Former Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti is speaking out after the Trump administration ousted her and other top leaders at the Pentagon Friday, asserting that the Navy's mission will continue "unabated and undisrupted."

Franchetti, the first woman to serve as the chief of naval operations and on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, described leading the sea service as the "honor of a lifetime" and thanked Navy sailors for their service supporting the U.S. 

"We are America’s Warfighting Navy and America is counting on us to deter aggression, defend our National security interests, and preserve our way of life," Franchetti, who had served as the Navy's top officer since 2023, said in a Tuesday LinkedIn post. "We operate from seabed to space, around the globe and around the clock. Our mission continues, unabated and undisrupted…There is no time to waste."

TRUMP NOMINATES AIR FORCE LT. GEN. DAN 'RAZIN' CAINE FOR JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF CHAIRMAN

Franchetti joined the Navy Reserve Officer Training Corps as a student at Northwestern University and was commissioned in 1985. She told Navy Times in 2023 that she met other ROTC students at a barbecue during freshman orientation week, who notified her about the scholarship opportunities ROTC provided.

At the time of her commissioning, women were barred from serving on combatant ships and aircraft and were instead assigned to ships like oilers and destroyer tenders. However, Congress repealed the law in 1993 — paving the way for women like Franchetti to serve in top leadership positions in the Navy. 

"I joined for free college and books, but I stayed for our mission, the opportunity to serve something greater than myself, and the chance to be part of amazing teams in the world’s most lethal fighting force: America’s Warfighting Navy," Franchetti wrote on LinkedIn. 

Ultimately, Franchetti went on to command two carrier strike groups, and served as the deputy commander of U.S. Naval Forces Europe and Africa and the commander of the U.S. 6th Fleet, which falls under U.S. Naval Forces Europe and Africa.

Other leaders the Trump administration removed Friday included Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. CQ Brown and Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Jim Slife. 

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth requested nominations to replace Franchetti and Slife, and said that both had "distinguished careers."

"We thank them for their service and dedication to our country," Hegseth said in a Friday statement. 

Vice Chief of Naval Operations Adm. James Kilby announced that he would take over responsibilities as the top officer in the Navy until a permanent replacement was found for Franchetti. 

FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF BIDS FAREWELL IN HEARTFELT SOCIAL MEDIA POST: ‘DISTINCT HONOR’

"The work of our Navy continues without disruption," Kilby said in a statement Saturday. "We will sustain forward-deployed lethal forces that enhance the peace and deter our adversaries."

The Navy did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. It remains unclear where Franchetti will be reassigned. 

Hegseth didn’t provide any additional comment on Franchetti or her career, but previously described her as a "DEI hire" in his 2024 book, "The War on Warriors: Behind the Betrayal of the Men Who Keep Us Free." 

Hegseth also announced Friday that President Donald Trump plans to nominate retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Dan "Razin" Caine to replace Brown, claiming that Caine embodies the "warfighter ethos" the U.S. military needs. 

"Under President Trump, we are putting in place new leadership that will focus our military on its core mission of deterring, fighting and winning wars," Hegseth said. 

Bybit has already paid more than $4 million to bounty hunters who helped trace and freeze some of the stolen funds.

© 2024 TechCrunch. All rights reserved. For personal use only.

• Last week's Pentagon leadership purge included firing top JAG officers, raising alarm.
• JAGs are crucial legal advisors, ensuring military actions comply with the law.
• "I do see this as one of the bigger threats to the rule of law," an expert in military law told BI.

When President Donald Trump's Pentagon chief sacked top military officers last week, the most startling firings were the lawyers, legal experts told Business Insider.

The abrupt firing of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, US Air Force Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., drew condemnation and spurred headlines. But it was the dismissal of top JAG officers — a single line of text at the end of the Friday night announcement — that had those aware of the potential deep impacts on military legal affairs more concerned.

"These firings with the JAGs are more concerning than the firings of the four stars that accompany them," Franklin D. Rosenblatt, a retired US Army JAG officer and president of the National Institute of Military Justice, told Business Insider in a phone interview on Monday.

"I don't want to engage in hyperbole, but I do see this as one of the bigger threats to the rule of law that the Pentagon has faced in a long time."

In the same memo in which Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said that he was removing Brown and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti, and Air Force Vice Chief General James Slife, he also announced a solicitation for "nominations for the Judge Advocates General for the Army, Navy and Air Force," effectively removing these three senior JAG officers.

The move deepened a sense of upheaval as the administration shifts departmental funding priorities and invites DOGE cost-cutters fresh from gutting USAID.

Speaking to reporters on Monday about the recent developments, Hegseth called the JAGs potential "roadblocks" to the president's orders.

"We are looking for the best" to replace the fired officers, he said, suggesting that those career officers were not well suited to the task of providing the best recommendations to commanders.

When reached for comment, the Office of the Secretary of Defense directed BI to the transcript of the engagement between Hegseth and reporters in which he characterized the dismissed officers as potential hindrances.

The commander's 'right hand'

Colorado Rep. Jason Crow, a former Army Ranger, was one of the first to raise concerns about the firing of the JAG officers, writing on X last Friday that purging JAG officers worries him the most.

Judge advocates general, or JAGs, are military lawyers and part of the niche and often complex realm of military justice and oversight. Legal experts say that the decision to kneecap these apolitical roles and replace them with a fresh lot could cause harmful ripple effects.

JAG officers serve as legal advisors to commanders at all levels, from battalion leadership directing gunfights and interrogations during the Global War on Terror to the quiet corridors of the Pentagon, where top JAGs can advise commanders spread out across the globe. They don't set rules for commanders to follow, Rosenblatt said, but instead advise leaders on the legality of their desired employment of US forces.

Mark Nevitt, a former Navy JAG, said in a Just Security post that "summary removals" of these lawyers are "unprecedented in modern times." He said the "firing without apparent cause of the service JAGs is particularly disturbing."

These officers practice a wide range of law, supporting not just the military force employment decisions but also endeavors associated with contract and fiscal law through litigation of disputes and advising contracting boards.

JAGs are the military equivalent to general counsels at large companies that advise CEOs on the legality of policies and practices, often recommending courses of action to avoid unnecessary liabilities.

"JAGs are instrumental in that they're the right hand of commanders and helping commanders affect their command vision and their goals," said Rachel VanLandingham, a law professor at Southwestern Law School and former Air Force JAG, in a phone call with BI on Monday.

"We have the Constitution, and flowing from that, a plethora of federal laws and federal regulations that apply to the military," she said.

JAGs are guardrails for commanders, VanLandingham said. This role is particularly important should a military leader, or even the commander-in-chief, consider wading into the gray areas of military law, like Trump's previous musings about deploying active-duty troops to American cities.

Former Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall, who wrote in a New York Times op-ed this week that Trump is a rogue president, said that he was deeply troubled by the JAG departures.

"One has to ask why JAG leadership was singled out for replacement," Kendall wrote, highlighting the authority JAGs have to advise commanders on whether an order from a president or the secretary of defense is lawful.

