Senators Express Frustration with Pentagon Secrecy

On Tuesday, frustration boiled over among senators from both parties regarding what they described as increasing secrecy and disorganization at the Pentagon. This situation turned routine nomination hearings into a platform for complaints about Army policies.

Austin Dermer, nominated by President Trump to serve as assistant secretary of strategy, plans, and military affairs, was set to discuss his new position before the Senate Armed Services Committee. However, he found himself addressing legislators’ anger over the Pentagon’s inadequate communication with Congress, foreign allies, and the White House.

Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi) opened the discussion by noting the difficulties faced in obtaining information from the policy office. He mentioned, “We’ve observed some troubling trends this year,” adding that Pentagon officials had occasionally advocated for policies that were misaligned with President Trump’s directives.

There’s been a lack of transparency regarding several contentious decisions, such as the suspension of military aid to Ukraine, a reevaluation of the AUKUS submarine agreement, and a pause on troop deployments and discussions with significant allies.

Wicker emphasized the struggles committee members had experienced in getting meaningful insights from the Office of Policy, particularly concerning the National Defense Strategy and the Global Posture Review.

Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) chimed in, criticizing the Pentagon’s policy office as being the least effective in the administration. He stated it was often easier to get information directly from Secretary of the Army Pete Hegseth or President Trump than from the policy office. “I’m not even getting a response,” Sullivan exclaimed, expressing his frustration.

Dermer faced further scrutiny, with Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) calling the Pentagon’s policy processes a “pigsty of chaos.” Sullivan also expressed disappointment that the Army had failed to engage Congress when creating a new National Defense Strategy, questioning the source of the NDS requirements.

The office in question is led by Elbridge Colby, the undersecretary of defense for policy, who was reportedly responsible for suspending aid and intelligence sharing with Ukraine—a move that was overturned after President Trump became aware.

In July, Trump appeared unaware of the suspension of U.S. security support for Ukraine, while Dermer denied that any moratorium existed, despite a spokesman’s confirmation at that time.

Wicker highlighted last week’s unexpected cessation of sending an Army brigade to Romania, suggesting it contradicts Trump’s commitment to maintaining troops in Europe. “This decision does not seem to align with the president’s policy mandate,” he remarked.

When questioned about the lack of a briefing for Congress on the Romania decision, Dermer asserted that the committee had been informed three times, frustrating Republican members further.

Wicker pushed back, asking if Dermer was confusing mere notifications with actual briefings. The bewilderment about Dermer’s role also came to the forefront, as Wicker noted the committee had only learned recently that Dermer’s position had changed due to a quiet internal reorganization.

Democrats and Republicans expressed concern that this situation exemplifies a wider breakdown in communication under Hegseth, who reportedly requires that all interactions with Congress go through the Legislative Affairs Office.

When pressed about ongoing issues in the policy division, Dermer attributed some challenges to “fake news” and said he lacked details on various matters, though his explanations did not seem to satisfy lawmakers.

Sen. Cotton took the opportunity to comment, saying, “I understand that media reports might be misleading. Please believe me,” referencing animated characters for effect.

Though Dermer’s new role is still pending finalization, he is currently performing the duties of the assistant secretary for Army policy, and lawmakers have raised doubts about his claims of ignorance around significant issues.

Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), the ranking member of the committee, expressed skepticism, indicating that Dermer’s testimony seemed to hide behind ignorance. “Even though you were basically Director Colby’s representative, you have no idea what transpired in these various cases,” Reed pointed out.

Ultimately, Dermer admitted to some shortcomings, acknowledging that “delays in notification and lack of consultation were to blame.” However, Reed remained unconvinced, stating, “You are clearly sidestepping questions you should be able to answer,” which doesn’t inspire confidence in Dermer’s potential future role within the Department of Defense.

If the Senate does not confirm Dermer, he would become the second Trump Pentagon nominee to encounter substantial opposition, following Hegseth, whose confirmation was achieved after a tie-breaking vote from Vice President J.D. Vance.