In theory, this should come as no surprise. Both Hegseth and Trump made it clear at the start of the president’s second term that their plans for the Department of Defense were to focus on fighting what Trump called “the enemy within.” But then again, Trump has said time and time again that he will never involve the U.S. military in a costly, endless war in the Middle East. His shocking about-face came so quickly and unexpectedly that Hegseth and many others in the pre-Trump America First coalition are having a hard time adjusting to their leader’s neo-imperialist style. Even the propagandists didn’t quite rewrite their script, as noted before Hegseth’s speech, when his staff distributed a new one-hundred-and-forty-four-page “Field Manual” to the troops that included four of Hegseth’s speeches and a preface by the president declaring, “As your Commander-in-Chief, I will not ask you to fight stupid wars.”
But he did, and it didn’t go well. Since the conflict broke out in February, when Iran humiliated the United States by claiming control of the Strait of Hormuz, the global economy has been thrown into chaos, U.S. military bases in the Middle East have suffered billions of dollars in damage, and U.S. stockpiles of important anti-aircraft weapons and other ammunition have been depleted at an alarming rate.
At a moment like this, with the midterm elections less than a month away, when the war is deeply unpopular and concerns about its economic and national security consequences are growing, leading to a backlash against Republican candidates, the timing for such a speech couldn’t be worse. It seems as politically ill-advised as Trump’s decision to travel to a truck manufacturing plant in Texas on Thursday, inevitably reminding voters that the price of the diesel fuel that powers those trucks had just reached its highest level on record — $6.53 a gallon on Sept. 21 — as a result of a war with Iran that Trump’s defense secretary insists is not happening.
Several weeks ago, North Carolina Republican Sen. Thom Tillis, who cast a key vote on Hegseth’s confirmation last year despite his doubts about Hegseth’s fitness for public office, urged Trump to fire him. “I have never seen such incompetent management of the brave men and women who serve our country,” Tillis posted on
Soon after, another Republican, Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie, submitted formal articles of impeachment against Hegseth to the House of Representatives. House rules require a vote within forty-eight hours of a resolution being tabled, but Republican leadership seemed so worried about the vote count that Speaker Mike Johnson abruptly canceled the remaining business of the House ahead of the midterm elections and adjourned lawmakers early. written in American Conservative Party Writing in “Why Heggs’ Impeachment Frightens Republicans,” a former aide to Republican Senator Josh Hawley likened Johnson’s strategy to King Charles I’s dissolution of the British Parliament in 1626 rather than allowing Parliament to vote to impeach his favorite courtier, the hated Duke of Buckingham. (Things did not go well for Charles, with his disputes with Parliament culminating in the English Civil War and his beheading for treason.)
Massey may not have garnered enough votes to force Hegseth’s ouster, but the high-profile irregularities illustrate the clear bipartisan distaste for Trump’s Pentagon chief on Capitol Hill. “I think the fact that a Republican member of Congress is bringing forward impeachment speaks to how concerned people are and how those Republicans in the Senate who agreed to approve someone who was clearly not eligible for impeachment are seeking to repent of that choice,” Kori Schake, a former senior Bush Pentagon official who is now the director of foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, told me.