'A chilling message'

Prior to Hegseth's Friday memo on the big shake-ups at DoD, Air Force Lt. Gen. Charles Plummer, Army Lt. Gen. Joseph Berger, and Navy Rear Adm. Lia Reynolds were the top uniformed military lawyers for each of their armed services.

Rosenblatt said that it was surprising to see Berger's relief, given that he had advocated for less restrictive legal procedures on the battlefield.

The lack of pre-identified JAG replacements in Hegseth's Friday memo seems to undermine any assumptions that political leadership has specific, sufficiently "loyal" options in mind, Rosenblatt said. Rather, he said, "it just really seemed to give more credence to the view that Hegseth just doesn't like military lawyers."

Hegseth has criticized JAGs in the past as unnecessary and self-serving and has referred to them disparagingly as "JAG-offs" because of their often methodical processes, which Hegseth views as unnecessarily burdensome and harmful to units across the board.

Hegseth is an infantry veteran who served in the Army National Guard and deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan.

"I have a lot of confidence in the people who may come next," Rosenblatt said, referring to other high-ranking JAGs who could hold the job. "But there is no doubt that this is sending a chilling message to all of those who may follow the advice of JAGs," he said.

"This is very much, I think, a message that they want legal advice that's going to be more politically-minded," he concluded.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth arrived at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, on Tuesday, his first trip to the naval installation since being confirmed to his post in January. 

Hegseth was expected to receive briefings on all mission operations at the base, including the detention facility where illegal migrants deported from the United States are being housed before being flown to their native countries. 

"Arrived at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay on the front lines of the war against America’s southern border," the secretary wrote on X. 

He was also expected to meet with troops at the base and aboard the USS Thomas Hudner. Images posted to Hegseth's X account show him meeting and eating with troops stationed at Gitmo. 

TRUMP ADMIN ENDS DEPORTATION PROTECTIONS FOR MASSIVE NUMBER OF VENEZUELANS AMID ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION CRACKDOWN

"These warriors are directly supporting the apprehension and deportation of dangerous illegal aliens," he wrote. "We cannot thank them or their families enough."

The base is best known for detaining terrorism suspects, including those behind the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. President Donald Trump authorized the detention of illegal immigrants at the facility shortly after taking office on Jan. 20. 

In January, Trump said he wanted to expand immigrant detention centers at Guantánamo to hold as many as 30,000 people.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT ARRESTS SKYROCKET UNDER TRUMP ICE COMPARED TO BIDEN LEVELS LAST YEAR

"Some of them are so bad that we don’t even trust the countries to hold them because we don’t want them coming back, so we’re going to send ‘em out to Guantánamo," Trump said at the time. 

Last week, nearly 200 Venezuelan illegal immigrants arrested in the U.S. were flown back from Guantanamo Bay after Venezuela expressed interest in accepting its citizens. 

Earlier this month, two Venezuelan flights carried 190 illegal immigrants from the U.S. to the South American nation.

The U.S. government has alleged that Venezuelan illegal immigrants transferred to the naval base are members of the violent Tren de Aragua gang. Trump has turned the gang into the face of the alleged threat posed by immigrants living in the country illegally.

President Donald Trump’s decision to fire several high-ranking military leaders is a first step in helping the president achieve his goal of a military more focused on lethality.

"It’s a bold move… you could even say it’s fairly aggressive," William Ruger, the President of the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER) and a former Trump nominee for ambassador to Afghanistan, told Fox News Digital. "There’s a sense that I get that this isn’t merely a challenge to one or two individuals, but that there needed to be a greater push to change the direction the Pentagon has been going… in terms of lethality, warrior ethos."

Ruger, who serves as an officer in the U.S. Navy Reserve, was "a prominent advocate for ending America’s participation in the Afghanistan War," according to his AIER profile page.

The comments come after Trump fired the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Gen. C.Q. Brown, as well as several other top military officers over the weekend, a list that also included the U.S. Navy's top officer, Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the first woman to lead one of the military branches.

OBAMA FIRED TOP MILITARY OFFICERS TO ALIGN PENTAGON WITH HIS POLICY VISION, NOW TRUMP SET TO DO THE SAME

The dramatic move reportedly caused "upheaval" at the Pentagon, according to a Reuters report, while critics were quick to pounce on Trump’s decision.

"Firing uniformed leaders as a type of political loyalty test, or for reasons relating to diversity and gender that have nothing to do with performance, erodes the trust and professionalism that our service members require to achieve their missions," the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Jack Reed, of Rhode Island, told Reuters, whose report called the firings "unprecedented."

But Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth pushed back against that characterization, arguing during an appearance on "Fox News Sunday" that Trump "deserves to pick his key national security advisory team."

"Nothing about this is unprecedented," Hegseth said, noting that there have been "lots of presidents who made changes," specifically citing Franklin D. Roosevelt, George H.W. Bush and Barack Obama, who Hegseth argued "fired or dismissed hundreds" of military officials.

OFFICIALS PUSH BACK ON CLAIMS OF 'LIST' OF GENERALS HEGSETH PLANS TO FIRE AT PENTAGON

In the most recent example, Obama made the decision to relieve Army Gen. David McKiernan as the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan five months into the president’s term in office in 2009, marking the first time a wartime commander had been dismissed since 1951.

According to Ruger, the main point of the firings will be to allow Trump to have trusted military advisors to carry out his vision for the future of the force.

"The president had good reason for trying to do this, believing that the military was not led by the admirals and generals that were necessary to implement his vision of our defense structure," Ruger said. "We should have some caution here in thinking that there’s anything amiss."

Ruger also noted that the moves align more closely to Hegseth’s vision for the military, which he believes will "focus on lethality and the warrior ethos, as opposed to some of the more… identitarianism that we had seen creeping into the military."

Perhaps more importantly, Ruger stressed that Trump’s ability to shake up military leadership as he sees fit is critical to the U.S.’s time-tested tradition of civilian leadership over the military.

"It’s important that for good civil military relations purposes, that it’s clear who is the decision maker, and that should be the civilians, and that what they say will be faithfully implemented," Ruger said. "That’s the hallmark of good civil military relations."

Among the critics who posted on X Sunday after my Fox News show was one who made an argument that surprised me.

Don’t pay attention to what President DonaldTrump says, this person wrote. Pay attention to what he does.

Now that’s a novel idea. What the president of the United States says is unimportant and should be ignored. I doubt that this person applied the same standard to President Joe Biden.

And yet there’s an interesting thought exercise here. Trump says a lot of things, especially since he talks to journalists at length virtually every day. Not everything rises to the same level of seriousness. I say this as someone who has interviewed him many times over the years, including our sit-down two weeks before the election.

INTERVIEWING DONALD TRUMP: A LAST-MINUTE BLITZ AND NEW CLOSING MESSAGE

Sometimes the president says things just to rile up the press. Sometimes he says things that aren’t true, or are exaggerations or taken out of context.

But more often he says the quiet part out loud, signaling what he plans to do or insulting those with whom he disagrees, the kind of stuff that reporters used to have to attribute to unnamed aides, and he does it in front of the cameras.

