Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth Faces Tough Questions at Congressional Hearing

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth appeared to acknowledge that the Pentagon has developed plans to take over Greenland and Panama by force if necessary, but refused to answer repeated questions at a hotly combative congressional hearing on Thursday about his use of Signal chats to discuss military operations.

Democratic members of the House Armed Services Committee repeatedly got into heated exchanges with Hegseth, with some of the toughest lines of questioning coming from military veterans as many demanded yes or no answers and he tried to avoid direct responses about his actions as Pentagon chief.

Plans for Taking Over Greenland and Panama

In one back-and-forth, Hegseth did provide an eyebrow-raising answer. Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., asked whether the Pentagon has developed plans to take Greenland or Panama by force if necessary. Hegseth said, “Our job at the Defense Department is to have plans for any contingency,” several times.

It is not unusual for the Pentagon to draw up contingency plans for conflicts that have not arisen, but his handling of the questions prompted a Republican lawmaker to step in a few minutes later. “It is not your testimony today that there are plans at the Pentagon for taking by force or invading Greenland, correct?” said Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio.

As Hegseth started to repeat his answer about contingency plans, Turner added emphatically, “I sure as hell hope that is not your testimony.” Hegseth responded, “We look forward to working with Greenland to ensure that it is secured from any potential threats.”

Use of Signal Chats to Discuss Military Operations

Hegseth’s use of two Signal chats to discuss details of the U.S. plans to strike Houthi rebels in Yemen with other U.S. leaders as well as members of his family prompted dizzying exchanges with lawmakers. Hegseth was pressed multiple times over whether or not he shared classified information and if he should face accountability if he did.

Hegseth argued that the classification markings of any information about those military operations could not be discussed with lawmakers. That became a quick trap, as Hegseth has asserted that nothing he posted — on strike times and munitions dropped in March — was classified.

His questioner, Rep. Seth Moulton, a Massachusetts Democrat and Marine veteran, jumped on the disparity. “You can very well disclose whether or not it was classified,” Moulton said. Hegseth responded, “What’s not classified is that it was an incredible, successful mission.”

Policies on Women in Uniform and Transgender Troops

Hegseth got into a sharp debate about whether women and transgender service members should serve in the military or combat jobs. He said he has worked to remove diversity programs and political correctness from the military, and that he has not politicized the military but simply wants the most capable troops.

Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., demanded to know if Hegseth believes that both men and women can pull a trigger, cause death, operate a drone or launch a missile. “It depends on the context,” Hegseth said, adding that “women carry equipment differently, a 155 round differently, a rucksack differently.”

Hegseth, who has previously said women “straight up” should not serve in combat, asserted that women have joined the military in record numbers under the current administration. He said the military “standards should be high and equal.”

Democrats Ask About Plans for Action Against Greenland and Panama

The White House has said multiple times that it wants to take control of the strategic, mineral-rich island nation of Greenland, long a U.S. ally. Those remarks have been met with flat rejections from Greenland’s leaders. “Greenland is not for sale,” Jacob Isbosethsen, Greenland’s representative to the U.S, said Thursday at a forum in Washington sponsored by the Arctic Institute.

In an effort not to show the Pentagon’s hand on its routine effort to have plans for everything, Hegseth danced around the direct question from Smith, leading to the confusion. “Speaking on behalf of the American people, I don’t think the American people voted . . . . because they were hoping we would invade Greenland,” Smith said.

Conclusion

The congressional hearing highlighted the tensions between the Pentagon and lawmakers over issues such as the use of Signal chats to discuss military operations, policies on women in uniform and transgender troops, and plans for taking over Greenland and Panama. The hearing also showed the deep divisions between Democrats and Republicans on these issues.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What did Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth say about plans to take over Greenland and Panama?

A: Hegseth appeared to acknowledge that the Pentagon has developed plans to take over Greenland and Panama by force if necessary, but refused to answer repeated questions about the details of these plans.

Q: What was the controversy over Hegseth’s use of Signal chats?

A: Hegseth used two Signal chats to discuss details of the U.S. plans to strike Houthi rebels in Yemen with other U.S. leaders as well as members of his family, prompting questions over whether he shared classified information and if he should face accountability if he did.

Q: What are the Pentagon’s policies on women in uniform and transgender troops?

A: Hegseth has worked to remove diversity programs and political correctness from the military, and has said that women “straight up” should not serve in combat. The Pentagon has also moved to ban transgender troops, prompting criticism from lawmakers and advocates.

Q: What did the White House say about taking control of Greenland?

A: The White House has said multiple times that it wants to take control of the strategic, mineral-rich island nation of Greenland, long a U.S. ally, but these remarks have been met with flat rejections from Greenland’s leaders.