Assessing Claims About the Pentagon's Women, Peace, and Security Program
On April 29, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced his intention to shutter the Pentagon's Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) program.
Although Hegseth referred to the WPS program as a 'Biden initiative,' the program was established through bipartisan congressional legislation and signed into law by President Donald Trump. Hegseth later appeared to acknowledge this in a separate tweet shared two hours after his initial post: 'The woke & weak Biden Administration distorted & weaponized the straight-forward & security-focused WPS initiative launched in 2017. So—yes—we are ending the 'woke divisive/social justice/Biden (WPS) initiative.''
Hegseth lacks the authority to entirely eliminate the program, which he appeared to acknowledge at the end of his tweet, noting he would dismantle it to the fullest extent allowed by the law and push for its eradication in the administration's next budget request, which Congress must approve. The law that created the program was written to apply not only to the Department of Defense (DOD), but also the Department of Homeland Security, the State Department, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. Congress tasked the DOD specifically with ensuring that various training regimens address 'the importance of meaningful participation by women' and that employees receive training in 'gender considerations,' particularly in regards to the protection of civilians and international human rights law.
In May 2017, Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire introduced the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017 to increase female participation in U.S. foreign affairs, particularly in overseas conflict prevention and resolution. Four senators—two Democrats and two Republicans—co-sponsored the Senate bill, including Trump's current secretary of state, then-Florida Sen. Marco Rubio. The bill—and an identical version introduced in the House by South Dakota's then-Rep. Kristi Noem, the current homeland security secretary—called for the president to produce a 'Women, Peace, and Security Strategy' within one year of its passage, and then once every four years after, detailing the administration's efforts 'to promote the participation of women in conflict prevention and peace building.'
The Trump White House published its WPS report in June 2019. 'The Trump Administration is committed to advancing women's equality, seeking to protect the rights of women and girls, and promoting women and youth empowerment programs,' the 20-page report states. It spelled out four broad specific goals—'line of efforts'—detailing the administration's approach to advance 'women's empowerment and equality' and ensuring their participation in conflict-related matters. The first simply stated the importance of female participation globally 'in decision-making processes related to conflict and crises,' and the second focused on securing human rights for women around the world and protecting them from 'violence, abuse, and exploitation.' The third discussed how the U.S. could use its various international programs to advance its women's empowerment objectives, acknowledging 'that systemic inequality faced by women and girls serves as a known driver of conflict,' and the fourth focused on recommendations the U.S. should provide to allied governments for advancing women's empowerment and equality within their nations.
That strategy did not change radically between administrations, though the Biden White House's strategy, published in October 2023, focused more on intersectionality—a core concept of identity politics. 'Promoting intersectionality with regard to demographics such as race, disability, and sexual orientation is important to ensure opportunities for the participation of all women.'
The Biden administration report also linked questions of women's peace and security to climate change and LGBT+ rights. The administration stressed the importance of 'acknowledging the gendered dimensions of the climate crisis.' The report cited an example of an August 2023 review the government released to study the effects of climate change on women, and develop strategies to alleviate climate-related issues disproportionately affecting them. 'This Strategy directly links gender inequality and climate change with advancing the WPS agenda because climate change impacts—such as extreme weather events and food and water insecurity—are threat multipliers and increase the risk of displacement, migration, and conflict, especially in regions that suffer from instability, and particularly for women and girls,' the 2023 report explained. In another example, the report noted that tools to promote women, peace, and security within the government—such as sensitivity training—can also be used to raise awareness about LGBT+ issues of inequality.
The Dispatch Fact Check has reached out to the Department of Defense for comment.
