‘Shooting themselves in the foot': Pentagon officials outraged by DOD think tank ban
The new policy is already leading to bureaucratic kerfluffles.
A select group of top Washington think tankers got a routine invitation last Tuesday: How would they like to join a video call with the outgoing top U.S. general in Africa?
Just 48 hours later, they received a note that Africa Command chief Gen. Michael Langley had canceled with no explanation. A defense official said it was halted so as to not appear out of step with the new rules.
The idea for the halt, according to one of the defense officials, was sped along by the Pentagon's realization that multiple employees, including Navy Secretary John Phelan, were heading to the Aspen summit. The organization and the other forum attendees were not ideologically aligned with the president's American First agenda, they felt, so the Pentagon pulled its participation.
'It is absolutely to control who says what, where, and when,' said the official.
Defense Department officials have historically attended roundtables to explain emerging defense policies. Foreign allies worry about losing that big-picture view, especially as the Pentagon makes decisions that catch them off guard — such as pausing military aid to Ukraine and conducting a review of a major submarine deal with Australia and the U.K.
'Meetings with the Pentagon are difficult to book, so losing public events where we can glean some details about military policy will have a big effect on us,' a NATO diplomat said.
The ban will also limit the ability of tech start-ups to understand the Pentagon's priorities and build the weapons of the future, a defense industry executive said. Many of these companies struggle to get access to DOD officials.
Pentagon speaking requests also now have to be approved by the building's general counsel, the policy team, and Hegseth's press shop. Previously, only the individual command needed to approve the request.
The new rules have already led the Navy to bar the service's top official for research, development, and acquisition, Jason Potter, from participating in a conservative-leaning Hudson Institute event on shipbuilding, according to two people familiar with the matter. There wasn't enough time to go through the new approvals process.
The Pentagon used to pay member fees for the Council on Foreign Relations and slotted military fellows at think tanks such as the Center for Strategic and International Studies. But that would appear to clash with the new rules. Some employees wondered whether the Pentagon would still pay for their advanced degrees at universities considered more liberal, such as the Harvard Kennedy School or Princeton's School of Public and International Affairs.
The Halifax International Security Forum, one of the events explicitly targeted by the ban, hoped the Pentagon would change course.
'Halifax International Security Forum has provided a non-partisan venue to strengthen cooperation between the U.S. and its democratic allies,' said Peter Van Praagh, the founder and president of the forum. 'When these alliances are nourished, America is stronger and Americans are safer. When these alliances are not nourished, Americans at home and American troops abroad are less safe.'
Nick Taylor-Vaisey contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Right-wing influencer Laura Loomer lends Hegseth a hand at the Pentagon
On Sunday night, Donald Trump spoke briefly with reporters, one of whom asked the president about right-wing activist Laura Loomer and her influence in the White House. He didn't hesitate to respond. 'I know she's known as a 'radical right,' but I think Laura Loomer is a very nice person,' Trump replied. 'I think she's a patriot, and she gets excited because of the fact she's a patriot, and she doesn't like things going on that she thinks are bad for the country. I like her.' His comments came roughly a month after the Republican also boasted to reporters that the conspiracy theorist is 'a very good patriot' who makes 'recommendations' he takes seriously. His affection for her is obvious. In fact, it's been difficult to keep up with the number of officials — across multiple agencies and federal departments — who've either resigned or been fired as a result of Loomer whispering in the president's ear. (A tally in The Daily Beast put the total number of officials at 16, which sounds about right.) But her access does not appear to be limited to the West Wing. CNN reported: Loomer said she recently spoke with [Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth], whom she's known for a decade, about her work finding disloyal employees within the Pentagon. Defense Department spokesman Sean Parnell confirmed the two spoke, telling CNN in a statement that Hegseth 'appreciates Laura Loomer's outside advocacy.' Note, Loomer's claims about partnering with the beleaguered Pentagon chief to root out disloyal insiders haven't been independently verified, but with Hegseth's own spokesperson effectively confirming the claims on the record, there's every reason to believe that the activist's boasts are true. 