Steve Corbin is emeritus professor of marketing at the University of Northern Iowa and a contributing columnist to 246 newspapers and 48 social media platforms in 45 states, who receives no remuneration, funding, or endorsement from any for-profit business, nonprofit organization, political action committee, or political party.
Julie Roland published a compelling op-ed in the April 21 issue of The Fulcrum, titled “Hegseth, Trump and the desecration of the American Military.” Ms. Roland is a 10-year Lieutenant Commander for the U.S. Navy who was deployed as a helicopter pilot at the South China Sea and Persian Gulf.
While her research-based piece is focused on the changing secular aspect of our military, let’s explore how Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s firing of fifteen senior military officers may have on Department of Defense service employees and military’s readiness to protect America’s 348 million citizens.
Firings far exceed those during other recent presidencies
Examining the high-ranking military officer dismissals by previous modern-day presidents puts the recent actions in context.
During Ronald Reagan’s eight years as president, George H.W. Bush’s four-year term, George W. Bush’s eight-year presidency and Joe Biden’s four years at the helm, no executive-level military officer was dismissed. President Bill Clinton ousted just one senior officer, Harold Campbell.
During the eight years Barack Obama was president, Fox News reported he dismissed the following senior-level military personnel: Michael Carey, Michael Flynn, Charles Gaouette, Tim Giardina, James Mattis, and David McKiernan.
No high-ranking officer was dismissed during President Donald Trump’s first term. However, in just fifteen months of Trump 2.0, 15 defense leaders have been fired: Joseph Berger, Charles Blummer, C.Q. Brown, Shoshana Chatfield, Linda Fagan, Lisa Franchetti, Randy George, William Green, Jr., Timothy Haugh, David Hodne, Jeffrey Kruse, John Phelan, Milton Sands, Jennifer Short, and James Slife.
Effects, part one
A YouGov survey from last fall found a majority of Americans disapproved of the decision by Trump and Hegseth to summon all U.S. generals and admirals to a meeting in Virginia. Many military experts expressed concern at the time that the meeting could pose a national security risk.
A Partnership for Public Service survey of around 11,000 federal employees found their morale and satisfaction of Trump 2.0 endeavors have plunged substantially. The Military Times reported in March that “Defense Department civilian employee satisfaction and engagement scores declined markedly in 2025,” and “Only 9.1% of Army civilians agreed that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s political leadership team generates high levels of motivation in the workforce.”
Since Trump’s Iran War started, more military personnel are seeking out conscientious-objector advice and discharge options, NPR reported in April. The trend suggests rising unease, which could reduce the workforce over time (NPR). Calls to the GI Rights Hotline and related counseling services have risen sharply during the war as well. The same reporting cites military experts saying that firing high-ranking officers could send a negative signal to potential recruits.
Effects, part two
The immediate operational effect is not a collapse of U.S. operations, but a stress on the chain of command and confidence among troops and allies. Military analysts concur that removing high-caliber officers during Trump’s Iran War appears to be blame-shifting when the conflict is not going well.
Furthermore, the firing of upper-level officers during the Iran War signals tighter authoritarian control by Trump and less room for dissent inside the Pentagon.
Even before Trump returned to the White House, some military experts observed that “for service members and the public, the lack of transparency or even a full explanation for these military firings can significantly impact public trust in the military, affect morale and damage the integrity of military leadership.”
U.S. commanders in the Middle East depend on stable senior leadership to manage four factors: deterrence, air defense, intelligence sharing, and responses to attacks. Hence, the turnover of fifteen high-ranking military officers can complicate the continuity of military operations.
A leadership shake-up also makes it harder to maintain clear messaging to coalition partners. If allies think Washington’s senior team is politically unstable, they may delay cooperation, which weakens coordination within and among the eighteen countries that comprise the Middle East.
Other concerns, and a job for Congress
The concept of “escalation management” is a big concern to military commanders. When top military officers are removed during active operations, the process of managing the risks of military action to achieve specific goals while avoiding “redlines” that could trigger a catastrophic response is greatly compromised.
Americans of all political persuasions, Pentagon employees, and active military personnel have witnessed that both Trump and Hegseth are thin-skinned. They are not top-notch strategists or expert tacticians, and often make decisions by whim rather than short- and long-term well thought-out analysis and planning.
Firing so many high-ranking military officers in a short time can create four problems: lower trust inside the military force, more nervous senior military leadership, greater concern among lawmakers and the public about military readiness and democratic oversight uncertainty. A weaker chain of professional advice exists at exactly the moment when the Middle East is most volatile.
These developments cry out for nonpartisan Congressional oversight, which is the constitutional responsibility of the legislative branch. The country’s security depends on consistent military leadership guided by strategy, as opposed to the impulsive and erratic behavior of Trump and Hegseth. It is long past time for Congress to step up.
Top image: President Donald Trump with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth at a cabinet meeting on December 2, 2025. Official White House photo by Daniel Torok.