The Department of Defense will no longer devote resources to climate change-related initiatives, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated on Sunday. The announcement comes as the Pentagon undergoes a reassessment of spending priorities to eliminate programs that do not contribute to military readiness.
Hegseth’s comments followed a report by CNN National Security reporter Haley Britzky, which criticized the administration’s decision to cut climate-related programs within the DOD. Britzky argued that environmental initiatives are linked to military readiness and that their removal could pose risks to troops and operations. However, Pentagon officials have dismissed such claims as misguided.
Speaking in Germany last month, Hegseth clarified the administration’s stance: “The Pentagon is not in the business of climate change.” Acting Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Salesses echoed this sentiment, stating that the military would “cease unnecessary spending that set our military back under the previous administration, including through so-called ‘climate change’ and other woke programs.”
Pentagon press secretary John Ullyot confirmed that the department would collaborate with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to identify wasteful spending. “Climate zealotry and other woke chimeras of the Left are not part of that core mission,” Ullyot stated.
Hegseth doubled down on this position in a response on social media, saying, “The @DeptOfDefense does not do climate change crap. We do training and warfighting.” His remarks reflect a broader effort by the administration to ensure that military funding is directed toward strengthening America’s defense capabilities rather than pursuing political agendas.
DOD spokesperson Sean Parnell, a former Army Ranger, highlighted specific examples of wasteful spending in a video released last week. One such program involved $1.6 million allocated to the University of Florida to study “social and institutional determinants of vulnerability in resilience to climate hazards in African Sahel.” Parnell argued that such research is irrelevant to the military’s primary function and serves as a distraction from its core mission.
The move to eliminate climate-related spending represents a shift in priorities from the previous administration, which had emphasized environmental concerns within the military. Supporters of Hegseth’s approach argue that defense funding should be strictly allocated to warfighting, combat readiness, and military infrastructure rather than social policy initiatives.
