Search Climate Insights Directory

Poland integrates national health as a key component of its national security, managed through the Government Centre for Security (RCB) and the Ministry of Health. While the 2022 National Crisis Management Plan (KPZK) provides detailed response modules for biological incidents, the document argues that Poland lacks a dedicated national biodefense strategy. Current priorities include investing in real-time disease forecasting, diagnostic facilities, and securing pharmaceutical supply chains within the EU.

The brief contends that the Department of Defense is violating the Administrative Procedure Act and statutory obligations by refusing to conduct reviews for over 100 utility-scale wind projects. It argues this freeze is a pretext for the Trump Administration's animus toward wind energy, which will result in increased electricity prices, higher pollution levels, and greater greenhouse gas emissions.

An analysis of 393 environmental and energy bills introduced in the first quarter of 2026 reveals that 45% were bipartisan. Bipartisan bills showed a higher rate of legislative advancement (22%) compared to non-bipartisan bills (15%). The highest level of consensus was found in oceans and biodiversity, where approximately 67% of bills were bipartisan. Other areas of strong cooperation include disaster management, wildfires, and permitting reform. The report notes that successful bipartisan legislation often focuses on concrete economic impacts or specific, narrow scopes and typically avoids using the terminology of climate change. In contrast, energy bills were less bipartisan, with Republicans focusing on deregulation and Democrats on clean energy tax credits, although specific technologies like geothermal, hydropower, nuclear, and waste-to-energy maintain bipartisan support.

The Council on Strategic Risks describes a workshop in California that explored how extreme weather events, such as wildfires and droughts, can be leveraged by opportunistic actors to spread mis- and disinformation. The report identifies key uncertainties regarding generative AI, institutional capacity, and public trust, and presents three divergent future scenarios for the state: a 'muddling through' crisis, a geopolitical collapse triggered by conflict in the Pacific, and a positive social transformation in water management. It concludes that information manipulation is a persistent risk to disaster response and national security, necessitating cross-sector partnerships for resilience.

The Council on Strategic Risks proposes that the US government invest $10 billion annually over 10 years in biodefense, noting that the FY26 request of $4.02 billion is insufficient given threats from Russia, North Korea, China, and Iran. The author suggests that 2% of the proposed $500 billion defense spending increase could fund critical enhancements in wastewater surveillance, medical countermeasure discovery via supercomputing, biomanufacturing, and the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC).

Colorado is experiencing a rise in billion-dollar climate disasters, with an increase from 1.7 annually since 1980 to 4.4 per year between 2020 and 2024. The state faces critical threats from wildfires, flooding, avalanches, and drought, which impact public health, infrastructure, and the economy. Federal agencies including NOAA and FEMA provide essential forecasting, research, and funding for mitigation, such as the $13.8 million BRIC grant for the Greely Water Pipeline. However, proposed FY26 budget cuts and the cancellation of programs like BRIC threaten to shutter research labs in Boulder, eliminate cooperative university partnerships, and reduce funding for climate-smart agriculture and critical mineral surveys, potentially increasing the vulnerability of both local communities and military installations such as Buckley Space Force Base and Fort Carson.

Washington State faces escalating risks from drought, wildfires, extreme heat, and coastal flooding, which threaten its economy, ecosystems, and critical US military installations. While federal agencies like NOAA and FEMA provide essential forecasting, funding, and disaster recovery services, the report argues that recent and proposed budget cuts for FY2026—including the termination of key research laboratories and the reduction of grant programs—significantly degrade the state's capacity to prepare for and respond to these hazards.

The report examines how AI accelerates biological research, creating a 'dual-use dilemma' where tools for medical advancement can be repurposed for bioweapons. It analyzes the 'risk chain' of biological weapon development, the capabilities of foundation models and biological design tools (BDTs), and the geopolitical landscape involving the US, China, and Russia. The document proposes a 'preferred' 2030 scenario characterized by geopolitical stability and responsible AI development, offering specific US policy recommendations across biosecurity foundations, technical governance, and international diplomacy.

The Council on Strategic Risks warns that the reported firing of staff and potential closure of climate.gov would erode the health and security of Americans. The site serves as a vital bridge between scientists and the public, providing STEM resources, extreme weather outlooks, and the US Climate Resilience Toolkit for farmers and policymakers. The author asserts that losing this 'national security asset' would lead to higher disaster recovery costs, increased vulnerability to misinformation, and a 'brain drain' of US scientists to regions like the European Union.

The Center for Climate and Security (CCS) urges US lawmakers to challenge Secretary of Commerce Lutnick on proposed FY 2026 budget cuts to NOAA. The briefing highlights risks to weather forecasting, climate monitoring, and public safety, noting that funding lapses have already disabled four regional climate centers and that 27,000 years of staff experience have been lost. CCS specifically questions the decommissioning of 14 data services, the status of the Atlas 15 precipitation project, and the lack of funding for extreme heat monitoring, arguing that these cuts undermine the $7 billion private weather services market and US national security.

