The Climate Crisis Will Cost Our Troops

It’s up to us veterans to explain why

By Julie Roland

In terms of the forces that push our world more rapidly towards global conflict, the increasing volatility of climate change may be the greatest catalyst. The combination of heat domes, massive fires, and lethal floods all over the world are signals that, if they were launched by a foreign military, would cause nonstop alarms, and limitless Pentagon funding.

In many ways, the military will be affected by climate change before the rest of Americans. From Hurricane Michael to the Missouri River flooding, California wildfires to typhoons in Guam, extreme weather caused by climate change has already disrupted military bases in affected areas, resulting in billions of dollars in damages.

Plus, as the world destabilizes at a quickening pace due to intensifying physical effects of climate change, from forced mass migrations to exacerbated geopolitical flashpoints, whether they are sent into warzones or on humanitarian missions, service members will be among the first Americans to face the consequences. We need to fight climate change now for the troops.

The Defense Department used to care. It used to call climate change a national security priority, and worked to integrate “climate considerations into policies, strategies and partner engagements.” Former Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin even proclaimed that “no nation can find lasting security without addressing the climate crisis,” and that it is one of the only threats which “truly deserve[s] to be called existential.” Natural resources have been a frequent source of armed conflicts for millennia. As these resources continue to dwindle at a rapidly increasing rate, accelerated further by the war in Iran, future conflict will only intensify. We used to say so.

But by 2050, summers are expected to be largely ice-free, even in places as remote as the North Pole. Icebreaking ships are key in the near future, and while the U.S. only has three, Russia boasts at least 57 and is planning on spending around $30 billion to develop a shipping lane called the Northern Sea Route. Warmer weather also means that formerly frozen land may become farmable, formerly nonexistent seas may become fishable, and general access to oil deposits have emerged; Russia, the country with the most arctic coastal property, and historically a looming threat to Americans, is best equipped to extract its economic potential.

The military has been anticipating a northern conflict with Russia for years. In 2021, 15,000 U.S. service members, six U.S. Navy ships, and 240 aircraft participated in Northern Edge, a joint exercise intended to “practice how the U.S. military might react if simmering tensions in the Arctic reach a boiling point.” Preceding the exercise, U.S. Northern Command and North American Aerospace Defense Command boss General Glen VanHerck announced that Russian military aircrafts flew near Alaskan airspace more frequently than “any year since the end of the Cold War.”

In May 2023, Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks traveled to Alaska to investigate further how a warming Arctic could affect defense interests in the area. If we are already preparing for an impending conflict in the High North, one that Russia seems to already be teasing, then why are we not talking about it?

If the U.S. wants to minimize future conflict, it needs to prioritize the fight against climate change. Unfortunately, not only is there no sense of urgency around this existential threat, but Americans are actively contributing to what is being called an “unfolding ecological crisis” and a “multifront assault on the environment” in Iran, the Gulf, and Lebanon. The attacks on Iranian oil facilities have led to fires, black rain, oil spills, poisoned soil, toxic smoke, and more; the war unleashed more carbon pollution in two weeks than Iceland does in a year.

The U.S. Navy may have been at the forefront of climate change research for decades, but the DOD uses more fossil fuels than any other single institution in the world, and now our president calls climate change a hoax and has reversed any progress we’ve made. Congress needs to address the military’s role in contributing to a problem that threatens its own livelihood. Congress also needs to address the problem itself.

There should be immense pressure on the U.S. government to follow through on promises to help fight climate change. Such a massive paradigm shift has historically only been possible when in the face of a military threat, but that threat is here again–most people just don’t realize it.

In 2022, the Pew Research Center found that when asked about the biggest threats facing the country, most Americans found that global climate change was among the least of their concerns. Only 54% considered it a major threat, with 16% believing it wasn’t a threat at all, while Chinese and Russian power and influence came in at 67% and 64% respectively, and the spread of false information online came out higher still at 70%. Yet 72% of Americans also claim global warming is “personally important to them.” And, most Americans recoil at the thought of troops being needlessly put into harm’s way. The Iran War is polling incredibly low for that very reason.

Herein lies a huge disconnect: Americans care about global warming but don’t realize the extent of the threat to them and those who serve. This lack of urgency can have dire consequences.

The U.S. needs to treat climate change like the existential national security threat that it is. Surely we need to commit to efforts like Northern Edge, but moreso, we need to take a dramatic and powerful stance against carbon emissions and fossil fuels.

Politicians who vote to protect large corporations who can’t get emissions under control should be called out for being anti-American. No politician should be able to claim to be pro-military while supporting legislation that contributes to greenhouse gasses, advancing this rising threat to our country and troops.

Julie Roland is a former Navy Lieutenant Commander and helicopter pilot who earned her Juris Doctor in her free time while active duty. She now holds a Master of Laws in Global Business Law from Columbia University, is currently serving as the District Director for New York State Assembly District 73 in Manhattan.