If you have a claim you would like to see us fact check, please send us an email at factcheck@thedispatch.com. If you would like to suggest a correction to this piece or any other Dispatch article, please email corrections@thedispatch.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘We've lost the culture war on climate'
President Donald Trump's latest climate rollback makes it all but official: The United States is giving up on trying to stop the planet's warming. In some ways, the effort has barely started. More than 15 years after federal regulators officially recognized that greenhouse gas pollution threatens 'current and future generations,' their most ambitious efforts to defuse that threat have been blocked in the courts and by Trump's rule-slicing buzzsaw. Wednesday's action by the Environmental Protection Agency would extend that streak by wiping out a Biden-era regulation on power plants — leaving the nation's second-largest source of climate pollution unshackled until at least the early 2030s. Rules aimed at lessening climate pollution from transportation, the nation's No. 1 source, are also on the Trump hit list. Meanwhile, the GOP megabill lumbering through the Senate would dismember former President Joe Biden's other huge climate initiative, the 2022 law that sought to use hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks and other incentives to encourage consumers and businesses to switch to carbon-free energy. At the same time, Trump's appointees have spent months shutting down climate programs, firing their workers and gutting research into the problem, while making it harder for states such as California to tackle the issue on their own. The years of whipsawing moves have left Washington with no consistent approach on how — or whether — to confront climate change, even as scientists warn that years are growing short to avoid catastrophic damage to human society. While the Trump-era GOP's hardening opposition to climate action has been a major reason for the lack of consensus, one former Democratic adviser said her own party needs to find a message that resonates with broad swaths of the electorate. 'There's no way around it: The left strategy on climate needs to be rethought,' said Jody Freeman, who served as counselor for energy and climate change in President Barack Obama's White House. 'We've lost the culture war on climate, and we have to figure out a way for it to not be a niche leftist movement." It's a strategy Freeman admitted she was 'struggling' to articulate, but one that included using natural gas as a 'bridge fuel' to more renewable power — an approach Democrats embraced during the Obama administration — finding 'a new approach' for easing permits for energy infrastructure and building broad-based political support. As the Democratic nominee in 2008, Obama expressed the hope that his campaign would be seen as 'the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.' But two years later, the Democrats' cap-and-trade climate bill failed to get through a Senate where they held a supermajority. Obama didn't return to the issue in earnest until his second term, taking actions including the enactment of a sweeping power plant rule that wasn't yet in effect when Trump rescinded it and the Supreme Court declared it dead. Republicans, meanwhile, have moved far from their seemingly moderating stance in 2008, when nominee John McCain offered his own climate proposals and even then-President George W. Bush announced a modest target for slowing carbon pollution by 2025. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin contended Wednesday that the Obama- and Biden-era rules were overbearing and too costly. 'The American public spoke loudly and clearly last November: They wanted to make sure that all agencies were cognizant of their economic concerns,' he said when announcing the rule rollback at agency headquarters. 'At the EPA under President Trump, we have chosen to both protect the environment and grow the economy.' Trump's new strategy of ditching greenhouse gas limits altogether is legally questionable, experts involved in crafting the Obama and Biden power plant rules told POLITICO. But they acknowledged that the Trump administration at the very least will significantly weaken rules on power plants' climate pollution, at a moment when the trends are going in the wrong direction. Gina McCarthy, who led EPA during the Obama administration, said in a statement that Zeldin's rationale is "absolutely illogical and indefensible. It's a purely political play that goes against decades of science and policy review." U.S. greenhouse gas emissions were virtually flat last year, falling just 0.2 percent, after declining 20 percent since 2005, according to the research firm Rhodium Group. That output would need to fall 7.6 percent annually through 2030 to meet the climate goals Biden floated, which were aimed at limiting the rise in global temperatures to 1.5 degrees Celsius since the start of the Industrial Revolution. That level is a critical threshold for avoiding the most severe impacts of climate change. Those targets now look out of reach. The World Meteorological Organization last month gave 70 percent odds that the five-year global temperature average through 2029 would register above 1.5 degrees. The Obama-era rule came out during a decade when governments around the world threw their weight behind blunting climate pollution through executive actions. Ricky Revesz, who was Biden's regulatory czar, recalled the 'great excitement' at the White House Blue Room reception just before Obama announced his power plant rule, known as the Clean Power Plan. It seemed a watershed moment. But it didn't last. 'I thought that it was going to be a more linear path forward,' he said. 'That linear path forward has not materialized. And that is disappointing.' Opponents who have long argued that such regulations would wreck the economy while doing little to curb global temperature increases have traveled the same road in reverse. Republican West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey said he felt dread when Obama announced the Clean Power Plan in 2015. Then the state's attorney general, he feared the rule's focus on curbing carbon dioxide from power plants would have a 'catastrophic' impact on West Virginia's coal-reliant economy. 'It was really an audacious and outrageous attempt to regulate the economy when they had no power to do so,' said Morrisey, who led a coalition of states that sued the EPA over Obama's proposal. 