Navy set to rename ship honoring Harvey Milk amid DEI purge
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is set to rename a naval vessel named after gay rights activist Harvey Milk, with several other ships honoring civil rights activists and women also potentially being rechristened.
The move targeting the ship named after the gay rights icon comes as LGBTQ+ communities kick off pride month celebrations across the country. The step furthers Hegseth's agenda to stomp out DEI initiatives at the Pentagon, which has included removing books from service academies and scrubbing some mentions of women and people of color in the armed services from DOD websites.
Two defense officials, who were granted anonymity to discuss a situation that is still evolving, said that USNS Harvey Milk name change will likely be announced around June 13, and that six other John Lewis-class replenishment and resupply ships — all named after civil rights leaders and prominent women — could also be renamed in the coming weeks and months.
The officials said that more ships might follow in the coming months. Military.com and CBS News first reported some details of the plans.
'Secretary Hegseth is committed to ensuring that the names attached to all DOD installations and assets are reflective of the Commander-in-Chief's priorities, our nation's history, and the warrior ethos," Sean Parnell, the chief Pentagon spokesperson, said in a statement. "Any potential renaming(s) will be announced after internal reviews are complete.'
The other ships in the class are the USNS Thurgood Marshall, USNS Ruth Bader Ginsburg, USNS Harriet Tubman, USNS Cesar Chavez, USNS Medgar Evers, USNS Dolores Huerta and the USNS Lucy Stone. There is no timeline yet for the renaming of these ships, one of the officials said.
Milk served in the Navy before his political career. A member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, he was assassinated along with Mayor George Moscone in City Hall in 1978 by a former member of the board.
The planned erasure of barrier-shattering historical figures from the vessels is just the latest move in Hegseth's mission to stamp out any trace of diversity, equity and inclusion in the Defense Department.
Previous efforts in that direction have proven controversial for Hegseth, who came under scrutiny for stripping mentions of key figures from military websites — including baseball legend and World War II veteran Jackie Robinson — eventually prompting the reinstatement of some webpages and even eliciting an admission of error from the Department of Defense.
California politicians quickly criticized the Navy's planned renaming.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who shares a home city of San Francisco with Milk, sharply criticized the move as a 'shameful, vindictive erasure of those who fought to break down barriers for all to chase the American Dream' in a statement on Tuesday.
'Our military is the most powerful in the world – but this spiteful move does not strengthen our national security or the 'warrior' ethos. Instead, it is a surrender of a fundamental American value: to honor the legacy of those who worked to build a better country,' Pelosi said, encouraging the Navy to 'reconsider this egregious decision.'
'Stripping his name from a Navy ship won't erase his legacy as an American icon,' Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement, 'but it does reveal Trump's contempt for the very values our veterans fight to protect.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Pentagon diverting key anti-drone technology from Ukraine to US forces in the Middle East
The Pentagon notified Congress last week that it will be diverting critical anti-drone technology that had been allocated for Ukraine to US Air Force units in the Middle East, according to correspondence obtained by CNN and people familiar with the matter. The move reflects the US' shifting defense priorities under President Donald Trump – toward the Middle East and the Pacific – and the fact that US stockpiles of some defense components are becoming increasingly stretched. The technology, proximity fuzes for the rockets Ukraine uses to shoot down Russian drones, was redirected from the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI) to Air Force Central Command on orders from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, according to the correspondence dated May 29 and sent to the Senate and House Armed Services committees. USAI is a Defense Department funding program that was established in 2014, when Russia first invaded eastern Ukraine and annexed Crimea. It authorizes the US government to buy arms and equipment for Ukraine directly from US weapons manufacturers. The proximity fuzes were originally purchased for Ukraine but were redirected to the Air Force as a 'Secretary of Defense Identified Urgent Issue,' the correspondence says. The notification was first reported by the Wall Street Journal. The Pentagon has in recent months redirected a large amount of equipment and resources to the Middle East, including air defense systems out of the Indo-Pacific Command, amid threats from Iran and the Houthi rebels in Yemen. It is not yet clear what the impact will be of diverting the fuzes away from Ukraine. But the technology has made their rockets more effective against Russian drones, since the fuze sets off an added explosion as the rocket nears the drone. US forces in the Middle East have had to contend with drones, too, however, particularly from Iran-backed groups in Syria and Iraq.
