UPDATE: Tensions are escalating at the Pentagon as Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth clashes with newly appointed Army Secretary Dan Driscoll. Just days into his role, Driscoll angered Hegseth by attempting to arrange a visit from President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance, aiming to boost troop morale. Hegseth perceived this as a direct challenge to his authority, viewing it as a potential threat to his standing with Trump.
The fallout from this incident highlights a deeper power struggle within military leadership. Hegseth’s aggressive tactics have sparked concern among officials, who fear his ruthless approach could compromise effective governance at a time of global crises. “If Driscoll starts gaining prominence, it could politically jeopardize Hegseth,” one source close to the situation revealed.
In April, Hegseth fired three senior Pentagon officials in response to perceived leaks that damaged his reputation. He has also threatened further investigations, including polygraph tests for high-ranking officers like Admiral Chris Grady and Lt. Gen. Doug Sims, who have both denied any wrongdoing. This culture of fear extends to Driscoll, who recently faced public attacks from right-wing activist Laura Loomer for his associations with perceived Trump critics.
Despite the tension, Hegseth publicly denied any discord between himself and Driscoll. In a statement to CNN, he expressed complete confidence in Driscoll’s leadership, calling any claims of tension “fake news.” Driscoll echoed this sentiment, emphasizing his commitment to working under Hegseth’s guidance to restore military strength.
However, the Pentagon’s atmosphere remains charged. Hegseth has been accused of fostering an insular environment, having pushed out at least 11 senior military officers and instituted a 20% reduction in four-star generals, branding many as “woke.” Officials worry that Hegseth’s focus on public image and social media over substantive policy may leave critical tasks unaddressed.
With significant crises unfolding worldwide, including tensions in the Middle East and potential military confrontations in Latin America, Hegseth’s priorities have raised alarms. One Pentagon official criticized, “Renaming the Defense Department to the ‘Department of War’ isn’t a meaningful change.”
Hegseth’s recent actions, including a controversial military strike on a boat linked to Venezuelan cartel members without prior congressional notification, underscore the administration’s shift towards unilateral military actions. Lawmakers have expressed frustration over the lack of engagement from the Department of Defense under Hegseth.
Additionally, Hegseth has ramped up his public relations team, multiplying the number of spokespeople to monitor social media for dissent and control messaging. This has led to a climate of fear among military personnel, with reports of targeted firings based on social media scrutiny, particularly around issues of diversity and inclusion.
The growing influence of Driscoll within the Army has not gone unnoticed. Sources suggest he is viewed as a potential successor to Hegseth, raising stakes in their ongoing rivalry. Driscoll, characterized as non-threatening and cooperative, stands in stark contrast to Hegseth’s combative style.
As the situation evolves, the military community watches closely. The implications of this power struggle extend beyond mere politics; they could impact the effectiveness of the U.S. military at a critical juncture. The Pentagon’s leadership dynamics are more than just internal conflicts—they reflect broader ideological battles that could shape the future of American defense.
As developments continue, the focus remains on how this internal strife will affect military readiness and the relationships among key leaders in the Pentagon. The stakes are high, and the public awaits clarity from officials amidst a backdrop of escalating tensions.