Why the U.S. Military Dropping Climate Change From Its Threat Assessment is a Danger to Both Sides
On March 26, 2025, Axios reported that for the first time in over a decade, climate change was missing from the U.S. intelligence community’s annual threat assessment. The omission is not a clerical error — it represents a political choice. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) removed climate entirely, despite decades of warnings from defense officials that climate change is a “threat multiplier” (Axios).
The phrase comes from the Pentagon itself, which has repeatedly acknowledged that rising seas, heatwaves, and resource scarcity exacerbate existing risks — from military base flooding to regional instability. A 2019 Wilson Center report put it plainly: climate change “does not act alone, but it magnifies the risks of conflict, migration, and disaster” (Wilson Center).
By ignoring these warnings, the U.S. is not calming political waters. It is weakening its own ability to prepare for the threats that affect every American.
What “Threat Multiplier” Really Means
The military has long documented how climate change intensifies challenges on the ground:
At home, Norfolk Naval Station — the largest in the world — is already battling tidal flooding.
Overseas, droughts in the Middle East and North Africa have fueled unrest and migration, straining U.S. and allied resources.
Extreme weather forces the National Guard to deploy repeatedly to disaster zones, leaving fewer forces ready for other missions.
The Armed Services Committee has heard testimony confirming these vulnerabilities, yet the 2025 Worldwide Threat Assessment left them out (House Armed Services Committee). Silence does not erase the risk. It only blinds us to it.
Why Both Sides Should Be Alarmed
Conservatives pride themselves on national defense, order, and readiness. If bases flood, supply lines fail, and troops are deployed unprepared, that is not strength. It is negligence. Climate risks ignored today will mean higher costs and weaker security tomorrow.
Progressives see climate through the lens of fairness and care. Communities already suffering — low-income families in flood zones, farmers losing crops to drought, coastal towns battered by storms — are left more vulnerable when government agencies pretend the risks don’t exist.
This is not just a left-wing environmental issue. It is a national security issue. And national security belongs to all of us.
The Danger of Omission
The Council on Strategic Risks has already warned that sidelining climate from threat planning “undermines preparedness and leaves the nation exposed” (Council on Strategic Risks).
When climate is left out of official documents, the ripple effects are serious:
Commanders downplay or delay adaptation measures.
Agencies lose funding for resilience planning.
Allies doubt U.S. commitment to shared challenges, weakening coalitions.
Enemies see an opening to exploit instability while America looks away.
The omission does not protect us from controversy. It exposes us to danger.
A United Front
Whether you care most about defending the homeland or protecting vulnerable families, the conclusion is the same: climate change is a threat, and dropping it from national assessments is reckless.
The Daisy Chain does not claim every climate policy must look the same. Conservatives may prefer nuclear energy and market incentives; progressives may emphasize regulation and justice. But both sides should agree on this much: you cannot defend a nation by ignoring what endangers it.
Omitting climate from our national threat assessment is not strength. It is self-sabotage.
Conclusion
America can have debates about carbon taxes, renewable energy, or international treaties. But the idea that climate change is irrelevant to national security should not be up for debate. That is not a partisan line. It is a reality recognized by generals, scientists, and local leaders alike.
🌼 At The Daisy Chain, we believe a true United Front means refusing to let ideology blind us to reality. Climate change is a danger to every citizen. Recognizing it is not political weakness. It is patriotic strength.
