US Military

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Musk’s SpaceX is frontrunner to build Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ missile shield

      by

      Elon Musk’s SpaceX and two partners have emerged as frontrunners to win a crucial part of Donald Trump’s “Golden Dome” missile defense shield, six people familiar with the matter said.Musk’s rocket and satellite company is partnering with the software maker Palantir and the drone builder Anduril on a bid to build key parts of Golden Dome, the sources said, which has drawn significant interest from the technology sector’s burgeoning base of defense startups.In his 27 January executive order, Trump cited a missile attack as “the most catastrophic threat facing the United States”.All three companies were founded by entrepreneurs who have been major political supporters of Trump. Musk has donated more than a quarter of a billion dollars to help elect Trump, and now serves as a special adviser to the president working to cut government spending through his so-called “department of government efficiency”.Despite the Pentagon’s positive signals to the SpaceX group, some sources stressed the decision process for Trump’s Golden Dome was in its early stages. Its ultimate structure and who is selected to work on it could change dramatically in the coming months.The three companies met with top officials in the Trump administration and the Pentagon in recent weeks to pitch their plan, which would build and launch 400 to more than 1,000 satellites circling the globe to sense missiles and track their movement, sources said.A separate fleet of 200 attack satellites armed with missiles or lasers would then bring enemy missiles down, three of the sources said. The SpaceX group is not expected to be involved in the weaponization of satellites, these sources said.One of the sources familiar with the talks described them as “a departure from the usual acquisition process. There’s an attitude that the national security and defense community has to be sensitive and deferential to Elon Musk because of his role in the government.”SpaceX and Musk have declined to comment on whether Musk is involved in any of the discussions or negotiations involving federal contracts with his businesses.
      The Pentagon did not respond to detailed questions from Reuters, only saying it will deliver “options to the president for his decision in line with the executive order and in alignment with White House guidance and timelines”.The White House, SpaceX, Palantir and Anduril also did not respond to questions.In an unusual twist, SpaceX has proposed setting up its role in Golden Dome as a “subscription service” in which the government would pay for access to the technology, rather than own the system outright.The subscription model, which has not been previously reported, could skirt some Pentagon procurement protocols allowing the system to be rolled out faster, the two sources said. While the approach would not violate any rules, the government may then be locked into a subscription and lose control over its ongoing development and pricing, they added.Some Pentagon officials have expressed concerns internally about relying on the subscription-based model for any part of the Golden Dome, two sources told Reuters. Such an arrangement would be unusual for such a large and critical defense program.The US space force general Michael Guetlein has been in talks on whether SpaceX should be the owner and operator of its part of the system, the two sources said. Other options include having the US own and operate the system, or having the US own it while contractors handle operations. Guetlein did not respond to a request for comment.The retired air force general Terrence O’Shaughnessy, a top SpaceX adviser to Musk, has been involved in the company’s recent discussions with senior defense and intelligence leaders, the two sources said. O’Shaughnessy did not respond to requests for comment.Should the group led by SpaceX win a Golden Dome contract, it would be the biggest win for Silicon Valley in the lucrative defense contracting industry and a blow to the traditional contractors.However, those long-standing contractors, such as Northrop Grumman, Boeing and RTX are expected to be big players in the process as well, people familiar with the companies said. Lockheed Martin put up a webpage as a part of its marketing efforts.SpaceX is pitching for the part of the Golden Dome initiative called the “custody layer”, a constellation of satellites that would detect missiles, track their trajectory, and determine if they are heading toward the US, according to two sources familiar with SpaceX’s goals.SpaceX has estimated the preliminary engineering and design work for the custody layer of satellites would cost between $6bn and $10bn, two of the sources said. In the last five years, SpaceX has launched hundreds of operational spy satellites and more recently several prototypes, which could be retrofitted to be used for the project, the sources said.Reuters reviewed an internal Pentagon memo from the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, issued shortly before a 28 February deadline to senior Pentagon leadership asking them for initial Golden Dome proposals and calling for the “acceleration of the deployment” of constellations of satellites.The time frame could give SpaceX an advantage because of its fleet of rockets, including the Falcon 9, and existing satellites that could be repurposed for the missile defense shield, the people familiar with the plan said. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Hegseth adviser placed on leave after investigation into Pentagon leaks

