policy
This comes against the backdrop of the Republican president’s hatred of wind turbines and his desire to promote fossil fuels in order to “dominate” energy in the global market.
A wind turbine base is shown at the Sunrise Wind offshore wind farm under construction off the coast of Montauk Point, New York, April 23, 2026. AP Photo/Joshua A. Pickle, file
The administration of President Donald Trump has worked to halt the development of offshore wind energy on the grounds that it poses a threat to national security since late last year.
It halted work on major projects and bought back leases, citing national security concerns. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said a classified report from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth proves offshore wind poses a threat to national security.
This comes against the backdrop of the Republican president’s hatred of wind turbines and his desire to promote fossil fuels in order to “dominate” energy in the global market. National laboratory estimates are shown Turbines installed along the coast of the United States could provide more than enough energy to cover the country’s annual electricity consumption.
Wind turbines interfere with radar, but this is not a new problem. The Pentagon is reviewing plans to build the wind farm and could consider the areas off-limits. There are radar upgrades to mitigate turbine effects.
Here’s what to know about the national security implications of offshore wind development:
Rotating turbine blades can create false targets on radar screens
Burgum says he’s concerned about drones passing into the wind tower field undetected because of radar interference. He said the vibration of wind towers could affect undersea sonar.
Radar systems can be modified to raise the threshold for what is considered a detection, but they may miss actual targets as a result, according to the Department of Energy.
Radar operators are trained to distinguish a direct path — anything from a boat or submarine periscope to a drone or missile — from clutter, said Kirk Leibold, a national security expert and former commander of the destroyer USS Cole. If the drones were not detected before they arrived at the wind farm, “we would have bigger national security issues,” he said.
The Trump administration says there are new risks
According to the Department of Justice, defense officials provided the Office of Ocean Energy Management with classified information in November 2025 detailing new national security risks from offshore wind projects.
BOEM halted construction on five large projects on the East Coast days before Christmas. They must address the rapid development of competing technologies and related vulnerabilities created by these projects near East Coast cities, Burgum said. This came after courts blocked Trump’s efforts to halt development through executive action.
Like the United States, Sweden raises security concerns about offshore wind energy. Officials said Thursday they are approving two offshore wind farms while rejecting 11 others.
Green Power Switzerland CEO Nils Grunditz said he wondered why Sweden was scaling back its plans for offshore wind when technological solutions to radar interference were being used elsewhere in the region. Denmark has been a leader in wind energy since building its first offshore wind farm in 1991.
The UK government said in March it had purchased new air defense radars to mitigate anomalies created by offshore wind farms, describing them as new technology ensuring air defense and offshore wind coexist. Independent climate change think tank E3G said North Sea turbines could be a defense asset, for example by including surveillance and monitoring equipment.
The judges were not convinced by the Trump administration
Developers were affected by the construction freeze and states sued. The Justice Department said national security concerns are of paramount importance and that federal courts do not criticize military officials’ assessment of those risks.
Federal judges reviewed the classified information and allowed all five wind farms to resume construction.
In the US District Court for the District of Columbia, Judge Royce Lamberth expressed concern that the aforementioned national security rationale may have been a “pretext,” to hide the true motives for stopping offshore wind.
In getting a major wind farm in Rhode Island and Connecticut back on track in January, Lamberth said the government did not apply newfound concerns specifically to that project, Revolution Wind. Burgum publicly criticized offshore wind around the time of the stop-work order for reasons unrelated to national security, and BOEM waited until December to act on information it received in November.
The Pentagon is also obstructing the development of onshore wind farms, and the administration has used emergency orders to keep fossil fuel plants running. On Thursday, attorneys general from 18 states and Washington moved to intervene in a lawsuit seeking to develop onshore wind farms.
The administration is making a national security argument in many different contexts, “and that has caused increased skepticism on the part of the courts,” said Megan Greenfield, a partner at Jenner & Block LLP in Washington.
A retired naval officer questions the administration’s motives
In buying back offshore wind leases, the Interior Department cited national security concerns regarding projects, including those off California. The Interior Department said Thursday that there were serious national security risks that required immediate attention, and that it would not allow “reckless projects to lead to higher utility costs, weaken the energy system, and unnecessary harm to the environment.” Several states are suing.
Retired US Navy Vice Admiral Dennis McGinn knows the waters off California well. He commanded the fleet responsible for naval operations across the eastern and northern Pacific Ocean. He said there was no “national security issue” that would negate years of analysis of the leasehold areas.
McGinn said he believes the administration is maximizing the risks and costs of offshore wind while minimizing the benefits to justify the pursuit of more fossil fuels and “it doesn’t pass the common sense tests.” Offshore wind produces electricity cleanly. Oil, coal and natural gas emit carbon pollution when burned.
McGinn, who served as Assistant Secretary of the Navy, said radar interference was a problem that was recognized early and dealt with appropriately, and that thousands of turbines are operating across Europe and Asia.
“National security and offshore wind are compatible, if done right, in the right locations,” he said.
Economist Diana Furchtgott Roth disagrees. Defense issues have been known for decades, the military’s views should be taken seriously, and the nation should not rely on Chinese-made turbines, said Furchtgott Roth, a distinguished fellow at the Energy Policy Research Foundation, and gas, coal and nuclear power provide reliable and affordable energy. She said the administration was acting wisely.
Members of Congress were briefed
Democratic US Senator Jack Reed from Rhode Island said that he participated in a secret press conference months ago and did not find the reasons convincing. Reed, the ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee, is trying to include a measure in the defense bill that would set military policy to impose a 180-day deadline for a military office known as the Clearinghouse to evaluate wind projects and explain its conclusions.
“They must be able to provide a thoughtful and comprehensive analysis that justifies their decision,” Reed said Wednesday. “This is the way to go.”
Even with this move, this administration is finding many ways to stop things it doesn’t like, Reed said, and he expects the campaign against wind energy to continue.
Additional news alerts
Get breaking updates as they happen.