academy in Maryland and elevated runways in Virginia. These projects are framed as efforts to ensure "resilience" and "readiness," avoiding direct mention of climate change.

Honolulu Star-Advertiser

Critics argue that the military's current approach, which refrains from explicitly addressing climate change, undermines long-term preparedness. A February Government Accountability Office report indicated that the military has not adequately tracked disaster-related costs or fully integrated climate projections into facility designs. Experts warn that the loss of climate research funding could hinder effective defense planning, particularly in regions vulnerable to climate impacts.

Honolulu Star-Advertiser

While the military continues to invest in resilience projects, there are concerns about the adequacy of funding and the comprehensive tracking of climate-related risks. Some military leaders assert that the focus on "resilience" is sufficient, while critics highlight the need for a more explicit acknowledgment of climate change to inform strategic planning.

Honolulu Star-Advertiser

• “Ultimately, the military is a very pragmatic institution. It wants to maintain mission capability. Whether we’re going to call it ‘climate,’ not ‘climate,’ whatever — if I can’t get to the base because the road is flooded, that’s a problem.” — John Conger, Former Director, Center for Climate and Security

U.S. military officials take steps to address climate crisis, even as they avoid the term

• “Because ‘climate’ is a dirty word, we’re not investing in that predictive capability,” — Sherri Goodman, Secretary General, International Military Council on Climate and Security

Honolulu Star-Advertiser

• “It wants to maintain mission capability. Whether we’re going to call it ‘climate,’ not ‘climate,’ whatever — if I can’t get to the base because the road is flooded, that’s a problem.” — John Conger, emphasizing operational challenges posed by climate impacts.

Honolulu Star-Advertiser

As climate-related disasters become more frequent, the military's ability to adapt its infrastructure will be crucial for maintaining operational readiness. The ongoing tension between political directives and the pragmatic needs of military operations will likely shape future defense strategies and funding priorities.

Honolulu Star-Advertiser