      by

      One of US defense secretary Pete Hegseth’s leading advisers, Dan Caldwell, was reportedly put on leave and removed from the Pentagon on Tuesday following a Department of Defense investigation into leaks.Caldwell was escorted out of the Pentagon after being identified during the investigation and subsequently placed on administrative leave for “an unauthorized disclosure”, a source told Reuters.“The investigation remains ongoing,” the source, an official within the administration, said. The source did not go into detail about the alleged disclosure of information, and they did not reveal whether it was made to a journalist or another entity.A memo signed 21 March by Hegseth’s chief of staff, Joe Kasper, requested an investigation into “recent unauthorized disclosures of national security information involving sensitive communications”. The memo also mentions a potential “use of polygraphs in the execution of this investigation” but it is not currently known if Caldwell was subjected to a polygraph test.“I expect to be informed immediately if this effort results in information identifying a party responsible for an unauthorized disclosure, and that such information will be referred to the appropriate criminal law enforcement entity for criminal prosecution,” Kasper wrote in the letter.Caldwell has played a significant role as Hegseth’s adviser, with the defense secretary naming Caldwell as the best staff point of contact for the National Security Council as it prepared for the launch of strikes against the Houthis in Yemen in the leaked Signal chat published by the Atlantic last month.The decision to put Caldwell on administrative leave is reportedly separate from the wave of federal firings in the past few weeks under the Trump administration.Caldwell, a Marine Corps veteran, previously worked for Concerned Veterans for America, a non-profit group with strong ties to Republican lawmakers and promoting conservative policies.He had worked with Hegseth at that organization before he joined Hegseth’s defense department team. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump authorizes US military to take control of land at US-Mexico border

      by

      Donald Trump has authorized the military to take control of land at the US-Mexico border as part of the president’s broader efforts to crack down on undocumented immigration.The authorization came late on Friday in a memorandum from Trump to interior secretary Doug Burgum, defense secretary Pete Hegseth, homeland security secretary Kristi Noem and agricultural secretary Brooke Rollins, outlining new policies concerning military involvement at the US’s southern border.The memorandum, entitled “Military Mission for Sealing the Southern Border of the United States and Repelling Invasions”, allows the US’s armed forces to “take a more direct role” when it comes to securing the boundary in question.“Our southern border is under attack from a variety of threats,” the order claimed. “The complexity of the current situation requires that our military take a more direct role in securing our southern border than in the recent past.”The memorandum added that the Department of Defense should be given jurisdiction to federal lands, including the Roosevelt Reservation, a 60ft-wide strip that stretches over California, Arizona and New Mexico. Doing that would give troops stationed there the legal right to detain immigrants accused of trespassing on what in effect is an elongated base – and unauthorized immigrants would be held in custody until they could be turned over to immigration agents.Military activities that could be carried out on federal land include “border-barrier construction and emplacement of detection and monitoring equipment”, according to the memorandum.After 45 days, the defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, will assess the “initial phase” of the order. But at any time, Hegseth could extend the amount of federal land included in the memorandum.The ordered military takeover excludes Native American reservations, according to the memorandum.Friday’s order is the latest step from Trump in his administration’s ongoing focus on immigration enforcement, which has involved declaring a national emergency on the southern border.On Thursday, a US federal judge ruled that the Trump administration was allowed to require people who are in the country but not citizens to register with the federal government, a requirement that advocates say hasn’t been universally implemented since it was enacted as a law in the 1940s.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe ruling comes after the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced the new requirement on 25 February, adding that those who failed to report could face fines or possible prison time.The DHS’s announcement was widely seen as a workaround of the Posse Comitatus Act, a federal law that bars US military troops from participating in most civilian law enforcement actions.One of the purported justifications for militarizing the US border most commonly cited by Trump and his Republican colleagues is that people crossing the border with Mexico without permission carry much of the fentanyl sold in the US. Yet official statistics show 90% of convicted fentanyl peddlers are US citizens. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Panama opposition party accuses US of ‘camouflaged invasion’

