A French Air Force jet deployed in Polish airspace this month. US policy officials have signalled that the Pentagon will withdraw some forces from Europe and consolidate commands in a way that unnerves some US allies, particularly amid Russia’s war with Ukraine and its incursions into Nato airspace. Photo / Handout, Etat Major des Armes, AFP
Military leaders have raised serious concerns about the Trump Administration’s forthcoming defence strategy, exposing a divide between the Pentagon’s political and uniformed leadership.
It’s occurring as United States Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth summons top brass to a highly unusual summit in Virginia today, according to eight current and former officials.
The critiques from multiple top officers, including General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, come as Hegseth reorders US military priorities - centring the Pentagon on perceived threats to the homeland, narrowing US competition with China, and downplaying America’s role in Europe and Africa.
US President Donald Trump will attend the abrupt gathering of generals and admirals at Marine Corps Base Quantico, where Hegseth is expected to deliver remarks on military standards and the “warrior ethos”, even as uniformed leaders fear mass firings or a drastic reorganisation of the combatant command structure and the military hierarchy.
The debate over the National Defence Strategy - the Pentagon’s primary guide for how it prioritises resources and positions US forces around the world - is the latest challenge for top military officials navigating the Trump Administration’s unorthodox approach to the armed forces.
People familiar with the editing process, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity, described a growing sense of frustration with a plan they consider myopic and potentially irrelevant, given the President’s highly personal and sometimes contradictory approach to foreign policy.
Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell declined to comment on the substance of the classified document or whether concerns had been raised in the editing process.
“Secretary Hegseth has tasked the development of a National Defence Strategy that is laser focused on advancing President Trump’s commonsense America First, Peace Through Strength agenda,” Parnell said in a statement. “This process is still ongoing.”
Trump political appointees within the Pentagon’s policy office - including some officials who have previously criticised long-standing American commitments to Europe and the Middle East - drafted the strategy, now in its final edits.
The draft plan has been shared widely with military leaders from the global combatant commands to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, some of whom questioned what its priorities would mean for a force designed to respond to crises around the globe, according to three people familiar with the matter.
Dissent during the drafting process is normal, but the number of officials concerned about the document - and the depth of their criticism - is unusual, several people said.
Caine shared his concerns with top Pentagon leadership in recent weeks, according to two people familiar with the matter.
“He gave Hegseth very frank feedback,” one of the two people said, noting that Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby was also included in the discussion.
“I don’t know if Hegseth even understands the magnitude of the NDS, which is why I think Caine tried so hard.”
The second person said Caine has tried to get the NDS to remain focused on preparing the military to deter and, if necessary, defeat China in a conflict.
Hegseth and his policy officials have signalled that the Pentagon will withdraw some forces from Europe and consolidate commands in a way that unnerves some US allies, particularly amid Russia’s war with Ukraine and its recent, repeated incursions into Nato airspace.
For years, Pentagon strategy has been anchored in the idea that America’s best defence was in building and maintaining strong military alliances abroad.
Critics of that approach within the Administration have argued that it has mired the US in expensive wars on foreign soil, instead of securing domestic US interests.
Trump’s approach so far has largely been to prod allies to spend more on their own security, at times alienating Republican hawks in Congress who are also urging higher defence spending at home.
While Trump has undertaken bombing campaigns in Yemen and Iran, his main focus has been surging the military towards missions close to American soil.
Under his command this year, the Pentagon has struck alleged drug traffickers in the Caribbean Sea, deployed US troops and weapons to the southern border, and sent the National Guard and Marines to US cities.
There they have aided deportation efforts and sought to curtail what the president has called “out of control” urban crime. Some of those domestic deployments are being challenged in court.
Trump on social media ordered troops to Portland, Oregon, saying he was allowing them to use “full force” to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents whose operations have drawn sporadic protests in the city.
Hegseth said on Monday in a memo to the Oregon National Guard that the mission would include the federalising of about 200 Guard members.
Much of the internal criticism of the new strategy regards the document’s emphasis on threats to the US homeland even as China continues a rapid military build-up that uniformed leaders have warned is narrowing the US’ edge in the Pacific, according to several people familiar with the matter.
There are still substantial sections of the document that do focus on China, but these are largely concentrated on the threat of an attack on Taiwan, rather than global competition with the US’ largest adversary, five people said.
Colby has long warned that the US military is unprepared for the risk of a Chinese invasion and called for Washington to shift attention and resources towards the problem.
“There’s a concern that it’s just not very well thought out,” one former official said of the strategy.
The document’s tone is also far more partisan than past strategies, saying the Biden Administration caused an erosion of America’s military in rhetoric similar to Hegseth’s speeches, two people familiar with the plan said.
Hegseth is leading an overhaul of the armed forces, promising to cut the roughly 800 generals and admirals overseeing the US military by 20% and redraw the lines of the US’ combatant commands.
The secretary has already fired senior officers, including Chairman of the Joint Chiefs General Charles Brown and Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Lisa Franchetti. A disproportionate number of women have been relieved during the sackings.
The Pentagon’s interim defence strategy, which the Washington Post first reported in detail in March, included a similar focus on Taiwan and homeland defence, going as far as to urge Pentagon leaders to “assume risk” in other parts of the globe to meet both priorities.
That interim document also hinted at the emerging strategy to use military personnel in a more assertive role at home and abroad.
The Pentagon was directed by Hegseth to “prioritise efforts to seal our borders, repel forms of invasion including unlawful mass migration, narcotics trafficking, human smuggling and trafficking, and other criminal activities, and deport illegal aliens in co-ordination with the Department of Homeland Security”, according to the document.
Sign up to Herald Premium Editor’s Picks, delivered straight to your inbox every Friday. Editor-in-Chief Murray Kirkness picks the week’s best features, interviews and investigations. Sign up for Herald Premium here.