Comments on: Military Leaders Warn of Climate Change-Again

By: Collide-a-scape » Blog Archive » Collide-a-scape >> The Pentagon’s Potential Game Changer

Wed, 20 May 2009 16:06:01 +0000

[...] At least that’s the WSJ’s Keith Johnson’s useful interpretation of the latest CNA report, entitled, “Powering America’s Defense: Energy and the Risks to National Security.” Johnson’s historical perspective is instructive and makes me think that the clarion call issued on Monday by a high-voltage group of retired military officers might echo longer than I indicated here. [...]

By: Geoff Dabelko

Geoff Dabelko — Tue, 19 May 2009 12:32:53 +0000

Having heard the MAB members make this point before, they are taking pains to saying they aren’t going to get into the scientific debate on the extent and effects of climate change. They take pains to say they aren’t debating the science. So they draw a distinction between not debating the science and making suggestions for what both military and civilian institutions should or should not be doing. They are much more willing on the latter.

By: Keith Kloor

Keith Kloor — Tue, 19 May 2009 12:12:11 +0000

Geoff,

I hear you. But I also want to point out one paraphrased comment from the BusinessWeek story I posted in the update:

“Retired Admiral John Nathman, another of the co-authors, said in an interview that the board deliberately tried not to inject itself into the debate over climate change, instead accepting the view that temperatures are rising.Yet the report coincides with a fierce debate in Congress over so-called cap-and-trade, a proposal to control greenhouse gases by parceling out the right to emit them.”

My point is that the authors of the report do need to inject themselves in the public debate over global warming, which largely takes place in the political arena and in the media.

So I look forward to seeing that happen.

By: Geoff Dabelko

Geoff Dabelko — Tue, 19 May 2009 11:13:14 +0000

To be fair Keith, members of the CNA Military Advisory Board from the 2007 report have testified on the Hill repeatedly. I remember a Senate Foreign Relations Committee meeting that has half a dozen potential presidential contenders at the time in 2007 showing up and 15 total Members.

I think you will start to see MAB members talking about this report now in the outlets you suggest. I believe Sherri Goodman and company wanted to have the report embargoed until the big launch. But they are setting up opportunities to brief as we’ve hosted a private one for a policy principal at the Wilson Center and will have a public briefing on it May 28th. So they are hitting the road, give it a little time.