      by

      Panamanian opposition politicians have accused the US of launching a “camouflaged invasion” of the country, amid simmering discontent over the government’s handling of the diplomatic crisis.After a three-day visit by the US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump appeared to confirm that US military personnel had been deployed to the Central American country on Thursday, telling reporters: “We’ve moved a lot of troops to Panama.”Hegseth said that the US would increase its military presence at three former US bases in the country to “secure the Panama canal from Chinese influence”.The last US military bases in Panama were vacated in 1999 as a condition of the 1977 Torrijos-Carter treaties to hand the canal to Panamanian ownership. Under the canal’s neutrality treaty, no foreign power can “maintain military forces, defense sites and military installations within its national territory”, and the US comments have prompted outrage in Panama.“This is a camouflaged invasion,” said Ricardo Lombana, the leader of the opposition Other Way Movement. “An invasion without firing a shot, but with a cudgel and threats.”At a Wednesday press conference to announce the signing of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the US, Panama’s minister of public security, Frank Abrego, said the agreement would not impinge on his nation’s sovereignty and that the country would not accept military bases.However, a full text of the MOU included aerial photos of Fort Sherman, Rodman naval base and Howard air force base, with areas outlined for “training”, “humanitarian activities” and the “installation of US property”.The Panamanian government says they are not “military bases” and that the deal is temporary, but opposition parties have rejected such claims.“If you have an installation which is for use of foreign soldiers and they have control over what happens inside – and Panama has to ask in advance to enter – that’s a military base,” said Lombana.For many Panamanians, the return of US armed forces – even for supposed “joint operations” – will bring back uncomfortable memories of 1989’s Operation Just Cause, when American troops killed thousands of civilians.A second agreement allows US navy ships to be reimbursed for the fees they pay to the canal. That preferential treatment would appear to violate the neutrality treatment and could open the door to further attempts to negotiate down the fees charged by the canal.On Thursday a local lawyer filed a legal case against the Panamanian president, José Raúl Mulino, accusing him of “crimes against the international personality of the state”.Frustration is growing over the government’s handling of the diplomatic crisis. Since Trump declared his plan to “take back” the Panama canal on his 20 January inauguration speech, all communication on the topic has been through Mulino and the details of negotiations kept largely secret.This has led to serious differences in the US and Panamanian accounts of those negotiations. When the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, visited in early February, Mulino told press that the meeting had been “very cordial” and that the canal was not under threat. Later, however, Rubio said the situation around the canal was “unacceptable” and Trump continued to call for the return of the canal.The latest example came on Tuesday when two different statements concerning Hegseth’s meeting with Mulino were published. In the Panamanian version, Hegseth was said to have recognized Panama’s “inalienable sovereignty” over the canal, but those words were absent from the secretary of defense’s statement and Hegseth refused to acknowledge Panamanian ownership of the canal at Wednesday’s press conference. Panama says that the US omitted the phrase from the agreed joint statement.Mulino has also opted to avoid engaging with other countries – such as Canada and Mexico – to gain international support for his country’s cause.On Thursday the local chapter of Transparency International requested on X that Mulino “inform the country of all the details of what is happening, the agreements in process and the pressures he is receiving if that is the case. The country requires transparency in order to achieve unity against this threat to our sovereignty.”Even before Hegseth’s visit, Mulino had faced heavy local criticism for offering concessions to the US without gaining firm assurances over the future of the canal.Two-thirds of Panamanians disapprove of the way he is running the country. In addition to the diplomatic crisis he has passed an unpopular social security reform and angered environmentalists by opening talks with a copper mine closed down in 2023 due to popular protest. He lacks the backing of many of his party’s deputies in congress who are loyal to his political patron, Ricardo Martinelli, who has been residing in the Nicaraguan embassy to escape corruption charges and recently saw his attempt to gain exile in that country rejected.Popular demonstrations against US policy and the handling of the government are expected on Saturday. More

