Yemen Pentagon chief Hegseth comes under pressure on several fronts
Whether it's his careless handling of sensitive military data, new guidelines for the press or a controversial deployment of the US military in the Caribbean: Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth is coming under increasing pressure. On Thursday, the Secretary of Defense, who now calls himself Secretary of War, was in the spotlight in several respects:
05.12.2025, 05:18
SDA
Signal affair
The oversight committee of his ministry has come to the conclusion that Hegseth risked endangering US soldiers through his handling of sensitive military information. Because he used a private cell phone for official business and shared mission details that were not publicly accessible via the Signal app, personnel could have been harmed, according to a partially redacted investigation report that has now been published. Mission objectives could also have been jeopardized by the exchange of highly sensitive information about an attack on the Houthi militia in Yemen in March.
If this information had fallen into the hands of US adversaries, Houthi forces might have been able to take action against US forces or reposition themselves, the report continues. "While these events did not ultimately occur, the Secretary's actions posed an operational security risk that could have resulted in the failure of U.S. mission objectives and potential harm to U.S. pilots."
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell nevertheless assessed the results of the review on Platform X as a "COMPLETE exoneration of Secretary Hegseth". It proves that no classified information was shared. In fact, the report states that Hegseth had sent sensitive information about Signal on his private phone, which he classified as non-classified. The report nevertheless identifies violations of Pentagon guidelines: in the use of the private phone or an unauthorized, commercially operated app.
The Signal affair hit the headlines in the spring when the US magazine "The Atlantic" made the contents of a chat public. Its editor-in-chief had previously been invited to the Signal group - presumably by mistake - by then National Security Advisor Mike Waltz. The journalist was able to read sensitive information about a US military operation against the Houthi militia in Yemen live in the app. Hegseth, who, like other top US national security leaders, was a member of the chat, provided detailed information about weapons and attack times. The media later reported that he had also shared the military plans with his wife and other people.
Attack on survivors
The US Secretary of Defense is also under fire for a particularly controversial attack by the US military on an alleged drug smuggling boat in the Caribbean. At the beginning of September, two people who had initially survived a first attack are said to have been killed by the military. According to experts, this second attack may have violated international law - according to the Washington Post, the men had clung to the wreck and posed no immediate threat.
According to reports in the newspaper and on CNN, Hegseth himself had previously given the order to "kill them all". However, according to CNN, it is unclear whether he knew about the survivors before the second attack. Hegseth himself recently denied direct responsibility for the second attack. He personally had not seen any survivors. He had only learned a few hours later that the commander in charge, Admiral Frank M. Bradley, had made the decision for a second attack, "which he was fully authorized to do".
Observers fear that Bradley could be used as a scapegoat in the affair. On Thursday, he exonerated Hegseth: the admiral told members of Congress that he had not received an order to "kill everybody", said Republican Senator Tom Cotton and Democratic member of the House of Representatives Jim Himes.
But demands for clarification of the US actions and Hegseth's role are not likely to be off the table. Democratic US Senator Jack Reed, for example, has now called on Platform X for the Pentagon to publish the complete and unedited video footage of the second attack.
"New York Times" lawsuit
The debate about the controversial US attack was triggered by media reports that referred to people familiar with the situation. The case is therefore an example of the relevance that reporting on US military action can have - even if access to the Pentagon for journalists was restricted under Hegseth.
Since October, new guidelines have been in place which stipulate that reporters may not publish any information without the approval of the Ministry - otherwise their accreditation may be withdrawn. Reporters who did not agree to comply with the guidelines had to leave their jobs. Almost all major US media outlets have rejected the rules, including the Republican-affiliated Fox News channel, for which Hegseth used to work, and the New York Times.
The renowned daily newspaper has now filed a lawsuit against the Pentagon and Hegseth. In it, it argues that the new directive violates the First Amendment and aims to "restrict the ability of journalists to do what journalists have always done: Asking questions of government employees and gathering information." This is necessary in order to publish articles that offer more than official statements. The First Amendment of the US Constitution protects, among other things, the freedom of the press.
