Reed Sounds Alarm on Hegseth’s Campaign to Politicize the U.S. Military

WASHINGTON, DC - This week, U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, delivered a speech on the Senate floor warning that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is systematically undermining the U.S. military's apolitical foundation and eroding the American people's trust.

Senator Reed condemned Hegseth's recent hyper-partisan remarks at the D-Day anniversary at Normandy, his commencement address at West Point, his political campaign activities in Kentucky, his interference in the military's chain of command, and his introduction of explicit partisan political agendas into Pentagon leadership.

The Senator concluded: "The military's apolitical mission is not incidental to its strength; it is foundational to it. When the Secretary of Defense uses his office to promote a sectarian vision of his culture war, he does not inspire the force. He divides it. Taken together, the secretary's actions are an assault on the norms, traditions, and structures that have kept the American military the most trusted institution in this country for 250 years."

Senator Reed called on his colleagues to reject the politicization of the American military and to defend the institutional norms that protect the trust of the American people in their armed forces.

A video of Senator Reed's remarks may be viewed here.

A transcript of Senator Reed's floor speech follows.

Addressing Secretary Hegseth's Politicization of the U.S. Military

U.S. Senator Jack Reed

Ranking Member, Senate Armed Services Committee

Wednesday, June 17, 2026

REED: Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the United States military and its role as an apolitical institution. For 250 years, our military's most important source of strength has been the trust of the American people. Their trust is hard won, and relies upon the belief that our military remains above politics. I fear that trust is being eroded by the current Secretary of Defense.

I want to begin with Dwight Eisenhower. This month marks the 82^nd anniversary of D-Day and the American invasion at Normandy. General Eisenhower spent the night before those landings walking among the men he was sending into battle - asking where they were from, what they did back home. He wrote two messages for June 6th: the rallying call for the soldiers, sailors, and airmen of the Allied Expeditionary Force, and a second message he hoped no one would ever read, in case the landings failed. It read: "If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt, it is mine alone." He never had to send it. But he wrote it, because he understood that the privilege of command carries the full weight of its consequences.

In 1947, Eisenhower addressed the graduating class at West Point. He had just finished commanding the largest military campaign in human history and witnessed the deaths of hundreds of thousands of young Americans. He knew what war was. And this is what he told the cadets: "War is mankind's most tragic and stupid folly." Fifteen years later, General MacArthur, no stranger to war himself, stood at West Point and said: "The soldier above all other people prays for peace." Those commanders understood that "lethality" is a terrible tool, and humility is paramount in warfare.

Last weekend, Pete Hegseth traveled to Normandy to observe the D-Day anniversary. He stood at the American cemetery above the beaches where more than 2,500 Americans died in a single morning. Standing on that sacred, historic site, Secretary Hegseth did not use his platform to express humility or unity, but to preach an anti-immigrant message. He said: "Sadly, today, different European beaches are stormed by different, dangerous ideologies… Beaches in Spain, Italy, Greece and Bulgaria - boats and men arrive. When will European capitals do something about that invasion?"

Historians and veterans called his speech grotesque. I would call it a desecration - and an ignorant one.

I doubt the Secretary knows that during World War Two, more than 300,000 foreign-born individuals served in the U.S. Army alone. More than 109,000 of them were not even American citizens. They were men and women who crossed an ocean to fight and die for a country that had not yet fully claimed them, and who earned their citizenship through their service.

Hundreds of thousands more were first-generation Americans - the children of immigrants. For example, U.S. Navy Coxswain Amin Isbir, the son of Syrian immigrants who settled in Pittsburgh, was among the first men off his landing craft when it reached Omaha Beach under heavy fire on the morning of June 6th. After securing his landing craft on the beach, he was killed by a German shell while helping load a fellow wounded soldier onto a stretcher. Coxswain Isbir and countless heroes like him are buried at Normandy.

Yet Secretary Hegseth stood above their graves and used the moment to deride the kind of people they were.

Last month, Secretary Hegseth got his own chance to address West Point cadets at their commencement. Where Eisenhower and MacArthur spoke of wisdom, humility, and caution, Pete Hegseth boasted about lethality, claimed that West Point had turned into "woke Princeton," and made such bluster as "you can't throw your pronouns at the enemy." He told the Class of 2026 - the most diverse in the Academy's history - that strength in diversity is "the single dumbest phrase in military history." He mocked the service of women officers and criticized those with non-conservative political beliefs. He told a captive audience of newly commissioned officers that the presence of their classmates with different beliefs and demographics represented a lowering of standards. It was shameful, divisive, and self-centered.

Mr. President, I attended West Point as a cadet. I taught there as a professor. I served on active duty as an Army officer. I know what West Point stands for, and what its graduates embrace: principled leadership to serve their soldiers and the nation. Where past leaders asked West Point cadets to understand the economic, political, and spiritual aspirations of other peoples - to devote their lives as seriously to leading toward peace as preparing for war - Hegseth gave them a culture war speech. Indeed, as James Bennet observed in The Economist: "where past military leaders treated violence as a tragic necessity, Hegseth celebrated it as righteous and thrilling."

His hyper-partisan remarks were both morally and factually wrong.

