Could this meeting have been an email?
Last week, when news broke that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth had ordered hundreds of generals from around the world to gather at the Marine base in Quantico, Virginia, this week, it set off fevered speculation about the possible reason for the unprecedented gathering.
After the meeting, it’s still not entirely clear what the expense and risk involved in bringing so many generals and admirals together was all for. Hegseth and President Donald Trump gave relatively short speeches that didn’t break any news and were heavy on both men’s familiar talking points. If there was a takeaway message, it was that any commanders who don’t like Hegseth and Trump’s recently rebranded “Department of War” are free to leave.
Hegseth gave a progress report on his campaign to restore a “warrior ethos” to a military and Pentagon that he believes has gone “woke”: restoring “gender-neutral” performance standards, allowing drill sergeants to once again instill “healthy fear” in recruits, and rooting out “dudes in dresses,” “beardos,” and “fat generals.” He also vowed that the US military would no longer fight under “stupid rules of engagement.” The secretary, who is currently under internal investigation for handling of classified information ahead of US airstrikes on Houthi targets in Yemen, also teased changes to the Pentagon’s inspector general process and the retention of “adverse information” on personnel records.
Trump gave a discursive speech that included numerous references to his poll numbers, a fond reminiscence of the 1950s documentary Victory at Sea, and a reference to nuclear submarines as “the n-word,” but also included some chilling language implying that the military would increasingly be employed against the American people. Referring to the recent deployments of National Guard forces to American cities like Los Angeles and Washington, DC, as well as potential operations in Chicago and Portland, Trump described the US as "under invasion from within” and suggested to Hegseth that the military "should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds.” He also described Washington as more dangerous than Afghanistan to a crowd that included many officers who served in Afghanistan.
Trump has given highly partisan speeches in front of military audiences before, but the president still seemed perturbed by the lack of crowd reaction, saying he had never walked into such a quiet room and telling the audience of generals that they could loosen up. This was in contrast to the raucous reception he got from soldiers during a speech at Fort Bragg last summer, who were reportedly vetted ahead of time for their political loyalty.
The most important lines of both speeches may have been those addressed to members of the audience who did not appreciate the message. “If the words I'm speaking today are making your heart sink, then you should do the honorable thing and resign. We would thank you for your service,” Hegseth said. Trump was less generous: “If you don't like what I'm saying, you can leave the room,” he said. “Of course, there goes your rank, there goes your future.”
It’s been reported that many senior military commanders, including Gen. Dan Caine, the Trump-appointed chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have expressed misgivings about the Pentagon’s new national security strategy, which emphasizes threats to the homeland over superpower competition with countries like China and Russia or maintaining military alliances abroad. Hegseth and Trump have already fired high-ranking officers, including former Joint Chiefs chair Gen. C.Q. Brown and chief of naval operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti. Both had been criticized by Hegseth as “DEI” hires.
The message appeared to be that the remaining officers could get with the program or get out. The gathering was “an informal loyalty test,” as defense analyst and Army veteran Sean McFate put it.
The “program,” Trump and Hegseth appear to envisage, is a military that can be used on domestic “enemies” as often as foreign ones, is aligned with the administration on culture war issues, and is personally loyal to the president, not just as commander in chief but as a political figure. None of this is exactly new from Trump or Hegseth, but the act of bringing the traditionally apolitical leaders of “the most lethal fighting force in the world” in from around the world to listen to these speeches may have been an indication of just how seriously they take their extremely political vision for the future of that force.