'You can't take the actions that they were trying to take without going to the legislature.' Meanwhile, Congress has become harsher terrain for climate action. In May, House Republicans voted to undo the incentives for electric cars and other clean energy technologies in Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, the nation's most significant effort to spur clean energy and curb climate change. That same week, 35 House Democrats and Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) crossed the aisle and voted to kill an EPA waiver that had allowed California to set more stringent tailpipe pollution standards for vehicles to deal with its historically smoggy skies. California was planning to use that waiver to end sales of internal combustion engine vehicles in 2035, a rule 10 other states and the District of Columbia had planned to follow. The Supreme Court has added to the obstacles for climate policy — introducing more existential challenges for efforts to use executive powers to corral greenhouse gas emissions. In its 2022 decision striking down the Obama administration's power plant rule, the court said agencies such as EPA need Congress' explicit approval before enacting regulations that would have a 'major' impact on the economy. (It didn't precisely define what counts as 'major.') In 2024, the court eviscerated a decades-old precedent known as the Chevron doctrine, which had afforded agencies broad leeway in how they interpret vague statutes. Many climate advocates and former Democratic officials contend that all those obstacles are bumps, not barriers, on the tortuous path to reducing greenhouse gases. They say that even the regulatory fits and starts have provided signals to markets and businesses about where federal policy is heading in the long term — prodding the private sector to make investments to green the nation's energy system. One symptom is a sharp decline in U.S. reliance on coal — by far the most climate-polluting power source, and the one that would face the stiffest restrictions in any successful federal regulation to lessen the electricity industry's emissions. Coal supplied 48.5 percent of the nation's power generation in 2007, but that fell to 15 percent in 2024. Last year, solar and wind power combined to overtake coal for the first time. 'Regulation has served the purpose of moving things along faster,' said Janet McCabe, who was deputy EPA administrator under Biden and ran EPA's Office of Air and Radiation during Obama's second term. 'The trajectory is always in the right direction.' Freeman, who is now at Harvard Law School, said federal regulations plus state laws requiring renewable power to comprise portions of the electricity mix helped justify utility investments in clean energy. That, in turn, accelerated price drops for wind and solar power, she said. Clean energy advocates point to those broader market shifts, calling a cleaner power grid inevitable. 'There are people in each of these industries who wouldn't have taken the climate problem seriously and cleaner technology seriously, and invested in it, if it weren't for the pressure of the Clean Air Act and the incentives that more recently had been built into the IRA,' said David Doniger, senior attorney and strategist at the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'So policy does matter, even when it's not in a straight line and the implementation is inadequate.' But even if those economic trends continue — an open question given the enormous new power demand from data centers — it will not bring the U.S. closer to cuts needed to keep the world from overheating, multiple climate studies have concluded. And the greatest chunk of the emissions decline since 2005 comes from shifting coal to natural gas, another fossil fuel, which fracking made cheap and abundant. Biden's power plant rule, now being shelved by Trump's EPA, would have imposed limits on both coal-burning power plants and future gas-fired ones, requiring them to either capture their greenhouse gases or shut down. Staving off regulations may well keep coal-fired power plants running longer than anticipated to meet forecast demand growth, belching more carbon dioxide into the air. The Trump administration has even sought to temporarily exempt power plants from air pollution rules altogether and is trying to use emergency powers to prevent coal generators from shuttering. Without federal rules that say otherwise, power providers would also be likely to add more natural gas generation to the grid. Failing to curb power plants' pollution, scientists say, means temperatures will continue to rise and bring more of the floods, heat waves, wildfires, supply chain disruptions, food shortages and other shocks that cost the U.S. hundreds of billions of dollars each year in property damage, illness, death and lost productivity. 'I don't think the economics are going to take care of it by any means,' said Joe Goffman, who led the Biden EPA air office. 'The effects of climate change are going to continue to be felt and they're going to continue to be costly in terms of dollars and cents and in terms of human experience.' Some state governors, such as Democrats Kathy Hochul of New York and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, have vowed to go it alone on climate policy if need be. But analyses have shown state actions alone are unlikely to achieve the greenhouse gas reductions at the scale and speed needed to avoid baking in catastrophic effects from climate change. The Sierra Club, for example, has helped shutter nearly 400 coal-fired units across the U.S. since 2010 through its Beyond Coal campaign, which has argued the economic case against fossil fuel generation in front of state utility commissions. While Joanne Spalding, the group's legal director, said it can continue to strike blows against coal with that strategy, she acknowledged that 'gas is a huge problem' — and left no doubt that the Trump administration's moves would do damage. 'Given what the science says about the need to act urgently, this will be a lost four years in the United States,' she said.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Stephen Miller Explicitly Ordered ICE Raid Home Depots