At the top of the list right now would be Ukraine. President Trump is a smart guy. He knows that Russia invaded its much smaller sovereign neighbor with the aim of wiping it off the map and putting it under Moscow’s control. But he has chosen to blame Ukraine for starting the war, and to insult Volodomyr Zelenskyy as a dictator when everyone knows that label perfectly describes Vladimir Putin.

The most charitable interpretation is that Trump believes the only way to end the war is through an alliance with Putin for a settlement that could then be sold to Ukraine. (The United States voted with Russia yesterday against a U.N. resolution condemning the invasion.) 

Of course, Trump has cozied up to Putin for a long time. During their Helsinki summit in the first term, the president accepted Putin’s denial that the Kremlin had hacked into Democratic emails, despite the evidence gathered by his own intelligence agencies.

Trump has repeated again and again that Zelenskyy bears responsibility for the war that just marked its three-year anniversary. Is this aimed at the American public or at Moscow or Kyiv (to put pressure on Ukraine)?  

ELON MUSK’S BUDGET-SLASHING HITS POLITICAL REALITY OF SUFFERING AMERICANS

Journalists keep asking Trump aides and Republican supporters if they agree with the president’s blame-Ukraine approach, and many have simply tried to deflect the question.

In my "Media Buzz" interview with Jason Miller, the longtime Trump confidante and senior adviser to the Trump transition team, he deftly avoided contradicting the president.

"What President Trump has done," he said, "is he has forced the sides to the table to actually stop the killing and come up with a peace deal. For the last several years. Joe Biden has sat there completely incompetent, doing nothing but fueling and funding more killing and more death." 

When I tried again, Miller said of his boss that "his legacy really will be as a peacemaker."

I came back a third time, quoting conservative radio host Mark Levin as saying, "This is sick. Ukraine didn't start this war. What were they supposed to do? Roll over and play dead? They're just trying to survive." 

And I asked: "Why is President Trump blaming Zelenskyy for the beginning of the war?"

"Well, Zelenskyy has a lot of blame. I think that would go to this as well. But again, you want to look into the past, I want to look into the future, what we do to save lives." 

Miller was doing his job. A similar scenario played out on the other Sunday shows.

On "Fox News Sunday," my colleague Shannon Bream asked Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth whether it was fair to say that Russia was unprovoked when it attacked Ukraine. He replied that it was "fair to say it’s a very complicated situation."

DONALD TRUMP’S TOUGH TALK—BUY GREENLAND! TAKE BACK PANAMA CANAL!—SPARKS DEFIANCE FROM MANY REPUBLICAN REBELS

Stressing that Trump wants to end the war, Hegseth said: "‘You’re good, you’re bad; you’re a dictator, you’re not a dictator; you invaded, you didn’t.’ It’s not useful. It’s not productive."

Another part of my Sunday interview also shed light on Trump’s use of language.

The president told reporters: "I think we should govern the District of Columbia, make it absolutely flawlessly beautiful." 

The District has enjoyed home rule for 50 years, although Congress retains the power to overturn its laws. The capital, like most cities, grapples with crime, poverty and other urban ills.

I asked point blank: Is the president ready to end home rule in D.C.?

Miller said Mayor Muriel Bowser is largely doing a good job, adding: "I think part of the reason why President Trump won is because he said he was going to clean up our cities to make them safe. Of course he's going to put pressure on the District of Columbia."

SUBSCRIBE TO HOWIE'S MEDIA BUZZMETER PODCAST, A RIFF ON THE DAY'S HOTTEST STORIES

So Trump’s words in this instance had a different meaning, as a warning signal to the District.

Oh, I also wondered why Trump keeps referring to Canada as the 51st state when that’s not going to happen.

"The president's having a little bit of fun with it. But he's also making some very serious points."

My online detractor was wrong. It’s important to pay attention to the president’s words, especially for the media, which have a tendency to overreact to some of his language. The challenge is deciphering when he’s dead serious, when he’s sending signals and when he’s just trolling. 

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth defended President Donald Trump’s firing of "woke generals" and Pentagon officials, saying that the "status quo" at the Department of Defense "hasn’t worked" and that it is "time for fresh blood."

This comes after Trump made a series of changes in the Pentagon’s top leadership last week, including firing Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. Charles Brown and announcing he would replace him with retired Lt. Gen. Dan "Razin" Caine.

Trump also fired the Navy’s top leader, Admiral Lisa Franchetti, Air Force Vice Chief of Staff General James Slife and the judge advocates general of the Army, Navy and Air Force.

Speaking with Fox News on Sunday, Hegseth said that these changes "are a reflection of the president wanting the right people around him to execute the national security approach we want to take."

DEFENSE SECRETARY HEGSETH WORKING WITH DOGE TO CUT THE 'BS'

Speaking about the judge advocates general, Hegseth said that just like the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, these military positions have traditionally been filled by a "small group of insulated officers who perpetuate the status quo."

"Well, guess what, status quo hasn’t worked very well at the Pentagon," he said. "It’s time for fresh blood, so we’re going to open up those positions to a broader set in a merit-based process."

In response to criticisms from Democrats and the media, Hegseth denied the firings were part of any political purge, saying: "There’s no purge" and "Nothing about this is unprecedented."

"There is civilian control of the military," he said. "The president deserves to pick his key national security and military advisory team. There are lots of presidents who have made changes from FDR to Eisenhower to H.W. Bush to Barack Obama, who fired – or dismissed – hundreds of military [officials] during his first term."

SHOULD WOMEN SERVE IN COMBAT? MILITARY EXPERTS WEIGH IN

Hegseth pointed out that of the 160 three- and four-star generals in the military, Trump only dismissed or moved a total of six. 

He also criticized what he called "inflation in the ranks over time."

"We won World War II with seven four-star generals, we have 44 today, we have 163 three- and four-star generals and has it created better outcomes or not?" he asked. "We’re challenging a lot of assumptions at the Pentagon to streamline what we do to get as many resources as possible to the warfighters."

"There’s nothing about purging, there’s nothing about it illegal, we’ve made it clear from the beginning," he explained. "The military will be apolitical, with a fidelity to the Constitution, prepared to close with and destroy our enemies."

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth denied rumors that he drafted a list of senior military leaders he allegedly planned to purge after the rumor tore through the Pentagon last week and reportedly kept flag officers on their toes. 

"I gotta ask you about this rumored list of people that you allegedly put together that we're all going to be cleaned out. Is there a list? Is there anybody left on the list if it exists?" "Fox News Sunday" host Shannon Bream asked Hegseth in an exclusive interview on Sunday morning. 

"There's no list, Shannon," Hegseth responded. "I've heard that, seen that very rumor, although we have a very keen eye toward military leadership and their willingness to follow lawful orders."

Republican lawmakers on the House and Senate Armed Services Committees said Thursday that they had heard about such a list of senior military officials facing the chopping block, but had not been presented anything.

OFFICIALS PUSH BACK ON CLAIMS OF 'LIST' OF GENERALS HEGSETH PLANS TO FIRE AT PENTAGON

The rumors flew through the Pentagon Thursday, creating fear among top-ranked officers, as reports that thousands of probationary DOD employees, including many military veterans, could be affected by the federal workforce reductions ordered by the White House, Fox News Digital reported last week. 

