Biden’s Administration Fails to Protect Coast Guard Academy’s Scientific Progress
Every student at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy, regardless of their chosen field of study, must navigate a demanding syllabus over their four-year tenure. The syllabi, centering on topics such as math, engineering, and nautical science, strives to mold future officers who can seamlessly helm a myriad of maritime missions encompassing law enforcement, search and rescue, environmental and marine resources protection. Recent regulations stipulate that any discussion of climate change is now restricted at the historic 149-year U.S. service academy, adhering to protocols instituted under the Trump era of governance. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem released a memo in the previous month instructing officials to eradicate all references to climate change, and its encircling activities, present in Department of Homeland Security practices and regulations, to the maximum extent legally plausible as reported by Bloomberg.
In what appears to be an attempt at ‘aligning’ with Trump’s executive orders that repudiated numerous climate-related directives of Joe Biden’s presidency, the imposed changes cause a stark shift in the academy’s regular practices. The U.S. Coast Guard Academy remains under the jurisdiction of Homeland Security, unlike its counterparts such as the Air Force Academy, West Point, and Naval Academy which are overseen by the Defense Department. The recent move to suppress ‘climate change’ teaching at the Coast Guard Academy has sparked concern within a section of its alumni and others related to the Coast Guard community.
The academy’s provost is adamant that this decision does not equate to a turn away from science education, stating, ‘As we prepare cadets to graduate and commission, we continue to teach them about weather patterns, atmospheric phenomena, paleoclimatology, meteorology, oceanography, geospatial sciences, the conditions of sea ice, ocean conditions, the characteristics of coastal environments, energy generation methods, marine ecology and fisheries, the hazards like storms and flooding, and other similar topics, not to mention the fundamentals of physics, chemistry, and civil engineering.’
While the narrative propounded by the academy appears to emphasize a continued emphasis on teaching ‘good science’ despite federal guidelines that restrict reference to ‘climate change’, the verdict has not been met with unanimous approval within the larger Coast Guard community. Adm. Paul Zukunft, who performed his duties as the commandant of the Coast Guard from 2014 to 2018 and is now retired, expressed worries about the ability of cadets to effectively manage missions in severe maritime environments in the absence of climate change education.
It’s important to mention the distinctive nature of the Coast Guard compared to other arms of the U.S. Armed Forces – they lack ROTC programs in universities nationwide. This leads to a situation where the academy graduates a comparatively larger fraction of its officers than other branches. Zukunft shed light on this issue by stating, ‘If we’re not smart about the environment that we operate in, we’re going to be a much less capable Coast Guard.’
Zukunft underlined his stance with the example of Micronesia, an area which sees consistent Coast Guard activity due to one among many bilateral maritime law enforcement agreements. ‘America’s utilization of the Coast Guard’s presence in these islands offers a pivotal counter to China, who is steadily trying to extend its influence across the Pacific.’ he said.
The recently imposed edict that bars discussion of ‘climate change’ in the curriculum of the Coast Guard Academy is conspicuously divergent from the erstwhile approaches of a U.S. military branch which commands over 40,000 members on active duty. It ultimately manifests the backward and imprudent stance of Biden’s administration which failed to safeguard the scientific progress made by the academy.