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
UK looks to military gap years to boost recruitment in the face of growing geopolitical tension
The UK government recently endorsed proposals in its strategic defence review to consider the creation of military gap years for young people in the UK. It would potentially be similar to a scheme offered by the Australian Defence Force. Young Australian citizens can spend 12 months doing paid work in a variety of roles in the Navy, Army or Air Force. In Australia in 2023, 664 young people enlisted in the gap year programme, and 374 of these transferred on to a role in the permanent Australian Defence Force. Like in Australia, the gap year model in the UK would be optional and for over 18s to get a 'taste' of military life. These gap years would be a part of recruitment strategy. The proposal comes at a time of global geopolitical crisis, national youth unemployment and a shortage of soldiers (a global problem). Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK's latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences. Another key reason for the introduction of these gap years, highlighted in defence secretary John Healey's oral statement on the review, is to 'reconnect the nation with those who defend us'. Keir Starmer, in his speech, spoke of 'a new spirit of service, flowing from every part of society … everyone benefiting, everyone playing their role'. Young people are seen as a key part of building these connections. Another avenue raised in the review is to increase the number of cadet forces, a voluntary uniformed national youth organisation for teenagers that can also be linked to schools. An evaluation of cadet forces in the UK has outlined significant positive outcomes for young people, including for their employment and career prospects. The strategic defence review also proposed 'working with the Department for Education to develop understanding of the armed forces among young people in schools', but details of this are still unclear. These suggestions form part of a trend towards increasing military presence in children and young people's lives. My research has found that, over the last decade, successive UK governments have encouraged programmes with a military ethos within schools and character education to foster grit and gumption. My research shows that calls to reintroduce some form of military service appear at times of political, social or economic crisis. It's not surprising then, that in the last few years we have seen several proposals in this area. Most notable is previous prime minister Rishi Sunak's election pledge in 2024 that school leavers would have to do a year of compulsory military or voluntary service. A voluntary gap year – national service 'lite' – would be a more palatable approach compared to formal conscription, which is still active in several countries. Starmer has been keen to distance himself from the language of national service, especially as he has also committed to introducing votes at 16: compulsory national service doesn't poll well with young people. The UK has also recently scrapped its voluntary National Citizen Service, a non-military, short-term youth programme centred on local community action that has cost over £1.5 billion since 2010. But the fact that two successive prime ministers in the space of one year have pitched some form of military experience for school leavers tells us that this is not necessarily about benefits for youth, but about the concerning geopolitical landscape and the urgent need to boost recruits. In 2025 compared to the last few decades, the state's concern is less about youth crime, apathy or patriotism, but rather growing international security threats and the nation's preparedness. It is important to remember that the debate about national service in the UK is fuelled by generational nostalgia. In the UK, formal national service ran from the late 1940s to early 1960s for men aged between 17 and 21. Ever since those final troops were discharged in 1963, there has been a debate about 'returning' to national service. Research shows that those who were actually part of compulsory national service after the second world war generally don't think we should bring it back. This debate is cyclical, and each time it happens, it reveals what the state and adults think about young people more generally, usually shaped by moral panics. Given the current economic climate, it could be that a paid short-term year of military service is more attractive to UK teenagers and their CVs than ever before. However, we must reflect on why it might be so attractive in the present moment and understand the wider, structural issues shaping the lives of children and young people today. The costs of austerity and inequality in the UK run deep for children and young people. These issues cannot be solved by a defence focused gap year and there are other pressing demands to support young people in this country. For example, youth sector representatives are urging the UK government to reverse the long-term decline in funding on youth services. The impetus for a military gap year in the report is strategic defence, not unemployment. But there is no guarantee the defence sector itself will be keen to embrace this idea. When Sunak proposed national service last year, defence experts and ministers raised concerns about the British Army and Navy's current capacity and resources to deliver such a programme. They also highlighted the potential impact of such a scheme on the morale of professional, dedicated and highly-skilled force personnel. The actual feasibility of any new programme is uncertain, especially with the current fiscal situation. One thing my research suggests is certain though, is that this national debate will circle back around again and again. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. Sarah Mills has received research funding from UKRI (ESRC), the British Academy and the Royal Geographical Society. She is currently an unpaid member of the advisory 'College of Experts' group of researchers for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (UK Government)
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
Pentagon diverting key anti-drone technology from Ukraine to US forces in the Middle East
The Pentagon notified Congress last week that it will be diverting critical anti-drone technology that had been allocated for Ukraine to US Air Force units in the Middle East, according to correspondence obtained by CNN and people familiar with the matter. The move reflects the US' shifting defense priorities under President Donald Trump – toward the Middle East and the Pacific – and the fact that US stockpiles of some defense components are becoming increasingly stretched. The technology, proximity fuzes for the rockets Ukraine uses to shoot down Russian drones, was redirected from the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI) to Air Force Central Command on orders from Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, according to the correspondence dated May 29 and sent to the Senate and House Armed Services committees. USAI is a Defense Department funding program that was established in 2014, when Russia first invaded eastern Ukraine and annexed Crimea. It authorizes the US government to buy arms and equipment for Ukraine directly from US weapons manufacturers. The proximity fuzes were originally purchased for Ukraine but were redirected to the Air Force as a 'Secretary of Defense Identified Urgent Issue,' the correspondence says. The notification was first reported by the Wall Street Journal. The Pentagon has in recent months redirected a large amount of equipment and resources to the Middle East, including air defense systems out of the Indo-Pacific Command, amid threats from Iran and the Houthi rebels in Yemen. It is not yet clear what the impact will be of diverting the fuzes away from Ukraine. But the technology has made their rockets more effective against Russian drones, since the fuze sets off an added explosion as the rocket nears the drone. US forces in the Middle East have had to contend with drones, too, however, particularly from Iran-backed groups in Syria and Iraq.