The list allegedly contained a "handful of names."

"I may have heard a rumor, but I'm not going to speculate on rumors," Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker, R-Miss., told Fox News. "No one has approached me about such a list other than people asking me questions."  

HEGSETH ORDERS PENTAGON TO MAKE PLANS FOR MAJOR BUDGET CUTS TO ALIGN WITH TRUMP'S PRIORITIES

Concerns over an alleged list mounted on Friday when Hegseth was slated to travel to Guatanomo Bay in Cuba to hold a media availability, but the trip was postponed until later this week. Some officials viewed the postponement as a signal the firings would be imminent, Fox Digital reported. 

TRUMP ADMIN EXPECTED TO ENACT LAYOFF AT DEFENSE DEPARTMENT AMID DOGE ARRIVAL: REPORT

The Trump administration on Friday did fire six Pentagon officials, including Air Force Gen. C.Q. Brown, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Adm. Lisa Franchetti, who was the first woman to serve as chief of naval operations. 

"This is all about defending the Constitution," Hegseth continued in his remarks to Bream after denying the existence of any "list." "Joe Biden gave lawful orders. A lot of them are really bad, and it's unfortunate how they eroded our military, ideological, COVID mandates. President Trump has given another set of lawful orders, and they will be followed."

"And all these orders are in keeping with the Constitution, and norms inside the military. If they're not followed, then those officers will find the door. And that's not a tough calculation. We feel really good about the direction the Pentagon is headed under President Trump. We're going to focus on war fighting and lethality and accountability, and be the most transparent Pentagon that folks have seen in a long time," he added. 

Earlier in the interview, Hegseth added that the former Joint Chiefs chairman, Gen. Brown, is an "honorable man, not the right man for the moment."

 Fox News' Louis Casiano, Alexandra Koch and Jennifer Griffin contributed to this report.

• President Trump fired the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Friday night.
• His public removal coincided with the defense secretary's firing of five other top officers.
• Several lawmakers, including military veterans, expressed alarm.

The White House ousted the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Air Force Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., which was followed by a string of firings in the Pentagon's most senior ranks that alarmed lawmakers.

In a press release posted Friday night, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also removed the chief of naval operations and the Air Force vice chief of staff, Adm. Lisa Franchetti and Gen. James Slife, respectively, as well as the top military lawyers for the Army, Navy, and Air Force.

The removals of confirmed leaders deepen the turmoil at the Pentagon, which faces deep cuts to its civilian workforce and budget shifts that Trump officials say are to align with the new administration's priorities. Nearly 5,400 probationary employees within the DoD may face job termination next week, part of a larger slew of cuts that could total around 55,000 civilian military employees.

Friday night firings

In his Truth Social announcement, President Donald Trump did not provide a reason for the removal of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who serves as the president's top military advisor, nor did he explain the move to replace Brown with a retired general.

Brown is a fighter pilot, and only the second African American to hold the chairman position. After the police killing of George Floyd in 2020, Brown spoke out publicly about his personal experiences facing racial discrimination as an airman. Before his most recent role, Brown was Chief of Staff of the US Air Force, making him the first African-American service chief.

Trump said that he would nominate retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Dan Caine to take on the role of chairman of the joint chiefs. This is a position that would need to be confirmed by the GOP-led Senate.

Brown wasn't the only trailblazing military officer among the leaders terminated Friday. Franchetti was the first woman to lead the Navy and the first-ever female military leader to be part of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Prior to his confirmation, Hegseth had called for the removal of both Brown and Franchetti.

She is the most recent female leader to be sacked as the new administration shakes up the government. Shortly after taking office, Trump officials relieved Coast Guard leader Adm. Linda F. Fagan, the first woman to lead a branch of the US armed forces.

Lawmakers sound the alarm

Hegseth's press release on the DoD leadership changes also asked for nominations for the Judge Advocates General for the Army, Navy and Air Force, positions responsible for advising military commanders on whether orders are lawful.

These moves alarmed some lawmakers like Colorado Democrat Rep. Jason Crow, a former Army Ranger, who noted their crucial role in applying the law to orders.

"Under President Trump, we are putting in place new leadership that will focus our military on its core mission of deterring, fighting and winning wars," the press release read.

Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Democratic Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island said in a statement Friday night that the dismissals appear to be "part of a broader, premeditated campaign" by Trump and Hegseth to "purge talented officers for politically charged reasons, which would undermine the professionalism of our military."

Other veterans in Congress criticized the unprecedented mass firings of top military officers.

"What Trump and Hegseth are doing is un-American, unpatriotic," wrote Rep. Seth Moulton, a Democrat from Massachusetts and a former Marine officer. "It's [the] definition of politicizing our military, and we should expect to see loyalty oaths (not to the Constitution) and worse coming soon."

"In case anyone is wondering ... this isn't normal," Illinois Sen. Tammy Duckworth, a former Army National Guard soldier, said. "No, this is the work of a wanna-be dictator. By firing our top military leaders and installing his own personal yes-men, Trump is making America less safe."

• Pentagon leadership plans to pull 8%, or $50 billion, from various projects to fund Trump's priorities.
• Exempt programs include nuclear modernization, missile defense, and Virginia-class submarines.
• The memo has triggered confusion about its implications for the Navy's crucial shipbuilding effort.

A $50 billion funding shift ordered by President Donald Trump's new defense secretary makes attack submarines a priority but raises questions for the rest of the Navy.

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth intends to pull roughly 8% of the Biden administration's fiscal year 2026 budget from existing programs and shift them to Trump's recently designated priorities. The plan has led to confusion about what this could mean for a critical area needed to confront China: Navy shipbuilding.

Only 17 Pentagon program areas would be exempted, per a memo by Hegseth, including "Southwest Border Activities," Virginia-class attack submarines, and "executable" surface ships.

Building Navy warships takes years and requires consistent funding to private shipbuilders who employ the skilled technicians and industrial processes needed to build advanced warships. The directive leaves it unclear if the new administration wants to continue building aircraft carriers, ballistic missile submarines, frigates, amphibious assault ships, and other vessels.

"The Secretary of Defense is injecting a colossal amount of confusion and churn and uncertainty into the budgeting process," Bryan McGrath, a defense and national security consultant and retired Navy commander, told Business Insider in an interview on Thursday.

Details of the plans were reported this week, and Hegseth said publicly that the budget shifts are "refocusing" on "top line stuff" and eliminating "woke" projects.

For Navy shipbuilding — a roughly $40 billion industrial effort every year — Virginia-class attack subs are the only bright spot. But Virginia-class submarines are facing yearslong construction delays along with many other warship classes that are essential to building a larger and more modern fleet.

Attack subs and budget questions

Virginia-class submarines were the only Navy vessels specifically identified as a priority in the memo.

The Virginia-class attack subs Trump's Pentagon is shielding have long been seen as a critical capability for countering China, a US rival with a substantial surface fleet and long-range missiles that can threaten US ships.

