Pete Hegseth cuts 20 percent of U.S. military generals and admirals. Then GOP senators say they were blindsided: ‘It’s a huge problem’

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently announced a 20 percent reduction in the number of U.S. military generals and admirals, a move that has left senior Republican senators feeling blindsided and questioning the lack of communication from the Pentagon.

The announcement, which came Wednesday, caught key lawmakers off guard as they scramble to understand the implications for military readiness and the potential for ideological influence in these leadership shifts, The Hill reports.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker expressed clear frustration regarding the lack of consultation. “I wouldn’t have made that a priority if I had been asked,” he stated, noting that he was only informed of the plan shortly before it was made public. Wicker, who admitted he did not receive a long lead time, speculated that the move might be intended to cut bureaucracy at the top level.

Wicker is not alone in his concerns about how these decisions are being handled

Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins also confirmed she received no advanced notice of the reduction. She previously raised concerns at a hearing earlier this year, describing the ouster of senior officials as “deeply troubling.” Collins pointed out that the current system for officer promotions has long been a model of meritocracy. She expressed worry that this approach appears to be targeted on ideology, noting that it disturbs her to see a disproportionate number of Black and female officers not being promoted.

Sen. Thom Tillis, a veteran of the Senate Armed Services Committee, argued that this lack of transparency reflects a broader, concerning trend of the Department of Defense making major decisions without engaging key congressional stakeholders.

“Too much time has passed, and he’s failed to respect Congress. He’s never really given us fulsome briefings,” Tillis said. He emphasized that as the body controlling the purse strings, the committee expects more engagement. “It’s a huge problem, and I think he’s the face of the problem,” he added.

Despite these concerns, a Pentagon official pushed back against claims that the personnel changes are driven by identity politics, stating, “It is untrue that Secretary Hegseth is basing promotion decisions on race and sex, and we have said so repeatedly.”

During his State of the Force address at the Marine Corps Base in Quantico, Va., Hegseth defended the cuts as a necessary step toward accountability. He declared, “You can’t change a culture with the same people who enabled it. Personnel is policy at every single level.” He also noted that recruiting and retention rates across all branches are currently setting records.

Sen. Joni Ernst, another senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is looking for a formal plan to justify the cuts. While she acknowledged that a reduction might be warranted, she insisted that the secretary needs to explain the reasoning behind it. Ernst suggested that if the goal is to reduce bureaucracy, the department should also look at the civilian population at the Department of Defense rather than focusing solely on military leadership.

The tension comes at a difficult time for Senate Republicans, who are working to fund the department while also navigating the confirmation process for new leadership. Acting Navy Secretary Hung Cao, nominated to replace the sacked John Phelan, faces a hurdle in the form of a required congressional waiver due to his recent active service.