The document details South Carolina's high susceptibility to sea level rise, hurricanes, and droughts, noting that 101 weather disasters with losses over $1 billion occurred between 1980 and April 2025. It highlights the critical role of federal support from NOAA, FEMA, and USDA in maintaining coastal resilience, providing disaster aid, and supporting military installations. The briefing warns that proposed FY 2026 budget cuts—including the elimination of the Sea Grant program and significant reductions in coastal research and FEMA funding—would severely hinder the state's ability to manage climate risks and protect its economy and national security infrastructure.

The Council on Strategic Risks warns that proposed efforts by the Trump Administration to eliminate or restructure FEMA pose a grave risk to US national security. The author contends that FEMA is essential for protecting American lives, preventing foreign and domestic exploitation during disasters, and supporting military readiness. The document highlights recent cuts to staff and the elimination of the Building Resilience Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program as detrimental, suggesting that the agency requires modernization and investment rather than dismantling.

The Council on Strategic Risks advocates for the restoration of Feed the Future and the Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET), asserting that these programs mitigate national security risks by building food system resilience and providing critical forecasting for humanitarian responses. The text highlights that Feed the Future reduces migration intent in Honduras and that FEWS NET lowers the cost of humanitarian interventions. It references endorsements from former military commanders and bipartisan political support to emphasize that food security is an investment that prevents future conflict and reduces the need for costly US military or humanitarian spending.

The Council on Strategic Risks warns that the US administration's withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and the revocation of climate-focused executive orders create a 'blind spot' for foreign and security policy. The author asserts that climate hazards continue to threaten critical infrastructure, military readiness, and national security, citing recent wildfires in Los Angeles as an example. The document advocates for a common-sense approach to climate security, highlighting that the US military has deployed nearly 200 times in 12 countries over the last 2.5 years to respond to climate hazards.

The policy brief argues that climate change threatens US national security by damaging critical infrastructure, increasing state fragility, and intensifying geopolitical competition. It recommends that the US government implement a National Adaptation Plan, integrate 'Operational Resilience' into military budgets, scale up resilience funding for strategic allies, and strengthen interagency coordination on the food-climate-security nexus to protect US interests and economic competitiveness.

The author contends that the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA), while a step forward, is too reactive because it only mandates tracking when a product is suspected of being counterfeit. To close this loophole, the paper recommends implementing 'end-of-commerce' scanning—proactive verification and decommissioning of serial numbers at the point of dispense. This is framed as a national security priority, particularly for the Department of Defense and HHS stockpiles, given that over 58% of US-procured pharmaceuticals originate overseas. The document suggests an Executive Order to mandate these practices across federal health systems by 2027 and calls for international collaboration and the re-shoring of pharmaceutical manufacturing to mitigate risks from adversarial nations.

DASD Caroline Baxter describes the U.S. Department of Defense's (DoD) efforts to integrate climate literacy into professional military education (PME). She argues that climate change acts as a "threat multiplier" affecting installations, mission demand, and budgets. The DoD's approach focuses on making climate information mission-relevant, integrating it into existing curricula to avoid task saturation, and emphasizing readiness and lethality over political terminology. Key initiatives include the Climate Literacy Sub-Working Group, a new outcomes-based PME instruction, and a dedicated online portal for authoritative climate information.

The briefing identifies a critical national security risk stemming from the US pharmaceutical supply chain's dependence on China, which is the sole source for approximately 20% of API for vital medicines and 45% of KSM. It highlights that domestic generic manufacturing is severely underutilized, with plants operating at only half capacity, leaving the healthcare system and military vulnerable to shortages. The author proposes a phased strategy: immediately filling the Strategic Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient Reserve (SAPIR) with an 18-month supply of essential ingredients, providing grants and loans to transition manufacturing to US plants, and closing the 'Acetris loophole' to ensure 'manufactured in the U.S.' requires substantial transformation. The long-term goal is to achieve a domestic manufacturing capacity utilization of over 75% and reduce the number of drug shortages to below 50 within ten years.

The workshop highlighted that Japan's continued reliance on fossil fuel imports creates acute security vulnerabilities and trade-offs, particularly when intersecting with climate hazards and geopolitical tensions. Participants identified that public opinion can be a driver for the renewable energy transition if technology is perceived as viable, and suggested that Japan should pursue an energy resilience alliance with like-minded countries such as South Korea and Taiwan. The report emphasizes the need for deeper inter-governmental dialogue across Japanese ministries to integrate climate security into national defense planning and to mitigate supply chain risks associated with renewable technology, specifically reliance on China.

The research analyzes the Climate Security Strategies of eight Western national militaries, finding that these documents predominantly frame climate security as a matter of national security. The analysis reveals that military responses focus on adapting the military apparatus to protect the state and ensure mission success, often prioritizing national objectives over human and ecological security. Furthermore, the study finds that vulnerable groups in the global south are frequently framed as threats rather than as victims of climate change, which can lead to security measures that further harm these populations.