CIA Center on Climate Change and National Security
The CIA Center on Climate Change and National Security was established in September 2009 to assess how climate change might impact U.S. interests rather than to study the science of climate change itself. The Center focused on phenomena such as desertification, rising sea levels, and resource competition, and aimed to facilitate communication and data sharing within the intelligence community and with civilian scientists. Despite its intent to share unclassified insights with the public, criticisms arose regarding its transparency and effectiveness, particularly concerning the release of information. In 2011, a Defense Science Board Task Force recommended creating a new intelligence agency focused on climate-related research, arguing that the CIA Center was not fulfilling its mission adequately. The Center was ultimately closed in 2012, facing challenges such as funding and a cultural reluctance within intelligence agencies to engage in non-traditional intelligence work. Although the DSB's recommendations did not lead to a new agency, the CIA later opened the Transnational and Technology Mission Center in 2021 to address climate-related issues among other global challenges. This shift reflects ongoing recognition of climate change as a significant national security concern.
CIA Center on Climate Change and National Security
Summary
In September 2009, the Central Intelligence Agency opened the Center on Climate Change and National Security. Described as "a small unit led by senior specialists from the Directorate of Intelligence and the Directorate of Science and Technology," the Center is tasked not with evaluating the science of climate change but with determining how climate change might impact US interests. Examples of specific phenomena include "desertification, rising sea levels, population shifts, and heightened competition for natural resources."
In addition to serving as a resource for US policymakers, the Center was designed to work with the greater Intelligence Community (such as the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency) to review, declassify, and disseminate data and imagery to civilian scientists. At the outset, the Center intended to "be aggressive in outreach to academics and think tanks working the issue."
In 2011, a 175-page report issued by the Defense Science Board (DSB) Task Force (part of the US Department of Defense, reporting to the Secretary of Defense) recommended creating an entirely new intelligence agency devoted to climate research. The DSB task force concluded that the CIA Center on Climate Change and National Security needed to fulfill its duties outlined by the original charter.
According to the DSB, the Center must declassify information broadly and consistently. Therefore, the recommended new agency would not use any classified data at all, instead relying entirely on open-source intelligence (OSINT) culled from places like academia and think tanks. In 2012, the CIA officially closed the program.
In-Depth Overview
Upon its formation, the CIA Center on Climate Change and National Security faced two major paradoxical challenges. First, it was charged with studying the effects of climate change without devoting any resources to the study of climate change itself. Second, it was responsible not only for sharing information between intelligence agencies but also for declassifying information and releasing it to the general public. The first challenge is largely political—climate change is a controversial issue in US politics. The second challenge is largely cultural—US intelligence agencies are well known to have "walls" between them and are disinclined to share intelligence. They are even less inclined to declassify and publicly disseminate. Accordingly, the Center received criticism from analysts across the political spectrum, either because it is wasting resources on an unproven subject or because it needs to declassify at a rate according to its charter.
Around the same time, in 2010, the Obama Administration reinstated a program from the 1990s, Measurements of Earth Data for Environmental Analysis (Medea), which was meant to allow scientists and climate specialists access to classified data in order to study climate change. It was, essentially, a climate research program. While Medea continued after the Center on Climate Change and National Security had already disbanded, it eventually ended in 2015 for similar reasons as the disbandment of the Center.
Secrecy & Conflict with Open Government
Accusations of the Center not living up to its promise of intelligence sharing and declassification first appeared in September 2011. Jeffrey Richelson, senior fellow for the National Security Archive at George Washington University, submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the CIA in search of some of the Center's output over the first two years of its existence. His request was denied. Nothing beyond the original press release announcing the Center's creation has ever been released to the public.
According to Richelson, "As far as I know, they have not released any of their products or anything else. There was a statement announcing its creation, and that has been pretty much it."
Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy, determined that the CIA's response to Richelson means that all of "the center's work is classified, and there is not even a single study or a single passage in a single study that could be released without damage to national security."
The poor timing of the CIA's exchange with Richelson was aggravated when the Obama administration issued a thirty-three-page report on its commitment to open government.
Funding Challenges & The Future of Climate Intelligence
Richelson's situation alone calls into question the purpose of a declassification center if it is not declassifying anything. Adding to the problem, in 2010, policymakers almost blocked the Center's funding by arguing that the CIA's resources are better allocated elsewhere. At the time, Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) said, "The CIA's resources should be focused on monitoring terrorists in caves - not polar bears on icebergs." Barrasso sponsored a 2010 amendment to cut the Center's funding, effectively killing it. In it, he called the Center's work "spying on sea lions." The amendment eventually failed.
Many government agencies have endured budget cuts during the recession, as have some scientific endeavors that fall under the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). For example, funding was cut in April 2011 for NOAA's climate service, which would have "provided up-to-date climate information to inform the public and policymakers better. Much like the agency's weather service, it would offer a way to share its work monitoring, modeling, and assessing data."
Nonetheless, the future of climate-based intelligence does not rely on political or budgetary issues alone—there is also a cultural challenge. According to Rolf Mowatt-Larssen, Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University, "Intelligence agencies have a hard time understanding a project that doesn't involve stealing secrets." Mowatt-Larsen led the Department of Energy's intelligence unit from 2005 to 2008.
The 2023 Annual Threat Assessment report of worldwide threats to the national security of the United States examined the impacts of climate change and deemed it one of the most important risks of the twenty-first century in terms of security.
New Group Recommended by US Defense Science Board (DSB)
In October 2011, the DSB concluded that the best way to move forward was to create a new group apart from the CIA. This new group would have the ability to "commission the existing CIA task force on climate to 'produce an assessment of regional climate change hot spots'" and also "rely on open sources of information, cooperation with other intelligence agencies in the US and abroad, and sharing of intelligence."
The report recommended that the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) should "establish, within an appropriate agency of the Intelligence Community, an intelligence group to concentrate on the effects of climate change on political and economic developments and their implications for US national security." The report also concluded that the US government's success or failure to reduce the risks associated with climate change would depend on the efforts of the DoD, the Department of State, and the US Agency for International Development. Though no new group was explicitly formed, the CIA opened the Transnational and Technology Mission Center in 2021, which included a holistic approach to issues potentially impacted by climate change, like global food security and migration patterns. The Mission Center also addressed other issues, such as new and emerging technologies, economic security, and global health.
Bibliography
"Ask Molly: Intelligence and Climate Change." Central Intelligence Agency, 20 Apr. 2023, www.cia.gov/stories/story/ask-molly-intelligence-and-climate-change. Accessed 12 Oct. 2024.
Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, 6 Feb. 2023, www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ATA-2023-Unclassified-Report.pdf. Accessed 12 Oct. 2024.
McDonnell, Tim. “Exclusive: The CIA Is Shuttering a Secretive Climate Research Program.” Mother Jones, 21 May 2015, www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/05/cia-closing-its-main-climate-research-program/. Accessed 12 Oct. 2024.
Sheppard, Kate. "Climate Change Spy vs. Spy?" Mother Jones, 15 Nov. 2011, motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/11/climate-change-spy-vs-spy. Accessed 12 Oct. 2024.
Sheppard, Kate. "Budget Axes NOAA's Climate Service." Mother Jones, 12 Apr. 2011, motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/04/budget-axes-noaas-climate-service. Accessed 12 Oct. 2024.
“Trends and Implications of Climate Change for National and International Security.” Intelligence Resource Program, 4 Oct. 2011, www.fas.org/irp/agency/dod/dsb/climate.pdf. Accessed 12 Oct. 2024.