US submarines are difficult to track and are less threatened by Chinese ballistic missiles, Tom Shugart, an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security and retired Navy submarine officer, said in a call with BI on Thursday.

The memo did not mention plans for the new Columbia-class subs, an important part of the already underway nuclear modernization process.

The ballistic missile subs, known as SSBNs or "boomers," will carry Trident II missiles armed with nuclear warheads. These subs are harder to target and destroy compared to silo-based intercontinental ballistic missiles or bombers, helping to preserve US second-strike capabilities.

The Columbia-class submarines are likely to be included within the "nuclear modernization" category, Shugart said, as they are perhaps the most important part of nuclear modernization.

For surface vessels, only ships identified as "executable surface ships" are free from budget cuts — raising questions about what "executable" means. Multiple Navy shipbuilding programs are plagued by production delays, such as new Constellation-class frigates and the Ford-class aircraft carriers Trump recently called out in a discussion of waste and fraud. Uncertain budgets are a factor that has driven ship delays and rising costs.

Shipbuilding is measured in years. Shipyard workers began construction on the second Ford-class carrier in 2015. It's finally slated to join the fleet later this year.

Shugart and McGrath expressed confusion about what could qualify as an "executable surface ship." The term could include ships like the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, which shipyards are actively manufacturing with firm designs and timelines.

It likely "means surface ships that are buildable with the industrial base as we have it today," said Shugart. Warships like the new class of frigate that aren't on hot production lines could be in trouble.

It does not say "surface combatants;" it says "surface ships," Shugart noted. "I'm not sure what that means with respect to aircraft carriers," he said. "It may also apply to surface auxiliaries, like oilers and tankers."

The Navy declined to comment on the priorities memo released by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, which didn't respond to BI's request on Friday for clarity on what an "executable" ship means or the confusion the memo has caused.

Dramatic financial "refocusing" risks difficult battles with Congress, suggesting the money may come from elsewhere.

McGrath said that the Pentagon leadership's planned reallocations appear poised to reduce readiness in more mundane yet critical areas of military funding, including money for spare parts, equipment maintenance, and servicemember quality of life; the Navy spends $14.5 billion annually to maintain its ships.

That approach could include things like barracks renovations, improved food, and the availability of decent childcare for parents in uniform, all factors that can affect troop morale and retention rates. Readiness woes could be exacerbated by cuts to the Navy's workforce of civilian experts who repair ships.

"That money is almost certainly going to be offered up for some portion of it," said McGrath. "Because when you take core readiness, shipbuilding, submarines and weapons, munitions, and you say 'You can't cut from those things,' there's just not a lot of fat there to go after."

Proposed budget moves are likely to be reviewed by the secretary of defense's office first, McGrath noted, and in some cases may be reallocated back to where they came from in the first place, making cut identification a crushing drill for the hard-working staff officers in the Pentagon.

Generally speaking, "it's a terrible way to run a railroad," he said.

Rumors swirled this week that Secretary Pete Hegseth is prepping a list of top Pentagon brass for the chopping block, but it's not the first time an administration has cleaned out top military commanders to align with new political goals.

Five months into office in 2009, President Barack Obama relieved Army Gen. David McKiernan as the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan – making McKiernan the first wartime commander to be dismissed since Gen. Douglas MacArthur in 1951.

He was replaced by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who had led special operations forces in Iraq, on the advice of Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who wanted "fresh eyes" in the drawn-out Afghanistan conflict. 

"We have a new strategy, a new mission and a new ambassador. I believe that new military leadership is also needed," Gates said at a news conference. 

OFFICIALS PUSH BACK ON CLAIMS OF 'LIST' OF GENERALS HEGSETH PLANS TO FIRE AT PENTAGON

Days before he was summoned to meet with Obama about the job, McChrystal had given a speech in London on the need for a military buildup in Afghanistan. Shortly afterward, Obama authorized the deployment of 33,000 troops to Afghanistan. 

Only a year into his command, McChrystal resigned, pushed out by Obama after reportedly badmouthing White House officials, and was replaced by Gen. David Petraeus.

Obama also fired Gen. James Mattis as head of U.S. Central Command – and Trump once quipped that the "only thing" he and Obama had in common was "the honor of firing Jim Mattis."

Obama and Mattis fell out over the withdrawal from Iraq. "Central Command, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and the new Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, who had replaced Bob Gates, continued to recommend to the White House retaining a residual force, as did Secretary of State Hillary Clinton," Mattis wrote in his book ‘Call Sign Chaos.’

$1,300 COFFEE CUPS, 8,000% OVERPAY FOR SOAP DISPENSERS SHOW WASTE AS DOGE LOCKS IN ON PENTAGON

Obama, who promised to "finish the job" in Afghanistan after he withdrew troops from Iraq in 2011, surged as many as 100,000 troops into Afghanistan, then drew them out at a rapid-fire pace that many in the military advised against, finishing his term in 2017 with 8,400 American troops on the ground. Ending the war also evaded the subsequent Trump administration, which set a removal deadline that fell under the following Biden administration and resulted in the messy withdrawal in August 2021 and the deaths of 13 U.S. troops.

But the Obama presidency was marred by reports of a schism between the White House and the military. 

One general, upon returning from Afghanistan, reportedly said he felt that the Obama White House wanted the military to be "seen and not heard." 

In his memoir, "Duty," Gates blamed then-Vice President Joe Biden, who had pushed against the initial surge in Afghanistan, for Obama’s poor relationship with the military.

"I thought Biden was subjecting Obama to Chinese water torture, every day saying ‘the military can’t be trusted,’ " he wrote.

In 2012, the Navy removed and replaced Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette as commander of an aircraft carrier strike group deployed in the Middle East over allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment. The Navy Inspector General later found that Gaouette had made racially insensitive remarks in emails. The Navy denied assertions that Gaouette had been dismissed for providing assistance during the Benghazi attack without orders. 

In October 2013, the Air Force fired the two-star general in charge of 450 nuclear missiles, Michael Carey, due to "loss of trust and confidence in his leadership and judgment." That same week, Obama fired the number-two nuclear commander, Vice Adm. Tim Giardina, from U.S. Strategic Command after he was involved in a criminal investigation into using counterfeit gambling chips in a poker game at a western Iowa casino.

Obama fired Army Gen. Michael Flynn as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency in 2014 over "insubordination," which Flynn claimed had stemmed from criticisms he had made about Obama not being tough enough on Islamic extremism.

Obama’s moves to slim down the armed forces and reinvent social policies to protect minority groups proved contentious among military brass. Critics claimed that his abrupt troop drawdowns in Iraq and Afghanistan had allowed for ISIS to gain ground, while supporters painted him as a Nobel Peace Prize winner who had kicked off a reorientation of the U.S. from the Middle East theater to the Indo-Pacific. 

Wildfire-like rumors swirled around Washington on Thursday of a "list" of names Hegseth has reportedly circulated among congressional leaders of generals and admirals he planned to fire. But members and staff of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees had seen no such list. 

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth released a video Thursday detailing oncoming Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) cuts and restructuring that will take place within the Pentagon.

On the date of filming, Hegseth said he met with DOGE and they are beginning their review.