'Personnel is policy, and Laura has taken that motto to heart. At the Department of Defense, we will never stop working to deliver on the president's America First agenda,' Hegseth's spokesperson added in a statement to CNN. For those who might need a refresher, Loomer is a right-wing activist, a radical conspiracy theorist and a failed Republican congressional candidate who has described herself as 'pro-white nationalism.' She was also a close confidant to Trump during the 2024 campaign — even joining the Republican for a Sept. 11 remembrance, despite the fact she's pushed false conspiracy theories about the terrorist attacks having been 'an inside job.' As a New York Times report summarized in April, Loomer is 'viewed as extreme by even some of Mr. Trump's far-right allies.' Why was there so much focus on Trump's partnership with Loomer during the campaign? Because of fears she'd have outsized influence in the White House, despite — or more to the point, because of — her radical and fringe views. Those concerns were, we now know, entirely correct. Media Matters' Matthew Gertz put it this way in an item published to Bluesky: 'If you had said in October that if Trump were elected he'd end up purging the NSC at the behest of Laura Loomer and ordering Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to fire the director of the NSA, you'd have been accused of having a terminal case of Trump Derangement Syndrome.' And yet, here we are, not only watching Loomer steer Trump, oust officials, get one-on-one meetings with Vice President JD Vance, but also lend Hegseth a hand at the Pentagon. If there's a compelling defense for giving an unelected, right-wing influencer this much power, I can't think of it. This post updates our related earlier coverage. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Draganfly Demonstrates Integrated Tactical Strike System at Invite-Only Pentagon Event
Washington, D.C., Aug. 05, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Draganfly Inc. (NASDAQ: DPRO; CSE: DPRO; FSE: 3U8A), an award-winning, industry-leading developer of drone solutions and systems, proudly participated at the Pentagon's Low-Cost Uncrewed Combat Attack Systems ('LUCAS') at a recent invite-only event. Selected by MMS Products, Inc. ('MMS'), the developer of the Mjolnir Modular Munition System ('Mjolnir'), Draganfly's UAV platforms were showcased with integrated kinetic payload capabilities, demonstrating the future of low-cost, scalable, autonomous lethality for modern conflict. This milestone builds on the Company's 2024 collaboration with MMS' Mjolnir, in which Draganfly was chosen to develop a tactical multi-drop payload system. The Pentagon event provided a national-stage venue for demonstrating this integrated solution to senior U.S. Department of Defense officials and allied partners from across the global defense enterprise. Demonstrating Next-Generation Tactical Integration Draganfly's Group I UAS platforms demonstrated the deployment of the Mjolnir warhead, a lightweight, modular, drone-agnostic munition engineered for ISR-to-strike fusion, precision effects, and contested-environment survivability. The platform's performance highlighted Draganfly's technical leadership in secure autonomous flight systems and modular payload integration. 'Being invited to demonstrate our integrated solution with MMS at the Pentagon event is a major validation of the work we're doing in tactical UAV innovation,' said Cameron Chell, CEO of Draganfly. 'This collaboration illustrates our commitment to mission-ready technologies that enhance operational effectiveness and warfighter survivability." Operational Impact and Strategic Relevance Draganfly's inclusion at LUCAS signals a growing demand for interoperable, field-adaptable systems across homeland security and defense domains. The integration of MMS's Mjolnir, capable of supporting fragmentation, EFP, and anti-armor effects, into Draganfly's platform represents a scalable solution for rapid response and complex tactical operations. Notably, Mjolnir recently made history as the first live munition dropped by a U.S. Marine Corps VTOL platform, marking a turning point in the adoption of modular munitions across DoD uncrewed systems. As global conflicts evolve, the need for agile, low-cost, and rapidly deployable technologies continues to intensify. Through partnerships like this, Draganfly and MMS are advancing the next generation of kinetic autonomy in defense. About Draganfly Draganfly Inc. (NASDAQ: DPRO; CSE: DPRO; FSE: 3U8A) is a leader in cutting-edge drone solutions and software that are transforming industries and serving stakeholders globally. Recognized for innovation and excellence for over 25 years, Draganfly delivers award-winning technology to the public safety, agriculture, industrial inspection, security, mapping, and surveying markets. The Company is driven by passion, ingenuity, and a mission to provide efficient solutions and first-class services to customers worldwide, saving time, money, and lives. NASDAQ (DPRO)CSE (DPRO)FSE (3U8A) About MMS Products, Inc. MMS Products, Inc. is a U.S.