Stephen Miller explicitly ordered ICE to target Home Depot parking lots to arrest undocumented day laborers, a report alleges. The White House deputy chief of staff gave the order in late May, gloating in a meeting that he could leave ICE's D.C. headquarters and arrest 30 people outside the nearest Home Depot, sources told the Wall Street Journal. Miller, 39, is also said to have reminded top immigration officials they are not just targeting the 'worst of the worst' criminals, but anybody who is in the country illegally—even if that is their only alleged wrongdoing. 'Just go out there and arrest illegal aliens,' he said, according to the Journal. ICE officials appear to have heeded the White House's call. The Journal reported that ICE conducted an immigration sweep at a Home Depot on Friday in a predominantly Latino neighborhood of Los Angeles. The raid was among those that spurred widespread anti-ICE demonstrations and occasional riots in the city, which escalated after President Donald Trump activated the National Guard and deployed Marines against the wishes of Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Day laborers are known to use Home Depot parking lots to find work at locations across the country, often waving down contractors or homeowners as they exit the home improvement store. Home Depot has acknowledged the practice, but does not explicitly allow it. Some stores feature signage to make clear that soliciting work is illegal in their parking lots. MAGA influencers have seized on this practice by migrants and are now encouraging ICE to continue targeting Home Depot parking lots. 'I'd like to report the front entrance of @HomeDepot at 5 am,' said Laura Loomer on Wednesday, responding to a promotion for the Department of Homeland Security's tip line to report undocumented immigrants. 'Location: Every Home Depot in the U.S.' Recent Home Depot raids have occurred at a minimum of seven locations in California, according to the Journal, The Guardian, and NBC Los Angeles. This appears to have workers skiddish about finding work in their go-to spot. Martha Arévalo, the executive director of the Central American Resource Center of Los Angeles, told the Journal that Home Depot parking lots in Southern California, once filled with hundreds of willing workers, have dwindled down to a 'handful.' Home Depot spokeswoman Beth Marlowe told the Daily Beast that the Atlanta-based corporation is not working in conjunction with ICE and that it does not receive any advance notice of raids at or near its locations. 'We tell associates to report [raids] immediately and not to engage with the activity for their safety,' she said. 'If associates feel uncomfortable after witnessing ICE activity, we offer them the option to go home for the rest of the day, with pay.' ICE did not respond to emails from the Daily Beast. White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson told the Beast in a statement, 'If you are present in the United States illegally, you will be deported. This is the promise President Trump made to the American people, and the administration is committed to keeping it.' Miller has reportedly orchestrated the Trump administration's immigration crackdown. In the same meeting he reportedly ordered ICE to target Home Depot locations, he also allegedly threatened to terminate officials if their arrest numbers did not rise significantly. Miller told ICE it needed an arrest total at or near 3,000 migrants per day. A plan, dubbed 'Operation At Large,' was implemented shortly after. It saw thousands of federal law enforcement officers and special forces, who don't typically assist with immigration, being activated to help ICE round up migrants accused of being in the country illegally. This supercharging of arrests resulted in several notable mishaps. That included ICE briefly detaining a U.S. Marshal in Arizona by mistake last week.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'The View' co-host warns cast mates not to demonize ICE and military personnel over LA riots
"The View" co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin on Wednesday warned her co-hosts against "demonizing" Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in their discussion about the Los Angeles riots. "I think Trump is not doing this just for optics," co-host Sunny Hostin said. "I think that this is a test case so that he can dismantle some of our institutions. I think it's a power grab. I think he is trying to use the might of the military to suppress people's rights. I think that is very clear. When you use the military against your own citizens, that is a sign of fascism. That is just the truth." The co-hosts continued to criticize the president for his decision to send in troops to aid law enforcement. Griffin then urged the co-hosts to be careful not to "take the bait," as Hostin insisted that she didn't think it was bait. Newsom Says Los Angeles Rioters Will Be Prosecuted, Slams Trump For 'Traumatizing Our Communities' "I haven't made my point yet," Griffin said. "The ICE agents, those are nonpartisan actors, for the most part, who signed up for jobs and served under multiple administrations. They did not necessarily sign up to be doing this, and they're following an order of the commander-in-chief." Read On The Fox News App Co-host Whoopi Goldberg and Hostin said they weren't demonizing them. "We're saying this is the result of ICE, ICE's actions," Hostin insisted. The liberal co-host blamed ICE for the crisis in LA on Tuesday. Griffin added, "I think it's important to remember it's the commander-in-chief that made the decision. They're following the orders." Federal Officials Slam Democrats For 'Dangerous' Rhetoric As Ice Agents Face Violent Mobs In La, Nyc Click Here For More Coverage Of Media And Culture Goldberg then made a seeming comparison to Germany in the 1930s, saying, "Where have you heard that before? 'I'm just following orders from the commander-in-chief.'" Goldberg agreed with co-host Sara Haines, who said she didn't blame the National Guard or the Marines, but said they needed to be careful. "I think it's important we remember statistically the National Guard, the Marines and even these ICE agents… half of them probably have your political views. Half of them are probably pretty uncomfortable with these orders. They have families at home. They have bills to pay, and they're questioning should I walk away from this," Griffin pushed back. Goldberg agreed and then went on to say construction companies and more would have a harder time getting people to work without immigrants. Hostin insisted on Monday that being undocumented was not illegal during a conversation about the riots in article source: 'The View' co-host warns cast mates not to demonize ICE and military personnel over LA riots
