In this week's solo episode, I examine a ProPublica investigation into Pete Hegseth's tenure as US Defence Secretary – and the catastrophic consequences of his \"maximum lethality\" doctrine. Here, I want to expand on some of the key themes we discussed.
The story begins with a programme called Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response (CHMR). It was a relatively new initiative, adopted after years of heavy civilian tolls in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Its mission was to station personnel within major regional commands to develop a picture of life on the ground in combat zones, aiding decision-making on military strikes and helping to avoid or minimise civilian harm.
Shortly after taking office, Hegseth polled the nation's top commanders about cutting the programme. He expected them to endorse his view that civilian security was \"woke\" and out of step with \"maximum lethality.\" Instead, every commander rebuffed him. Nine chose to preserve the programme; two asked to expand it.
Hegseth ignored them. He gutted the programme, cutting staff from nearly 200 to around two dozen, and reducing Central Command's team from 16 to one.
The results were predictable. In Yemen, an air campaign killed 153 civilians and wounded 243 others. In Iran, a US strike on a school killed more than 100 children.
Democratic senators and humanitarian groups questioned whether the cuts had contributed to the school tragedy. In a letter to Hegseth, 11 senators said the strike reflected the administration's \"broader disregard for the strategic, legal and moral imperatives to minimise civilian harm.\"
But this is not a regime that cares about international law. As I argue in the episode, the extreme right believes that international law has held the US back for years – that it has been fighting with one hand behind its back. The breaking of international law is not a regrettable byproduct of their policies; it is the mission.
In a speech last year, Hegseth announced that the \"Department of Defense is over\" and that the \"Department of War\" had been restored. He spoke of \"peace through strength\" and \"the warrior ethos.\" He told his enemies they would be \"crushed by violence, precision and the ferocity of the war department.\" In other words: FAFO.
But the reality is very different. The US military is under-resourced and overstretched in the Persian Gulf. It has lost its supply bases. It is facing critical shortages of everything from ammunition to toothpaste. The \"maximum lethality\" doctrine has produced exactly the opposite of what it promised.
As I discussed in my earlier conversation with Jasper Craven, Hegseth is a deeply damaged individual – a product of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and of the far-right culture war that has consumed the Republican Party. He is living out a violent adolescent fantasy, speaking in the language of Christian fascism and the annihilation of the enemy.
But he is also a symptom of a larger problem. Trump surrounds himself with incompetent ideologues because he does not want specialists and experts. He wants people who will tell him what he wants to hear, who will create chaos and distraction while he carries on looting the state. Hegseth is the perfect product of that system.
If you'd like to support this work, please consider joining us on Substack. We are migrating from Patreon – details in the show notes.
","author_name":"Nick Shepley"}