Hegseth’s Pentagon Sees Major Military Leadership Turnover
The Pentagon has experienced an extraordinary series of departures among its highest-ranking military and civilian leaders since Pete Hegseth became defense secretary, with the latest exit involving Army Secretary Dan Driscoll.
Driscoll submitted his resignation Monday after months of tension with Hegseth, including disagreements surrounding the defense secretary's decisions to remove senior Army officers. His departure adds another prominent name to a growing list of military leaders who have left their positions early or been pushed out during the Trump administration.
The leadership changes have occurred while the United States remains deeply involved in military operations, including the ongoing conflict with Iran. That timing has intensified scrutiny over whether the rapid turnover could affect continuity, military planning and the Pentagon's ability to execute long-term priorities.
Dan Driscoll’s resignation adds to Pentagon turmoil
Driscoll became Army secretary in February 2025 after serving in the Army and as an Iraq War veteran. He entered the position with an agenda focused on troop readiness and modernization, including adapting the Army to technologies such as drones and artificial intelligence.
His relationship with Hegseth, however, deteriorated over time.
People familiar with the relationship told The Washington Post that the two men clashed professionally and personally. One source of tension reportedly involved Hegseth's view that Driscoll had not shown sufficient deference to the defense secretary.
The White House did not provide a specific reason for Driscoll's departure but praised his performance, saying he had been effective in advancing President Trump's agenda.
Driscoll's resignation is particularly significant because the Army is undergoing major changes in how it approaches modernization, weapons acquisition and future warfare.
Christopher Donahue left Army command in June
Another major departure came in June, when Army Gen. Christopher Donahue announced that he would step down as commander of U.S. Army forces in Europe and Africa.
Donahue had an extensive combat background. He previously commanded the elite Delta Force and played a significant role in U.S. operations against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. He later served in Afghanistan.
His departure followed a decision by Hegseth to block efforts to extend Donahue's military career, according to The Washington Post.
The decision was notable because senior commanders typically remain in major leadership positions for carefully planned periods. An early departure can create disruption not only at the command level but also among subordinate officers who depend on predictable leadership transitions.
John Phelan was abruptly removed from Navy post
Navy Secretary John Phelan became another prominent casualty of tensions inside the Pentagon when he was forced out in April after roughly 13 months in office.
Phelan, a billionaire businessman who had been appointed to oversee the Navy, reportedly clashed repeatedly with Hegseth and Deputy Defense Secretary Steve Feinberg.
The disagreements included issues involving shipbuilding and other major Navy priorities.
Phelan also had a close relationship with President Donald Trump. According to two U.S. officials cited by The Washington Post, Phelan sometimes took matters directly to Trump, a move that reportedly aggravated Hegseth.
Hung Cao subsequently became acting secretary of the Navy.
The episode illustrates a broader problem inside the Pentagon: disagreements over policy can become intertwined with questions about who has direct access to the president and how decisions should move through the Defense Department's chain of command.
Randy George was asked to leave Army leadership
Gen. Randy George, the Army's highest-ranking uniformed officer, was asked to retire in April, more than a year before his expected completion of a four-year assignment on the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The Pentagon did not publicly provide a reason for his departure. A statement from Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell thanked George for decades of service but did not explain why he was leaving.
George had been serving as Army chief of staff since 2023 and was responsible for one of the military's largest services during a period of major technological and organizational change.
Two other Army officials also left at the same time: Gen. David Hodne, who had been leading the service's Training and Transformation Command, and Maj. Gen. William Green Jr., the Army's chief of chaplains.
The removal of the Army's top uniformed officer was especially consequential because it came during wartime and while the Army was simultaneously trying to modernize its force.
Alvin Holsey departed Central and South America role
Navy Adm. Alvin Holsey also left his senior command earlier than expected.
Holsey had been responsible for U.S. military operations in Central and South America. His normally three-year assignment was cut short, with Hegseth announcing the departure without providing a reason.
Hegseth thanked Holsey for decades of military service and said he would retire.
The timing was significant because the United States was increasing military activity in the region, including operations involving alleged drug-trafficking boats.
The departure therefore represented another senior leadership transition at a time when U.S. forces were being used for expanding missions outside traditional combat theaters.
David Allvin left Air Force leadership early
The leadership shake-up began well before the latest departures.
In August 2025, the Air Force announced that Gen. David Allvin would retire roughly halfway through his four-year term as chief of staff.
According to a person familiar with the matter, Allvin had been informed that he would be asked to retire.
As chief of staff, Allvin was the Air Force's top uniformed officer. His early departure represented a major change at the service's highest level and preceded additional removals involving other senior officers.
The turnover has therefore not been confined to one military branch or one period of Hegseth's tenure.
Charles Q. Brown Jr. was dismissed in 2025
One of the most consequential departures occurred at the very top of the U.S. military hierarchy.
Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was dismissed in February 2025, approximately 16 months into what normally would have been a four-year term.
Brown had been nominated for the Joint Chiefs chairmanship by Trump during his first presidency and was elevated to the position by President Joe Biden in 2023.
Hegseth said at the time that the administration wanted new military leadership focused on the core mission of deterring, fighting and winning wars.
Hegseth also announced plans to remove several other senior officers, including Adm. Lisa Franchetti, who was the first woman to serve as chief of naval operations, and Gen. James Slife, a senior Air Force commander.
The dismissals marked an unusually broad reshaping of the military's senior leadership.
Why Hegseth is reshaping military leadership
Hegseth has argued that the Pentagon needs a different approach to military leadership and priorities.
His administration has emphasized combat readiness, warfighting capability and structural changes intended to make the military more effective against emerging threats.
Supporters view the leadership changes as an effort to remove officials who are not aligned with the administration's strategic priorities and to put commanders in place who are more willing to implement its agenda.
Critics, however, have questioned the speed and scale of the turnover.
The concern is not simply that individual generals or secretaries are leaving. It is that removing numerous senior officials in a relatively short period can eliminate institutional knowledge and disrupt established command relationships.
Leadership turnover raises questions about readiness
Military organizations depend heavily on continuity.
Senior officers often spend years developing expertise in particular commands, building relationships with allies and understanding complicated operational plans. When multiple senior leaders depart early, their replacements must quickly learn responsibilities that normally require substantial preparation.
That issue becomes even more important during periods of active conflict.
The Washington Post noted that Driscoll's resignation came as the war in Iran entered its seventh month.
The Pentagon therefore faces a difficult balancing act: implementing the administration's desired transformation while maintaining operational stability.
A leadership overhaul can potentially accelerate reform, but excessive turnover can also make it harder to maintain consistent strategy.
Pentagon faces a new era under Hegseth
The departures demonstrate the extent to which Hegseth has reshaped the Defense Department since taking office.
From the chairman of the Joint Chiefs to service chiefs, commanders and civilian secretaries, numerous senior figures have either been dismissed, encouraged to retire or left their positions earlier than expected.
Some departures have had stated reasons, while others have been announced without detailed public explanations.
For Hegseth, the changes represent an effort to create a Pentagon leadership team aligned with the Trump administration's priorities.
For the military as an institution, however, the scale of the turnover creates an important question: how quickly can a new generation of leaders take over without compromising continuity, readiness and institutional expertise?
With Driscoll now the latest senior official to leave, that question is becoming increasingly difficult to separate from the Pentagon's broader transformation.