A Leaked Document Shows American Generals Are Squirming About Iran—and for Good Reason

War Stories The Generals Are Worried A leak of a recent report suggests that even Hegseth loyalists can’t keep ignoring how depleted American reserves are. By Enter your email to receive alerts for this author. Sign in or create an account to better manage your email preferences. Unsubscribe from email alerts Are you sure you want to unsubscribe from email alerts for Fred Kaplan? Aug 31, 20264:25 PM Aaron Schwartz/AFP via Getty Images Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily. A remarkable story in Monday’s Washington Post dramatizes how deeply the Iran war has degraded the U.S. military’s ability to fend off attacks by adversaries elsewhere in the world. The story is based on the leak of a little-known classified document, which itself signifies that we’ve reached a new stage in the growing turmoil among the senior officer corps over the chaotic reign of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. The leaked document reveals that the three four-star commanders in charge of U.S. military operations in Europe, the Pacific, and South America, as well as the Navy’s top admiral, all informed Hegseth that because so many of their planes, ships, and other weapons systems have been diverted to the war in Iran, they could no longer perform their tasks if a war broke out in their part of the world. These senior officers were responding to the Aug. 14 edition of the Secretary of Defense Orders Book. As Post reporters Alex Horton and Tara Copp describe the book: The SDOB, typically produced twice monthly, outlines the worldwide availability of U.S. warships, aircraft, personnel, and weapons systems. It reflects the president’s priorities for the force, which are carried out by the defense secretary. In response to that August edition, the top officers issued a comment of “non-concur.” This means they no longer had the number of ships, planes, personnel, or other weapons systems that, according to the SDOB’s calculations, would be needed to carry out the president’s priorities in the event of a war. These priorities spell out what steps the commanders should be able to take if, say, China assaulted or blockaded Taiwan, or North Korea invaded South Korea, or Russia mounted an incursion in the Baltics, or an attack of a certain scale was mounted against Israel. Two other senior officers, the top generals in the Army and the Air Force, concurred with the estimate of resources at their disposal but still noted that the risks involved in carrying out missions had grown. The Post story comes as the United States and Iran resumed firing missiles at each other’s ships after a month of relative calm, though it tracks conditions from weeks prior. It has been widely reported that in the six months of this war (and even over the course of its first month), the U.S. depleted a high percentage of its most vital munitions, including more than half of its cruise missiles and advanced air-defense missiles. The military has had to redeploy one of the most advanced weapons—its Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missiles—to the Middle East from South Korea. It has also had to reposition the USS George Washington vessel and its escort warships to the Persian Gulf from Japan—thus removing the Navy’s only aircraft carrier in the Pacific. The SDOB specified that the 50,000 U.S. troops and much of their hardware must remain in the Middle East at least through September, and in some cases well into next year. The subsequent “non-concur” statements warned that U.S. military readiness couldn’t be sustained if the war in Iran goes on for much longer. The story is remarkable partially because of the scope. A former senior Navy officer and a retired Navy operations officer told me that past commanders have occasionally filed statements warning of risk—similar to the non-concur notes. But it is unusual for so many commanders to file such notes all at once in the middle of a combat operation. And it is still more unusual, perhaps unprecedented, for such reports to be filed by these commanders, who have been chosen—or allowed to remain in their top slots—for their loyalty to Donald Trump and Hegseth. As several news agencies have reported, Hegseth has thrown much of the defense establishment—officers, enlisted personnel, and civilians—into disarray through his loyalty tests and other quirky demands. He has blocked the promotion of at least 45 officers, reversing the military services’ peer-review boards, whose decisions are very rarely challenged. Half of those officers have been Black or female, which does not seem to be a coincidence. Hegseth has frequently derided the very notion that women should be in the military, at least in combat roles, and he has wondered out loud whether Black officers have been promoted to the ranks they’ve attained because of DEI policies, which he opposes on principle. It wouldn’t be surprising if these choices by Hegseth are now coming back to bite him: The person or people who leaked the “non-concur” notices—as well as other reports about chaos in the Pentagon—may well be rising officers whose promotions were blocked by Hegseth for no good reason. Further, this past April, Hegseth fired the Army chief of staff, Gen. Randy George, a highly decorated, much-admired leader, who had objected to some of the promotion blocks. In the four months since, Hegseth hasn’t nominated a replacement—highly unusual in ordinary times, irresponsible in the middle of a war. The choices he’s made in the interim period have not offered any course correction. For example, Hegseth recently disbanded an Army unit that had been formed to focus on drone warfare, ordering it to return to its “core” mission of airborne infantry, even though drone warfare is a core mission now. He also discontinued programs in which promising officers spend a year studying history and strategy at major universities, dismissing the whole notion as “woke.” As a fitting counterpart, he said he would order troops to be tested for testosterone levels, which, it seems, he regards as more important than intellectual stamina. All of these actions have stirred fear among his officers, who have long been groomed to respect civilian authority and who now see that the slightest sign of dissent could end their career. Tension has also been brewing between Hegseth and the White House. When the reports about depletion of munitions first appeared, Trump at first denied them, then appeared angry. It seemed that Hegseth hadn’t told him. Still, it’s unlikely that Trump will fire Hegseth. It would be an acknowledgment that he made a mistake when he hired him, and Trump hates to admit he’s made a mistake. Hegseth has also been unwaveringly loyal to Trump, a trait that Trump values above all others. Their ties are stiffened by the fact that Trump came under pressure to drop his nomination even before the Senate held hearings, after reports appeared that Hegseth had a drinking problem, had abused ex-wives, and lacked experience at leading large organizations. But Trump stuck with him, and the Senate confirmed him only because Vice President J.D. Vance broke the tie vote in his favor. Hegseth may be Trump’s most unpopular Cabinet secretary—a high bar, given the competition—and possibly, the new documents suggest, the most dangerous. The question is whether Trump will push him under the bus, as he has so many other loyal aides who have outlived their purpose, or whether the two are lassoed together too tightly. Iran Military War