Memorandum: Nearly Three Months In, and DoD is on Shaky Ground

TO: All Interested Parties
FR: Caroline Zier, Senior Policy Advisor
DA: 14 April 2025
RE: Nearly Three Months In, and DoD is on Shaky Ground

As we approach the three-month mark of the second Trump Administration, it is useful to survey some of the reviews that Secretary Hegseth and his team have put in motion, and keep an eye on what may come next.

Beyond the defense headlines that garner the most attention, these reviews are ostensibly about reinvesting in a warrior ethos. In reality, the announced savings have been modest and the reviews and ensuing decisions are more likely to undermine the U.S. military than produce greater efficiencies or lethality.

 

Budget offsets and DOGE

In February, the Department of Defense announced plans to find offsets worth 8% of the Fiscal Year 2026 budget (or about $50 billion) and realign those towards Trump Administration priorities. Shortly thereafter, the Department welcomed the arrival of DOGE.

Only minimal savings have been publicly identified to date. On April 10, Secretary Hegseth signed a memo announcing $5.1 billion in cuts, predominantly targeting consulting and IT contracts. On March 20, Hegseth released a separate memo announcing $580 million in cuts. Though a large sum for some agencies, those cuts are more symbolic than meaningful for the Pentagon when stacked against the Department’s $850 billion annual budget. The memos maintain a focus on defunding and purging anything perceived to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), but the reality is there is very little money to be saved in this arena.

Current takeaway: DOGE at the Pentagon has not produced significant savings yet, as $6 billion in savings over an unspecified number of years is underwhelming for DoD.

 

Reviews of standards

Secretary Hegseth recently announced two reviews on the standards for physical fitness and combat arms:

• Combat Arms Standards: On March 30, Secretary Hegseth announced a 60-day effort to review and define combat vs. non-combat arms, with sex-neutral standards for the combat arms. The Secretary’s accompanying videos on X underscore this is about implementing the same standards for combat MOSs for men and women. Whatever the findings of this review, the desired outcome is clear: fewer or no women in combat arms.
• Rapid Force-Wide Review of Military Standards: On March 12, Secretary Hegseth signed a separate memo directing the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness to “gather the existing standards set by the Military Departments pertaining to physical fitness, body composition, and grooming” to see how those standards have changed since January 1, 2015.

Current takeaway: It is not unreasonable for the U.S. military to review standards for fitness and qualifications for combat arms. But these reviews will look to reverse and rebaseline standards in a manner that disproportionately targets women who currently serve in combat arms or aspire to do so. Under the mantle of “reviving the warrior ethos,” these are the opening moves to remove women from the combat arms and continue denigrating women in service more broadly.

 

Firing General Officers and Flag Officers

The purge of several senior military leaders began in February with the removal of the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Judge Advocate Generals (JAGs) from the Services, and several other 3- and 4-star Generals and Admirals. The head of U.S. Cyber Command and the National Security Agency was dismissed after the far-right conspiracy theorist, Laura Loomer, posited he was not loyal to President Trump. Most recently, the senior U.S. military representative to NATO’s military committee was dismissed without cause.

The officers who were fired had exemplary operational and combat experience, and no real reason or explanation was given for their dismissal. The JAGs served as the senior military lawyers in the Army, Navy, and Air Force, and in that capacity, acted as necessary guardrails to ensure U.S. troops follow lawful orders.

Current takeaway: Purging Generals and Admirals without cause fundamentally undermines the apolitical nature of the U.S. military. It draws the military into politics, when these officers themselves are nonpartisan – and have a deep responsibility to remain so across

Administrations. There is no such thing as loyalty to President Trump or any other President. Every man or woman in uniform swears an oath to the Constitution.

 

Erasure of military history

On February 26, the Pentagon gave direction to conduct a “digital content refresh” that removed all references to DEI from DoD websites by March 5. In a rush to implement the guidance across the vast enterprise, the Department inadvertently purged factual, historical references on websites, videos, and posts after searching for words like “history” and “first.” In particular, the stories of minorities and women in service and in combat were erased, including references to Jackie Robinson, the Tuskegee airmen, Navajo code-talkers, and women who served as pilots in World War II.

The Pentagon initially defended itself by suggesting these historical references erode unit cohesion before backtracking and committing to correct the mistakes.

Current takeaway: It is not at all clear that the vast Department will be able to restore all the records, nor how the public will know if and when DoD accomplishes the painstaking task. In an Administration claiming to make the U.S. military stronger and more lethal, this was an embarrassing waste of time and resources.

 

Reductions to the civilian work force

The Pentagon announced that 21,000 civilian employees opted into the Deferred Resignation Program (also known as the “fork in the road” ultimatum). Secretary Hegseth previously set a target of a 5-8% reduction in the civilian workforce (50,000-60,000). The Department opened

another round of deferred resignations in an effort to decrease the size of the civilian workforce. Even if probationary employees (approx. 5,400) do not return, these collective efforts will fall short of the goal. The results of an aggressive workforce recapitalization review – and a broader DoD Comprehensive Review that is mentioned – are forthcoming.

Current takeaway: Attrition, combined with hiring freezes, will not be sufficient to achieve the 5-8% target. A reduction in force (RIF) will be needed if the Pentagon actually intends to reach the target. If there is a RIF, this will ensnare veterans who are currently civil servants and highly qualified individuals will depart their jobs.

 

Planning for changes to Combatant Commands

There has been reporting of plans under consideration to restructure Combatant Commands, including by collapsing U.S. Africa Command into U.S. European Command and folding U.S.

Southern Command into U.S. Northern Command. Other options under consideration include ceding U.S. leadership of the NATO Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR).

Current takeaway: None of this is final. All estimates of cost-savings should be scrutinized closely, as it seems unlikely there are immediate, large-scale savings from merging headquarters or handing the SACEUR role to another NATO ally. Watch whether any announced changes are focused solely on the HQs, or also try to redeploy U.S. troops (and families) who are overseas.

 

Conclusion

Thus far, DOGE has barely made a dent at DoD in terms of cost savings or staff reductions. But it is likely the Administration will take more dramatic measures to achieve their goals from the aforementioned reviews. This could impact the health, safety, and quality of life of those who serve and their families. It is something to keep a close eye on.

Meanwhile, the use of Signal to communicate about classified operational details was a serious unforced error. This kind of behavior puts U.S. forces at greater risk due to the potential for leaks before or during dangerous operations. A lackadaisical attitude towards operational security is much more damaging to the military than a display of Jewish Women who served that was taken down and hastily restored.

The best way to refocus the Pentagon is for our leaders in Congress and throughout the country to speak out and inform the public. Any efforts that hurt our military and troops must be met with strong, bipartisan public opposition.