-based designer and manufacturer of modular munition systems. The company's flagship solution, the Mjolnir, delivers scalable, selective lethality across Group I–III platforms using additive manufacturing, user-supplied energetics, and rapid configuration options, all informed by battlefield experience in Ukraine and Israel. Media ContactErika RacicotEmail: media@ Company ContactCameron ChellChief Executive Officer(306) 955-9907info@ This release contains certain 'forward looking statements' and certain 'forward-looking information' as defined under applicable securities laws. Forward-looking statements and information can generally be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as 'may', 'will', 'expect', 'intend', 'estimate', 'anticipate', 'believe', 'continue', 'plans' or similar terminology. Forward-looking statements and information are based on forecasts of future results, estimates of amounts not yet determinable and assumptions that, while believed by management to be reasonable, are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the statements with respect to Draganfly's technology and products to be integrated with Mjolnir, ability of the Company's technology and products to be used defense and any inference that attending the LUCAS event will lead to orders for the Company's technology and products. Forward-looking statements and information are subject to various known and unknown risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond the ability of the Company to control or predict, that may cause the Company's actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from those expressed or implied thereby, and are developed based on assumptions about such risks, uncertainties and other factors set out here in, including but not limited to: the potential impact of epidemics, pandemics or other public health crises, including the COVID-19 pandemic, on the Company's business, operations and financial condition; the successful integration of technology; the inherent risks involved in the general securities markets; uncertainties relating to the availability and costs of financing needed in the future; the inherent uncertainty of cost estimates; the potential for unexpected costs and expenses, currency fluctuations; regulatory restrictions; and liability, competition, loss of key employees and other related risks and uncertainties disclosed under the heading 'Risk Factors' in the Company's most recent filings filed with securities regulators in Canada on the SEDAR+ website at and with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the 'SEC') on EDGAR through the SEC's website at The Company undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking information except as required by applicable law. Such forward-looking information represents managements' best judgment based on information currently available. No forward-looking statement can be guaranteed and actual future results may vary materially. Accordingly, readers are advised not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements or in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Fox News
2 hours ago
- Fox News
Trump lifts veil on US submarines in warning shot to Kremlin in 'clever' repositioning move
President Donald Trump broke with decades of strategic silence when he publicly revealed the repositioning of U.S. nuclear-powered submarines in a thinly veiled warning to Russia. The announcement — targeted at Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman and former President Dmitry Medvedev after his latest nuclear threats — sent shockwaves through the defense world not just for its provocation, but for the sheer fact that it was said out loud. Presidents have long moved military assets like aircraft carriers and bombers to signal resolve. But submarines, especially the covert, nuclear-powered kind, are rarely mentioned. "We rarely, if ever, talk about submarine movements unless there's been an undeniable accident," Gene Moran, a former Navy captain and Pentagon strategic advisor, told Fox News Digital. Plenty of other military assets — Patriot batteries, aircraft carriers, even B-52 bombers — are deployed publicly to send a diplomatic message. But this time, the secretive nature of the nuclear submarine positioning may have been the reason for the choice. "Submarine deployments are unverifiable," said Moran. "That's what gives them strategic value, but also what makes this announcement clever — if you're aiming for a headline." Vice Admiral Mike Connor, former commander of U.S. submarine forces, said Trump's statement may have sounded bold, but was in fact consistent with long-standing doctrine. "He didn't really give away too much," Connor, who now serves as CEO of maritime tech company ThayerMahan, told Fox News Digital. "It's generally understood, by our potential adversaries, that our submarines are out there, have been out there for 60-plus years, and are able to strike pretty much where they want, when they want, if needed." "It's a more gentle message done this way," Connor added. "It's not really in your face. It's just a reminder of what already exists." The president was vague in revealing his plans, only announcing that nuclear submarines would be positioned in the "appropriate regions" following Medvedev's accusations that he was escalating the war. Trump told reporters Sunday the submarines are "already in the region, where they should be." Moran said Trump may have simply aligned a routine rotation with a strategic message. "It doesn't cost anything," he said. "But if you do it repeatedly, it begins to reveal where your thresholds are. That