Listen to the article
Lawmakers Blast Pentagon for Communication Gaps During Nomination Hearing
Bipartisan frustration erupted during a Senate Armed Services Committee nomination hearing Tuesday, as lawmakers from both parties criticized the Department of Defense for what they described as systematic failures to communicate with Congress on critical national security matters.
The hearing, intended to review three key nominations for Pentagon leadership positions, quickly became a platform for senators to voice concerns about diminishing access to defense officials and information.
“I’ve noticed an unsettling trend this year. At times, the Pentagon officials have pursued policies that are not in accord with President Trump’s orders or seem uncoordinated within the administration,” said Committee Chair Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) in his opening remarks.
Wicker specifically highlighted last week’s Pentagon announcement that it would discontinue the rotational deployment of an infantry brigade combat team in Romania. He suggested this appeared to contradict President Trump’s public statements that U.S. troops would not be withdrawn from Europe.
The Pentagon defended the redeployment in a press release, stating it was “not an American withdrawal from Europe or a signal of lessened commitment to NATO and Article 5,” but rather “a positive sign of increased European capability and responsibility” as NATO allies meet “President Trump’s call to take primary responsibility for the conventional defense of Europe.”
Communication barriers between the Defense Department and Congress appear to have intensified following an October 15 memo from War Secretary Pete Hegseth and Deputy War Secretary Steve Feinberg. The directive, obtained by Breaking Defense, instructed Pentagon personnel to funnel all congressional interactions through the department’s central legislative affairs office.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell defended the policy change, saying it aimed to “improve accuracy and responsiveness in communicating with the Congress to facilitate increased transparency.” However, lawmakers view it as an attempt to limit information sharing.
Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) pressed nominee Austin Dahmer, who is being considered for assistant secretary of war for strategy, plans and capabilities, on what he characterized as a series of policy missteps. These included a March pause in U.S. aid to Ukraine, a canceled June meeting between Japanese and U.S. officials, and a review of the AUKUS agreement.
“It just seems like there’s this pigpen-like mess coming out of a policy shop that you don’t see from, say, intel and security and acquisition and sustainment,” Cotton said.
The criticism crossed party lines, with Senator Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) arguing that Congress wasn’t being treated as an “Article 1 co-equal branch,” while Committee ranking member Jack Reed (D-R.I.) criticized Dahmer for appearing to have a “veil of ignorance” about key decisions despite already performing deputy undersecretary duties since March.
Perhaps the most pointed criticism came from Senator Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), who specifically called out Elbridge Colby, the Pentagon’s top policy official, for being particularly difficult to reach. Sullivan challenged all three nominees to commit to returning senators’ calls the same day if confirmed.
“The guy you’re going to work for [Colby] has been really bad on this. The worst in the administration,” Sullivan said, adding that it was easier to communicate with Secretary Hegseth and President Trump than with Colby. “Man, I can’t even get a response and we’re on your team.”
The three nominees under consideration—Austin Dahmer for assistant secretary of war for strategy, plans and capabilities; Robert Kadlec for assistant secretary of defense for nuclear deterrence, chemical and biological defense policy; and Michael J. Borders Jr. for assistant secretary of the Air Force for energy, installations and environment—faced repeated questions about their commitment to improving congressional relations.
In response to the criticism, Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson defended the department’s congressional engagement, stating that “all DoW components engage with Congress on a very regular basis” and that the policy organization under Colby “has briefed Congress dozens of times, in both classified and unclassified settings.”
The contentious hearing highlights growing tensions between the legislative and executive branches over defense policy formulation and implementation. The outcome could potentially impact how the Senate proceeds with these and future Pentagon nominations as lawmakers seek to reassert congressional oversight authority over national security matters.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
This breakdown in communication between the Pentagon and Congress is concerning. Lawmakers need clear, timely information to make informed decisions on national security issues. The DoD should work to improve these vital coordination channels.
Absolutely, the military must be more proactive in keeping Congress in the loop. Transparent dialogue is essential for maintaining effective civilian control over the armed forces.
The Pentagon’s poor communication with Congress is concerning. Lawmakers need clear and consistent information to make informed decisions on national security matters. Hopefully the DoD can improve transparency and coordination going forward.
Agreed, a lack of communication between the military and Congress undermines oversight and accountability. The Pentagon should prioritize keeping lawmakers in the loop on key policy changes.
It’s troubling to see bipartisan frustration over the DoD’s failure to properly communicate with Congress. Transparent and regular dialogue is crucial for effective civilian control of the military.
You’re right, this breakdown in communication is concerning. Congress must be able to fulfill its constitutional duties, which requires the Pentagon to be more forthcoming.
The reported communication gaps between the Pentagon and Congress are quite troubling. Effective civil-military relations hinge on the military keeping policymakers fully informed. The DoD must do better to strengthen these important linkages.
You raise a good point. Lack of communication undermines Congress’ ability to provide oversight and guidance. The Pentagon should prioritize more transparent and consistent dialogue with lawmakers.
The Pentagon’s apparent policy misalignment with the White House is worrying. Clear communication is essential for the military to maintain public trust and support. Hopefully they can improve coordination going forward.
I agree, the lack of synchronization between the DoD and the administration is troubling. Effective civil-military relations depend on the Pentagon keeping policymakers fully informed.
This sounds like a concerning pattern of the Pentagon failing to keep Congress in the loop. Lawmakers need timely and accurate information to fulfill their oversight role. The DoD should work to strengthen these channels of communication.
Agreed, the Pentagon needs to be more proactive in sharing information and coordinating with Congress. Transparent dialogue is crucial for maintaining civilian control over the military.