"They're here, and we're welcoming them," Hegseth said. "They're going to have broad access, obviously, with all the safeguards on classification."

TRUMP ISSUES WARNING ABOUT WASTEFUL SPENDING, ORDERS 'RADICAL TRANSPARENCY' AMID DOGE PROBES, REVELATIONS

He added that many DOGE workers are veterans, and it is a "good thing" that they will find deficiencies.

"They care just like we do, to find the redundancies and identify the last vestiges of Biden priorities — the DEI, the woke, the climate change B.S., that's not core to our mission, and we're going to get rid of it all," Hegseth said.

DOGE's stop at the Department of Defense comes after reviews of the Treasury, Labor, Education and Health departments, as well as at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Office of Personnel Management and Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

The temporary organization has faced an enormous amount of scrutiny over the last few weeks, with some accusing President Donald Trump of giving department head Elon Musk too much power.

Numerous lawsuits have also been filed in an attempt to block DOGE's access to sensitive information.

$1,300 COFFEE CUPS, 8,000% OVERPAY FOR SOAP DISPENSERS SHOW WASTE AS DOGE LOCKS IN ON PENTAGON

The Defense Department has already slashed 8%, or $50 billion, from former President Joe Biden's budget.

"It's not a cut," Hegseth said. "It's refocusing and reinvesting existing funds into building a force that protects you, the American people."

The budget will be "refocused" on Trump's priorities, and key programs will not be eliminated, he added.

The department is also reevaluating its probationary workforce, a government-wide action ordered by the president.

"Bottom line, it is simply not in the public interest to retain individuals whose contributions are not mission-critical," Hegseth said. "We start with poor performers amongst our probationary employees, because that is common sense, and you want the best and brightest."

DOGE fired 3,600 probationary Health and Human Services employees, and 7,000 are expected to be slashed from the IRS amid tax season.

It is unclear how many defense employees will lose their jobs.

There will also be a hiring freeze as the defense department reviews its needs.

"Ever since I've taken this position, the only thing I care about is doing right by the war fighters, by the troops," Hegseth said. "In short, we want the biggest, most bad a-- military on the planet, on God's green Earth."

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said that as the U.S. aims to "revive the warrior ethos," European members of NATO also should follow suit and bolster defense efforts. 

"NATO should pursue these goals as well," Hegseth told NATO members in Brussels on Thursday. "NATO is a great alliance, the most successful defense alliance in history, but to endure for the future, our partners must do far more for Europe’s defense."  

"We must make NATO great again," he said.  

As of 2023, the U.S. spent 3.3% of its GDP on defense spending — totaling $880 billion, according to the nonpartisan Washington, D.C.-based Peterson Institute for International Economics. More than 50% of NATO funding comes from the U.S., while other allies, like the United Kingdom, France and Germany, have contributed between 4% and 8% to NATO funding in recent years. 

Hegseth urged European allies to bolster defense spending from 2% to 5% of gross domestic product, as President Donald Trump has long advocated. 

NATO comprises more than 30 countries and was originally formed in 1949 to halt the spread of the Soviet Union. 

Hegseth pointed to former President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who advocated for a strong relationship with European allies. But he noted that eventually Eisenhower felt that the U.S. was bearing the burden of deploying U.S. troops to Europe in 1959, according to the State Department’s Office of the Historian. Eisenhower reportedly told two of his generals that the Europeans were "making a sucker out of Uncle Sam." 

Hegseth said that he and Trump share sentiments similar to Eisenhower's. 

PUTIN VIEWED AS ‘GREAT COMPETITOR’ BUT STILL A US ‘ADVERSARY’ AS UKRAINE NEGOTIATIONS LOOM, LEAVITT SAYS 

"This administration believes in alliances, deeply believes in alliances, but make no mistake, President Trump will not allow anyone to turn Uncle Sam into Uncle Sucker," Hegseth said.

"We can talk all we want about values," Hegseth said. "Values are important, but you can’t shoot values, you can’t shoot flags, and you can’t shoot strong speeches. There is no replacement for hard power. As much as we may not want to like the world we live in, in some cases, there’s nothing like hard power."

Hegseth’s comments come as the Trump administration navigates negotiations with Russia and Ukraine to end the conflict between the two countries. On Wednesday, Trump called both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent traveled to Kyiv.

OBAMA OFFICIALS, TRUMP CRITICS TARGET HEGSETH'S ‘CONCESSIONS’ AS ‘BIGGEST GIFT’ TO RUSSIA 

Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio are slated to meet with Zelenskyy Friday at the Munich Security Conference.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has come under scrutiny for the negotiations, fielding criticism that Ukraine is being pressured to give in to concessions after Hegseth said on Wednesday that it isn’t realistic for Ukraine to regain its pre-war borders with Russia. 

"Putin is gonna pocket this and ask for more," Brett Bruen, director of global engagement under former President Barack Obama, told Fox News Digital. 

Michael McFaul, ambassador to Russia under the Obama administration, also shared concerns in a social media post on X on Wednesday, claiming that Trump was delivering Russia a "gift." 

But Hegseth said he rejected similar accusations. 

"Any suggestion that President Trump is doing anything other than negotiating from a position of strength is, on its face, ahistorical and false," Hegseth said Thursday. 

Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, and Trump vowed on the campaign trail in 2024 that he would work to end the conflict if elected again. 

Fox News’ Emma Colton and Morgan Phillips contributed to this report. 

Obama officials and Trump critics are up in arms after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said a return to the Eastern European country's pre-war borders with Russia is "unrealistic." 

Hegseth, speaking to the Ukraine Defense Contact Group in Belgium on Wednesday, said "returning to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective." He also called for Europe to offer Ukraine security guarantees after the war – not the U.S. 

Trump administration critics accused the secretary of giving up leverage before the start of peace negotiations with Russia. 

"Putin is gonna pocket this and ask for more," Brett Bruen, director of Global Engagement under the Obama White House, told Fox News Digital. 

RUSSIAN MISSILES RAINED DOWN ON KYIV JUST AHEAD OF TREASURY SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT'S VISIT

Hegseth said Wednesday that "durable peace" for Ukraine must "ensure that the war will not begin again."

"The United States does not believe that NATO membership for Ukraine is a realistic outcome of a negotiated settlement. Instead, any security guarantee must be backed by capable European and non-European troops," he said. 

"If these troops are deployed as peacekeepers to Ukraine at any point, they should be deployed as part of a non-NATO mission and not covered under Article 5. There also must be robust international oversight of the line of contact. To be clear, as part of any security guarantee, there will not be U.S. troops deployed to Ukraine."

While it is little surprise the Trump administration does not currently support Ukraine’s NATO membership, or believe Ukraine can take back all of its territory including Crimea, critics argue that Hegseth vocalizing these beliefs just as President Donald Trump fired the opening salvo in peace negotiations took them off the table as leverage. 

"Why would you unilaterally surrender on some of those key strategic issues? Even if Trump ultimately wants to give ground, at least get something in return," Bruen said. 

‘NO BETRAYAL’ IN TRUMP MOVE TOWARD UKRAINE WAR NEGOTIATIONS, HEGSETH SAYS

"Anyone with any diplomatic experience would have said it is critical that we use this as part of our negotiation, as President Trump wants to have with Moscow. But the idea that we're simply going to announce all of the things that we are not going to do goes against 70 years of our diplomacy and our military strategy." 

Michael McFaul, ambassador to Russia under the Obama administration, asked why the Trump administration appeared to be giving Russian President Vladimir Putin wins for free. 

"Why is the Trump administration giving Putin gifts – Ukrainian land and no NATO membership for Ukraine – before negotiations even begin?" he asked on X. "I've negotiated with the Russians. You never give up anything to them for free."

Alexander Vindman, a Trump impeachment witness and former Europe director at the National Security Council – who continues to be a fierce Trump critic – characterized Hegseth's comments as "complete capitulation to Putin" that justifies Russia's wars of aggression going back to Georgia in 2008.

"This will embolden Putin and undermine the interests of peace in Ukraine and Europe. A major blow to U.S. national security," Vindman asserted.

Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., chimed in that Hegseth's comments show, "Trump's foreign policy has always been Russia First. Never America and its allies first." 

The defense secretary also called on Europe to "take ownership of conventional security on the continent."

HEGSETH WARNS EUROPEANS 'REALITIES' OF CHINA AND BORDER THREATS PREVENT US FROM GUARANTEEING THEIR SECURITY

"European allies must lead from the front," Hegseth said. "Together, we can establish a division of labor that maximize our comparative advantages in Europe and Pacific, respectively."

His comments came just before Trump called both Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent traveled to Kyiv. 

On Friday, Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio will meet with Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference. 

The Putin conversation came one day after the release of American Marc Fogel, who had been detained by the Kremlin, which Trump said he saw as a sign of "good faith" by the Russians. 

Trump, meanwhile, has begun pressuring Ukrainians to turn over access to rare Earth minerals in exchange for security aid. Bessent presented Ukraine with a draft deal exchanging aid for minerals on Wednesday in Kyiv, according to Zelenskyy. 

"We agreed to work together, very closely, including visiting each other’s Nations," Trump posted to Truth Social on Wednesday of his call with Putin. "We have also agreed to have our respective teams start negotiations immediately." 

He announced that he would asked Rubio, Director of the CIA John Ratcliffe, National Security Advisor Michael Waltz and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff to lead negotiations. 

Trump also said his call with Zelenskyy went "very well." 

"​​It is time to stop this ridiculous War, where there has been massive, and totally unnecessary, DEATH and DESTRUCTION. God bless the people of Russia and Ukraine!"

Ukraine advocates are up in arms after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said a return to the Eastern European country's pre-war borders with Russia is "unrealistic." 

Hegseth, speaking to the Ukraine Defense Contact Group in Belgium on Wednesday, said "returning to Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders is an unrealistic objective." He also called for Europe to offer Ukraine security guarantees after the war – not the U.S. 

Pro-Ukraine voices accused the secretary of giving up leverage before the start of peace negotiations with Russia. 

"Putin is gonna pocket this and ask for more," Brett Bruen, director of Global Engagement under the Obama White House, told Fox News Digital. 

RUSSIAN MISSILES RAINED DOWN ON KYIV JUST AHEAD OF TREASURY SECRETARY SCOTT BESSENT'S VISIT

Hegseth said Wednesday that "durable peace" for Ukraine must "ensure that the war will not begin again."

"The United States does not believe that NATO membership for Ukraine is a realistic outcome of a negotiated settlement. Instead, any security guarantee must be backed by capable European and non-European troops," he said. 

"If these troops are deployed as peacekeepers to Ukraine at any point, they should be deployed as part of a non-NATO mission and not covered under Article 5. There also must be robust international oversight of the line of contact. To be clear, as part of any security guarantee, there will not be U.S. troops deployed to Ukraine."

While it is little surprise the Trump administration does not currently support Ukraine’s NATO membership, or believe Ukraine can take back all of its territory including Crimea, Ukraine advocates argue that Hegseth vocalizing these beliefs just as President Donald Trump fired the opening salvo in peace negotiations took them off the table as leverage. 

"Why would you unilaterally surrender on some of those key strategic issues? Even if Trump ultimately wants to give ground, at least get something in return," Bruen said. 

‘NO BETRAYAL’ IN TRUMP MOVE TOWARD UKRAINE WAR NEGOTIATIONS, HEGSETH SAYS

"Anyone with any diplomatic experience would have said it is critical that we use this as part of our negotiation, as President Trump wants to have with Moscow. But the idea that we're simply going to announce all of the things that we are not going to do goes against 70 years of our diplomacy and our military strategy." 

Michael McFaul, ambassador to Russia under the Obama administration, asked why the Trump administration appeared to be giving Russian President Vladimir Putin wins for free. 

"Why is the Trump administration giving Putin gifts – Ukrainian land and no NATO membership for Ukraine – before negotiations even begin?" he asked on X. "I've negotiated with the Russians. You never give up anything to them for free."

Alexander Vindman, former Europe director at the National Security Council, characterized Hegseth's comments as "complete capitulation to Putin" that justifies Russia's wars of aggression going back to Georgia in 2008. 

"This will embolden Putin and undermine the interests of peace in Ukraine and Europe. A major blow to U.S. national security," Vindman said. 

Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., chimed in that Hegseth's comments show, "Trump's foreign policy has always been Russia First. Never America and its allies first." 

The defense secretary also called on Europe to "take ownership of conventional security on the continent."

HEGSETH WARNS EUROPEANS 'REALITIES' OF CHINA AND BORDER THREATS PREVENT US FROM GUARANTEEING THEIR SECURITY

"European allies must lead from the front," Hegseth said. "Together, we can establish a division of labor that maximize our comparative advantages in Europe and Pacific, respectively."

His comments came just before Trump called both Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent traveled to Kyiv. 

On Friday, Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio will meet with Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference. 

The Putin conversation came one day after the release of American Marc Fogel, who had been detained by the Kremlin, which Trump said he saw as a sign of "good faith" by the Russians. 

Trump, meanwhile, has begun pressuring Ukrainians to turn over access to rare Earth minerals in exchange for security aid. Bessent presented Ukraine with a draft deal exchanging aid for minerals on Wednesday in Kyiv, according to Zelenskyy. 

"We agreed to work together, very closely, including visiting each other’s Nations," Trump posted to Truth Social on Wednesday of his call with Putin. "We have also agreed to have our respective teams start negotiations immediately." 

He announced that he would asked Rubio, Director of the CIA John Ratcliffe, National Security Advisor Michael Waltz and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff to lead negotiations. 

Trump also said his call with Zelenskyy went "very well." 

"​​It is time to stop this ridiculous War, where there has been massive, and totally unnecessary, DEATH and DESTRUCTION. God bless the people of Russia and Ukraine!"

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth warned Europeans this week that "realities" prevent the U.S. from being its security guarantor, and to expect a drawdown of U.S. forces in the region. 

"We are focusing on security of our own borders. We also face a peer competitor in the Communist Chinese with the capability and intent to threaten our homeland and core national interests in the Indo-Pacific," Hegseth told a meeting of a Ukraine Defense Contact Group in Belgium on Wednesday. 

"The U.S. is prioritizing deterring war with China in the Pacific. Recognizing the reality of scarcity and making the resourcing trade-offs to ensure deterrence does not fail. Deterrence cannot fail."

This was Hegseth’s first trip to the headquarters of the NATO alliance. 

HEGSETH BANS FUTURE TRANS SOLDIERS, MAKES SWEEPING CHANGES FOR CURRENT ONES

The U.S. defense secretary called on Europe to "take ownership of conventional security on the continent."

"European allies must lead from the front," he went on. "Together, we can establish a division of labor that maximize our comparative advantages in Europe and Pacific, respectively."

Hegseth said on Tuesday the U.S. has no active plans to draw down forces in Europe but remains committed to analyzing U.S. troop postures across the globe. Speaking at U.S. Africa Command headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany, he said the U.S. is committed to having a presence in Europe while emphasizing the continent should not rely on that presence for security. 

UKRAINE REGAINING PRE-2014 BORDERS IS ‘UNREALISTIC OBJECTIVE,’ HEGSETH SAYS IN FIRST NATO VISIT

"The European continent deserves to be free from any aggression, but it ought be those in the neighborhood investing the most in that defense," he said. "That’s common sense. You defend your neighborhood, and the Americans will come alongside you in helping in that defense."

Roughly 100,000 U.S. troops are deployed across Europe, about a third of which are in Germany, according to Defense Department figures. Some 375,000 U.S. forces are assigned to the Indo-Pacific Command. 

During his first term, President Donald Trump began pulling thousands of troops out of Europe. 

Under the Trump administration, the U.S. has begun to bolster its troop presence on the southern border. Some 1,500 more U.S. troops deployed to the southern border last week, bringing the total up to 3,600. 

HEGSETH SAYS DOGE WELCOME AT PENTAGON AS DEFENSE DEPARTMENT REVIEWS MILITARY POSTURE GLOBALLY

Hegseth also said that any European peacekeeping forces sent to help Ukraine win the war against Russia must not be from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and would not be protected under Article 5, a provision that states an attack on one NATO country is an attack on all. 

The defense secretary said the U.S. does not believe allowing Ukraine into NATO is a "realistic outcome of a negotiated settlement."

Hegseth also called on NATO countries to step up after Trump recently called on them to boost defense spending to 5%. 

"The United States will no longer tolerate an imbalanced relationship which encourages dependency."

Earlier this week, Ukrainian President Voldymyr Zelenskyy suggested that security guarantees for Ukraine without the U.S. are "not real security guarantees." 

"There are voices which say that Europe could offer security guarantees without the Americans, and I always say no," he told The Guardian. "Security guarantees without America are not real security guarantees."

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Tuesday that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is "welcome at the Pentagon," telling reporters in Stuttgart, Germany, during his first overseas trip at the helm that the Department of Defense (DoD) will also be reviewing U.S. military posture globally to account for different "strategic assumptions" between President Donald Trump and former President Joe Biden.

Upon arriving at the headquarters of U.S. European Command and Africa Command, Hegseth did push-ups, dead-lifts and other PT exercises with the 1st Battalion, 10th Special Forces Group (Airborne) – a gesture the secretary, a combat veteran himself, said was meant to interact with the troops directly and hear about their missions, rather than solely communicating through four-star generals. 

Taking questions from reporters afterward, Hegseth, who has vowed to restore the "warrior ethos" at the Pentagon, addressed how Trump has called on NATO members to spend 5% of their GDPs on defense. Asked if the U.S. should also spend that amount, Hegseth said he and Trump share the view that U.S. defense spending should not go below 3% GDP, adding that the current administration ought to spend more than the Biden administration. 

HEGSETH SAYS FORT BRAGG IS COMING BACK, BUT WITH A TWIST

Hegseth accused the Biden administration of having "historically underinvested in the capabilities of our military," adding that Trump is committed to "rebuilding America's military by investing." 

Asked if he expects Elon Musk to start unilaterally slashing defense programs, Hegseth described the DOGE leader as a "great patriot interested in advancing the America First agenda" who knows "Trump got 77 million votes in a mandate from the American people, and part of that is bringing actual businesslike efficiency to government." Hegseth spoke of a "partnership" with DOGE to reduce Pentagon waste, agreeing with Musk's assessment that it could be to the tune of "billions" of dollars. 

But the secretary stressed that spending at the Pentagon did not equate to the "globalist agendas" pursued by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). 

"As I said on social media, we welcome Doge to the Pentagon," Hegseth said. "And I hope to welcome Elon to the Pentagon very soon. And his team working in collaboration with us." 

Hegseth said, "There are waste redundancies and headcounts in headquarters that need to be addressed. There's just no doubt. Look at a lot of the climate programs that have been pursued at the Defense Department. The Defense Department is not in the business of climate change, solving the global thermostat. We're in the business of deterring and winning wars. So things like that." 

NOEM, HEGSETH, BONDI PLEAD WITH CONGRESS FOR MORE BORDER FUNDING AMID LARGE-SCALE DEPORTATIONS

"There's plenty of places where we want the keen eye of DOGE, but we'll do it in coordination," he added, pointing to potential changes in weapons procurement programs as well. "We're not going to do things that are to the detriment of American operational or tactical capabilities… President Trump is committed to delivering the best possible military." 

"The Defense Department is not USAID," Hegseth said. "USAID has got a lot of problems that I talked about with the troops – pursuing globalist agendas that don't have a connection to America First. That's not the Defense Department. But we're also not perfect either. So where we can find billions of dollars, and he's right to say billions inside the Defense Department, every dollar we save, there is a dollar that goes to warfighters. And that's good for the American people." 

Hegseth was also asked if there were plans to shift U.S. forces from Europe to the Indo-Pacific to focus on the Chinese threat. 

"There are no plans right now in the making to cut anything," Hegseth said. "There is an understanding that we're going to review force posture across the world." 

"President Trump's planning assumptions are different in many ways, or at least strategic assumptions, than Joe Biden's," he said. "We certainly don't want a plan on the back of the withdrawal from Afghanistan. And what happened on October 7th and the war that was unleashed in Ukraine. You have to manage and mitigate those things by coming alongside your friends in Israel and sharing their defense, and peacefully resolving the conflict in Ukraine. But those shouldn't define how we orient." 

On his decision to reverse Biden's 2023 renaming of Fort Liberty back to Fort Bragg, Hegseth said, "It means Bragg is back. It means the legacy of an institution that generations of Americans have mobilized through and served at is back." 

"I never called it Fort Liberty because it wasn't Fort Liberty. It's Fort Bragg. And so I was honored to be able to put my signature on that," Hegseth said. The North Carolina base’s original namesake was Gen. Braxton Bragg, a Confederate general, but Hegseth said it would now be named after Pfc. Roland L. Bragg, a World War II hero who earned the Silver Star and the Purple Heart for his courage during the Battle of the Bulge.