Hegseth has generated widespread concern over his judgment and lack of restraint. His leadership has been defined by the summary firing of senior officers without cause, upheaval among his top advisers, giving his wife an outsize role in Pentagon affairs, juvenile social-media habits, and his obsession with military fitness and appearance. At the Pentagon these days, more and more there are two kinds of personnel—those fully on board with Hegseth and those afraid to say they are not. “It’s easier to stay out of the way than to be questioned about loyalty or willingness to do the job,” one defense official, who is in the latter camp, told us.
The maritime campaign, called “Operation Southern Spear,” is ostensibly aimed at curbing the flow of drugs from Venezuela to the United States, though the rationale is viewed by many as a thin veneer for Trump’s professed desire for the ouster of President Nicolás Maduro. The boat strikes, now totaling 22 with a death toll of more than 80, are viewed by many military-law experts as likely illegal. On Tuesday, the family of a Colombian man killed in a September 15 strike filed a complaint at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, alleging that Hegseth violated international law. The Pentagon declined to provide a comment but pointed to the chief department spokesperson’s denial that the September 2 strike ran afoul of proper military tactics and his assertion that the maritime operations “have been a resounding success.”
Throughout this debate, Hegseth has used social media to taunt critics, posting videos of boats being incinerated and promising to kill traffickers en masse. This week, he posted on X a doctored cover of a Franklin the Turtle children’s book, with a mock Franklin Targets Narco Terrorists illustration that shows Franklin hanging from a military helicopter, weapon in hand.
Also this week, the Pentagon’s inspector general released long-awaited findings of its investigation into Hegseth’s decision to post details of a pending strike on Houthi rebels in Yemen in a group chat on Signal, a commercial messaging app, that included the editor in chief of this magazine. (Mike Waltz, then the national security adviser, had inadvertently added Jeffrey Goldberg to the group.) The inspector general concluded that Hegseth could have put U.S. personnel and the mission at risk by his actions, even though the mission was completed. The report also found that Hegseth, as the Pentagon’s senior official, had the authority to declassify the sensitive information as he transmitted it—in effect declassifying it in his own head—but noted that the attack details had been classified when they were relayed to him by U.S. Central Command. The report also faulted Hegseth for violating his own department’s policies by using Signal for Pentagon business.
As Hegseth was busy attempting to declare exoneration from a report that clearly suggested otherwise, he was sued by The New York Times over his October decision to bar reporters from working inside the Pentagon unless they agreed to restrictions that could prevent reporters from publishing information not approved by the administration, conditions that journalists and First Amendment lawyers broadly agree represent an ostentatious attack on Americans’ basic constitutional protections.
It’s not as though Hegseth was widely adored until this week. He alienated many in Trump’s orbit all the way back in the presidential transition, when they believed he was being misleading about parts of his professional and personal history that later came to light in the media and in his contentious confirmation hearings. Susie Wiles, now the president’s chief of staff, groused to aides that she could never tell if Hegseth was telling the truth.
When Signalgate broke, in March, Trump called a number of his close allies to take their temperature on whether he should dismiss Hegseth. Some suggested he be fired, but Trump opted against it. He and his inner circle wanted to avoid the constant staff turnover of Trump’s first term. They have largely stuck to that “no scalps” policy so as not to give the Democrats a win—or the media a major story—by appearing to bow to pressure. (Waltz lost his post as national security adviser but was given a soft landing as ambassador to the United Nations.) Hegseth never regained the trust of some in the West Wing.
Pete Hegseth is seriously testing Trump’s ‘no scalps’ rule |
