Strange though it may seem, the importance of the amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act is overshadowed by the political statement being made – This is the same group of lawmakers that one year ago tried to block the military from spending money to prepare for climate change.
The amendment was crafted by Representative Jim Langevin, a Rhode Island Democrat. The only reason it won over the GOP members on the panel was that it only requires the Pentagon to deliver a report to Congress that assesses the impact of global warming on the U.S. military.
The committee’s version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) passed 60-1 and now moves to the full House for a vote after the July 4 recess. The bill authorizes $621.5 billion in the base defense budget and $75 billion in a war fund known as the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) account.
The amendment gives the Pentagon one year to identify the 10 military sites most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, including flooding, sea level rise, wildfires or other threats, according to Inside Climate. It also asks for the steps that will be needed to protect the 10 vulnerable sites, as well as a discussion on how climate change will affect field commanders who may have to deal with instability brought about by a climate crisis.
Photo taken: Aug. 15, 2002.
The effects of climate change on fielded forces and their commanders are already being seen in many regions of the world today where instability brought on by extreme climate events has led to unrest, terrorism, and civil strife.
The amendment also quotes Secretary of Defense James Mattis as saying, “I agree that the effects of a changing climate – such as increased maritime access to the Arctic, rising sea levels, desertification, among others – impact our security situation.”
The military has done a number of studies over the last decade on the impact of climate change on military bases, especially those on our coasts, but GOP lawmakers were successful in blocking any legislation that would have allowed mitigation to go forward.
Andrew Holland, the senior fellow for energy and climate at the American Security Project, a nonpartisan research organization, was somewhat surprised at the change in sentiment by Republican lawmakers. “I think that’s a pretty remarkable turnaround in one year, and I think it speaks to the fact that now that Republicans are fully in power they have to responsibly plan and prepare for reality.”
