CLIMATEWIRE | In a recent initiative, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has intensified his efforts to discontinue the Pentagon’s involvement in climate-related activities. In a memo, Hegseth demands a thorough examination of military objectives and planning documents to eliminate any mention of climate change and associated topics.

Despite the directive, issued on Monday, there are notable exceptions.

The directive allows for measures to reinforce U.S. military bases against severe weather events. It also specifies that the drive to remove climate considerations should not hinder the Pentagon from “evaluating weather-related impacts on operations, reducing weather-related threats, or carrying out environmental assessments,” as stated in the document which POLITICO’s E&E News exclusively accessed.

Support for Science Journalism

If you appreciate this content, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. Your subscription helps sustain the future of journalism that impacts our understanding of the world through stories about breakthroughs and ideas.

Critics argue that these exemptions highlight the lack of foresight in Hegseth’s crusade against what he labels “climate distractions.”

Climate change is exacerbating extreme weather such as hurricanes, floods, and wildfires, and is prompting significant shifts in the Pentagon’s strategic responsibilities, both minor and significant.

A warming globe increases the likelihood of conflicts over dwindling resources like water, and heightened severe weather events pose risks to military operations and can cause extensive damage to military infrastructure and equipment.

“Military facilities and structures are designed with a 50-year lifespan in mind,” explained Will Rogers, who formerly served as the senior climate advisor to the Army Secretary during the Biden administration.

“The climate situation will be different in 50 years,” Rogers continued. “It’s impractical to base designs on tomorrow’s weather forecasts.”

Rogers also expressed concerns that the memo might discourage military officials from preparing for high-risk scenarios, including extreme weather, and deter staff from equipping U.S. forces for the environmental changes on Earth.

Nonetheless, Hegseth remains undeterred, focusing on eradicating what he perceives as “woke” policies within the military. A Pentagon-wide effort is now in place to remove “climate distractions,” as outlined in the memo.

In a recent video on X, Hegseth declared that the DOD had slashed $800 million in what he called “wasteful expenditures.” A portion of this, perhaps up to $100 million, was directed towards climate-related initiatives, such as efforts to decarbonize Naval ships and research into climate conditions that stir unrest in Africa.

“These were not an effective use of taxpayer dollars,” he stated.

His memo aligns closely with Project 2025, a conservative policy plan managed by the Heritage Foundation.

The document describes the Defense Department as a “deeply troubled institution” plagued by a “politically motivated top-down focus on progressive social policies that emphasize issues like so-called diversity, equity, inclusion, and climate change, often at the expense of the primary warfighting mission of the military.”

Hegseth’s directive is even more aggressive, noted John Conger, who was a principal deputy undersecretary of Defense in the Obama administration.

This stance could jeopardize future U.S. military capabilities, he suggested. For example, he pointed to the changing Arctic environment, where melting ice is opening new navigation routes that were previously inaccessible. Both Russia and China have notably increased their activities in the Arctic, and ignoring these developments could disadvantage the United States.

Conger criticized the memo’s ambiguity, which he claimed allows Defense officials to indiscriminately target valuable programs that could be eliminated, even if they do not directly relate to emission reductions or fossil fuel usage.

“The approach seems to involve limiting the scope and definition of ‘climate’ to effectively erase it,” he observed.

The Department of Defense did not comment on the memo. Yet, Hegseth’s aggressive stance on climate issues marks a significant shift, even when compared to the policies during President Donald Trump’s first term.

During Trump’s tenure, senior Defense officials viewed climate change as a threat multiplier. James Mattis, Trump’s Defense Secretary for a period, recognized climate change as “a challenge that necessitates a comprehensive, whole-of-government response.”

The Pentagon has long integrated climate science into its strategic planning, operations, and readiness measures. Climate science and models have saved billions in taxpayer money by ensuring that military installations are prepared for rising sea levels, increased flooding, droughts, extreme heat conditions, and other consequences of global warming.

However, Hegseth’s memo presents a different viewpoint.

“Considerations related to ‘climate change’ are irrelevant to the Department’s mission,” the memo asserts.

Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2024. E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals.