Hegseth and Trump’s Address to the Generals and Flag Officers

I have no opinion on Secretary of War Hegseth’s and President Trump’s addresses to the generals and flag officers yesterday other than to observe that I have long held that there are too many of the latter. At the Washington Post David Ignatius remarks:

The implicit message of Tuesday’s “key leaders all-call,” as it was officially termed, was to get on board with Team Trump or get out. “If the words I’m speaking today are making your heart sink, then you should do the honorable thing and resign,” said Hegseth. Hopefully, those gathered at Marine Corps Base Quantico will ignore that guidance. It would be a national disaster to lose the battle-tested leaders who understand the military’s true challenges in the decades ahead.

For Trump and Hegseth, the issues facing the military seem more symbol than substance. Thus, their emphasis on rebranding the enterprise as the Department of War. And their endless rehashing of culture-war issues: “No more identity months, DEI offices, dudes in dresses. No more climate change worship. No more division, distraction or gender delusions,” said Hegseth.

Okay, got it. Clear away the modest elements of “woke” culture that developed in the Pentagon. But what are you building for the future?

Hegseth is so intent on creating a tough military that having a smart one appears secondary. He wants to restore the old-time, gung ho imagery. Basic training that’s “scary, tough and disciplined.” Drill sergeants who can “instill healthy fear” and “put their hands on recruits.” Hegseth seems convinced that how soldiers fight depends on how they look. “The era of unprofessional appearance is over,” he said. “No more beardos.” Maybe he doesn’t remember the unshaven “dogfaces” of Bill Mauldin’s cartoons during World War II.

Hegseth wants to overturn more than grooming standards. Among the 10 directives he issued Tuesday is a review of standards for bullying and hazing, so that leaders can “enforce high standards without fear of reprisal.” Yikes. That sounds like a blank check for behavior that could drive away, say, the math-and-science whiz who could design and operate future combat systems.

Another unpinned grenade is Hegseth’s directive to revise an inspector general process that he claimed has been “weaponized, putting complainers, ideologues and poor performers in the driver’s seat.” If a commander makes “honest mistakes,” those can be expunged from their record. For the military, Tuesday was “liberation day,” he said. “We are attacking and ending the walking on eggshells and zero-defect command culture.”

Hegseth’s vision of a hard-ass military might be compelling if you believed that future combat would be a reprise of landing on Omaha Beach or Iwo Jima. But the nature of military conflict is changing — on the drone-saturated battlefields of Ukraine and in the scenarios for deterring a tech-savvy China in the future. Beijing would be delighted if America focused on how many push-ups a soldier can do rather than how many computer tools he or she can use.

Based on what I’ve heard all of the generals and admirals can probably use PowerPoint. I don’t think that asking them to be able to do some push-ups is too much to ask.

Actually, I’m a bit confused about Mr. Ignatius’s observations. Based on my review of the biographies of generals and admirals (a tedious and time-consuming exercise) 20-30% of them are “battle-tested”. Relatively few in the Navy, Space Force, Air Force, or Coast Guard are “battle-tested” in the sense that I would use the term (came under fire and commanded troops in combat). Is Mr. Ignatius implying that they should be? I don’t oppose that. What does he mean?

I found his comments about Beijing thought-provoking. I know that Beijing has recently been emphasizing the importance of “informatization” and “intelligization” in the PLA and that recruitment standards have been raised and training adjusted accordingly. Most PLA recruits these days are university students which pretty much guarantees literacy and a reasonable degree of computer literacy. Given their ages I would expect them to be “digital natives”.

I’ll take this opportunity to repeat something I’ve said before: very few PLA generals and admirals are “battle-tested” (as I would use the term). I would say that we have very little idea how Chinese military doctrine would perform in actual combat situations (and neither does Beijing).