But Mr. President, this was not an isolated incident. It is part of a pattern of partisan, political behavior antithetical to the role of the Secretary of Defense.

Last month, Secretary Hegseth traveled to Kentucky to campaign for a Republican House candidate the day before a primary election. He stood on a stage, attacked a sitting Republican member of Congress, and told the crowd to send a different man to Washington. He announced a disclaimer, apparently "for the lawyers," that he was there in his personal capacity.

That disclaimer is void. The Secretary of Defense does not have a personal capacity. He represents, at every moment, this nation and its military forces.

Indeed, it seems he violated the Defense Department's own political activity rules, which expressly prohibit Senate-confirmed officials from taking an active part in political campaigns. The Department's rules are explicit: even "making speeches" or "knocking doors" constitutes a prohibited political act for someone in Hegseth's position.

Pete Hegseth arrived in Kentucky as the civilian leader of the most powerful military on Earth, in the middle of an active war. The Secretary title travels with him. The authority of the office travels with him. And every servicemember watching the news understood exactly what they were seeing: the man who controls their careers, their promotions, and their deployments inserting himself into a partisan election on behalf of the President's favored candidate.

This was an abuse of office and created an image that every Secretary of Defense in memory has worked to avoid. The Kentucky Republican Party's own former spokesman questioned whether Secretary Hegseth violated the Hatch Act, and numerous independent groups have filed complaints with the Pentagon's Inspector General.

Mr. President, this isn't about my opposition to the Secretary or President Trump. I'm driven by the corrosive impacts of his rhetoric, his actions, and what they mean for strength of our volunteer military. We need to think about what this means for the men and women in uniform who serve under this secretary. They took an oath to the Constitution - not to a political party, not to a candidate, not to a president. The Uniform Code of Military Justice restricts their partisan activity precisely because we have always understood that a politicized military is a dangerous military. And now our servicemembers are watching their Secretary of Defense do what they are forbidden to do. What message does that send? What chilling effect does it have on good order and discipline throughout the ranks?

Secretary Hegseth has personally intervened in the careers of nearly 50 senior officers we know of - firing them or blocking their promotions without explanation. Just last month, we learned he has personally blocked and delayed the promotions of dozens of top-performing Navy and Air Force officers, the majority of whom are women and minority officers. These are leaders selected by their peers based on merit and performance, in a promotion system that has functioned on those principles for generations.

The chilling effect is real. Senior officers across the force are asking themselves whether their professional military advice - the kind that keeps soldiers alive - will cost them their careers. And it is not hypothetical: we have already seen it happen. General Kruse, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, was fired last year after his analysts produced an intelligence report that contradicted the Secretary's public claims about Iran. The message was received by those advising him, and here we are today - more than 100 days into a war with Iran.

I would also note that, under U.S. law, only the President may remove an officer from a promotion list. Secretary Hegseth has refused to explain why or how he believes he has the authority to terminate or delay these officers' careers.

And, of course, there is the Kid Rock incident. In March, two Army Apache helicopters flew to the Nashville home of Kid Rock - a well-known Trump supporter - and hovered over his pool while he filmed them for social media. This was an obvious violation of military protocol and aviation safety laws, and the Army immediately launched an investigation and suspended the crews. But within hours, Secretary Hegseth intervened. He posted on social media: "No punishment. No investigation. Carry on, patriots." The Army's chain of command was overruled by a tweet because the man being entertained was a friend of the President. Secretary Hegseth later doubled down by taking Kid Rock for a ride in an Army Apache helicopter as part of a promotional video.

Mr. President, the Army's aviation safety regulations exist for a reason. The chain of command exists for a reason. It ensures commanders hold each other and their troops accountable, that those who break regulations face consequences, and that military assets are used for legitimate operational needs - not political theater. When the Secretary of Defense short-circuits good order and discipline to benefit a political ally, he does not just bend the rules. He signals to every officer that accountability is conditional on politics.

These actions are emblematic of the Secretary's broader focus on his own personal agenda. In the past three months alone, while our servicemembers have been fighting and dying overseas, he has taken it upon himself to cancel flu vaccine requirements, repeal firearm restrictions on military posts, bar servicemembers from attending certain universities, and upend the chaplain corps.

My point is this: Secretary Hegseth is behaving as though his time as Defense Secretary is an opportunity to impose his personal political views on our military men and women. He is wrong. The office of Secretary of Defense is about leading millions of American servicemembers of every faith, race, and gender with the character and composure they deserve. The military's apolitical mission is not incidental to its strength; it is foundational to it. When the Secretary of Defense uses his office to promote a sectarian vision of his culture war, he does not inspire the force. He divides it.

Taken together, the secretary's actions are an assault on the norms, traditions, and structures that have kept the American military the most trusted institution in this country for 250 years.

I served in the Army. 'Good order and discipline' is not a slogan. It means that the rules apply to everyone - including the leaders at the top. It means that accountability flows both ways and that promotions are based on merit, not loyalty to a party. And it means that servicemembers of every faith and background are welcomed and respected.

Secretary Hegseth is undermining every one of those tenets. Our servicemembers deserve better. And we have an obligation, as a body, to say so plainly, and to counter this abuse of power.

I yield the floor.

• Print
• Email
• Share
• Tweet