has long-term consequences." He also cast doubt on the depth of coordination behind the announcement. "Submarines don't just move at the snap of a finger." Matthew Shoemaker, a former defense intelligence official, echoed that point. "It's certainly unusual to announce it from an operational perspective," he said, "which means this is primarily about sending a message to the Russians rather than trying to achieve a military goal." Meanwhile, Trump's frustration with Putin has grown in recent weeks amid stalled negotiations to end the war, prompting him to scale back the deadline for Russia to agree to a peace deal this week. Trump's disclosure of the submarine presence puts additional pressure on Russia to come to the negotiating table, according to Bryan Clark, a retired submarine officer and director of the Hudson Institute think tank's Center for Defense Concepts and Technology. "We have used very sparingly submarines to try to influence adversary behavior before, but this is pretty unusual, to do it against a nuclear-powered adversary like Russia in response to a nuclear threat by Russia," Clark told Fox News Digital Monday. "So I think this is trying to essentially push back on Russia's frequent and long-standing threats to use nuclear weapons in part of the Ukraine conflict." Mark Cancian, senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, believes it's more likely that two already-deployed U.S. submarines were repositioned rather than any new vessels dispatched. "At any one time there are about a dozen U.S. submarines deployed," he said. "We probably just moved two of them to different spots. There hasn't been any report of new submarine sailings — you'd have heard about that." Retired Navy Capt. Todd Sawhill, who served as a targeting expert with the Joint Staff and U.S. Central Command, said there's precedent for moving submarines in response to tensions — but rarely is it spoken of this openly. "It is atypical to have a sitting president telegraph it so plainly," Sawhill said. "It's consistent with Trump's desire to direct-message, so in that sense it's not surprising. But it's not how these things are usually done." Experts agree that once a U.S. submarine leaves port, it becomes difficult — though not impossible — for adversaries to track. "These are very tightly controlled pieces of information," Cancian said. "The U.S. has good confidence that deployed submarines aren't being followed — though we've been wrong before." Shoemaker noted that geography plays a significant role. "The closer one gets to an adversary's shores, the more likely they can find and track our subs," he said. "So it depends on where exactly these subs are sent near Russia." Moran added that both sides exaggerate their tracking capabilities. "It's easy to claim you know where your adversary is. But with modern submarines, that's a very difficult task." Connor also pointed to a recent case that underscored the low-profile potency of submarines. "A few weeks ago, there was a strike on Iranian nuclear weapon component manufacturing sites," he said. "There was a lot of noise about the fact that some Air Force planes flew from the U.S. and struck two deeply buried targets. And it was more or less a side note that a submarine — who knows which one or where it was —struck 30 targets at the same time." "It's a capability that's always there, not often used and doesn't need to be talked about too overtly to be effective." But unlike the Iran strikes, it appears improbable that the submarines dispatched in response to increased tension with Russia would see the same kind of action, according to Clark. That's because the U.S. hasn't directly intervened militarily to back Ukraine, and the locations where these submarines operate are not best suited to launch attacks against Russian adversaries since the cruise missiles would go over NATO countries like Romania, Clark said. "It's unlikely to be a cruise missile attack that we threaten or even conduct," Clark said. "I think it's much more likely that we will be using attack submarines to sort of convey to the Russians that we can hold important targets of their own at risk if they do decide to escalate." Asked whether Russia might respond with its own maneuvers, Shoemaker was unequivocal: "Yes, almost certainly. Russia routinely and historically likes to do comparable responses to American actions." Moran pointed to a recent example from last year: "Russia moved ships near Cuba, and we responded by surfacing a submarine in Guantanamo Bay. That's a case of operational schedules aligning with an opportunity to send a message." But such cat-and-mouse signaling carries risk. "Missteps can be made. Things can be misinterpreted," Moran warned. "We've been here before." Connor agreed that the oceans will remain a chessboard of silent signaling. "Both countries have the freedom to operate as they would like in international waters," he said. "They've done that for decades and will likely continue to do so." The move appears to be part deterrence, part diplomacy. "[Trump] is showing annoyance with Russia's unwillingness to negotiate seriously on Ukraine. But more significantly, he's pushing back on Russia's nuclear saber-rattling — a pattern that's existed since the beginning of the war," said Cancian.