    • 100 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Pentagon chief says US could ‘revive’ Panama bases

      by

      The US defence secretary has floated the idea of the country’s troops returning to Panama to “secure” its strategically vital canal, a suggestion quickly shot down by the Central American country’s government.Pete Hegseth suggested during a visit to Panama that “by invitation” the US could “revive” military bases or naval air stations and rotate deployments of its troops to an isthmus the US invaded 35 years ago.He also said his country was seeking free passage through the canal for its navy ships – which Donald Trump had said were “severely overcharged and not treated fairly in any way, shape or form”.Trump, since coming to power in January, has repeatedly claimed that China has too much influence over the canal, which handles about 40% of US container traffic and 5% of world trade.His administration has vowed to “take back” control of the strategic waterway that the US funded, built and controlled until 1999.Hegseth suggested on Wednesday the former US military bases that dot Panama could be used again to host American troops.He said a deal signed with Panama this week was an “opportunity to revive, whether it’s the military base, naval air station, locations where US troops can work with Panamanian troops to enhance capabilities and cooperate in a rotational way”.While Hegseth cited the possibility of joint exercises, the mention of a rotational force was likely to raise the hackles of Panamanians, for whom sole ownership of the canal is a source of national pride.The US has long participated in military exercises in Panama. However, a longer-term rotational force – such as the force the USmaintains in Darwin, Australia – is politically toxic for Panama’s centre-right leader, José Raúl Mulino.His government quickly slapped down the idea. “Panama made clear, through President Mulino, that we cannot accept military bases or defence sites,” said Panama’s security minister, Frank Abrego, in a joint public appearance with Hegseth.Hegseth also said the US was seeking an agreement under which its warships could pass through the canal “first, and free”.Jose Ramón Icaza, Panama’s minister for canal affairs, said: “We will seek a mechanism by which warships and auxiliary ships can have a compensation system for services, that is, a way to make them cost-neutral but not free.”The independent Panama Canal Authority (PCA) that manages the waterway said on Wednesday that it was seeking a “cost-neutral scheme” to compensate services rendered in security matters for warship tolls.Under current treaties, the canal is open to all countries and vessels must pay the same rates according to their capacity and cargo, regardless of their country of origin or destination.The PCA said the US recognised Panamanian sovereignty over the waterway, although Hegseth did not mention it in the news conference.The Pentagon chief’s two-day visit has been peppered with comments about China and its influence in Latin America. He said the US was not looking for war with China but would counter Beijing’s “threats” to the region.“We do not seek war with China. And war with China is certainly not inevitable. We do not seek it in any form,” Hegseth said. “But together, we must prevent war by robustly and vigorously deterring China’s threats in this hemisphere,” the former Fox News anchor said.China hit back after Hegseth’s comments, saying Washington officials “maliciously attacked China … exposing the US’s bullying nature”.Trump has zeroed in on the role of a Hong Kong company that has operated ports at either end of the canal linking the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans for decades.Hegseth asserted that China-based companies were also capturing Latin American land and infrastructure in strategic sectors, such as energy and telecommunications, and that China had too large a military presence in the hemisphere.“Make no mistake, Beijing is investing and operating in this region for military advantage and unfair economic gain,” he said.Under pressure from the White House, Panama has accused the Hong Kong-backed Panama Ports Company of failing to meet its contractual obligations and pushed for it to pull out of the country.The company rejected an audit on Wednesday that suggested it had failed to pay $1.2bn due under its concession.The ports’ parent company, CK Hutchison, announced last month a deal to offload 43 ports in 23 countries – including its two on the Panama canal – to a consortium led by the US asset manager BlackRock for $19bn in cash. A furious Beijing has since announced an antitrust review of the deal.The US invaded Panama in 1989 to oust the dictator Manuel Noriega, killing more than 500 Panamanians and razing parts of the capital. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Under Trump and Musk, billionaires wield unprecedented influence over US national security

      by

      Just days before Donald Trump’s inauguration in January, Blue Origin, the space company owned by billionaire Jeff Bezos, launched its New Glenn rocket, named for John Glenn, the Mercury astronaut who was the first American to orbit the Earth. Around 2am on 16 January, the 30-story rocket powered by seven engines blasted off into the Florida night from Cape Canaveral’s historic launch complex 36, which first served as a Nasa launch site in 1962.The flight’s end was marred by a failure to bring the booster rocket back for further use, but the successful launch and orbit still marked a watershed moment for Blue Origin in its bid to compete with SpaceX, the company owned by Elon Musk, for dominance over American spy satellite operations. During the Trump administration, it is likely that both companies will play significant roles in placing spy satellites into Earth orbit, which could mean that the United States intelligence community will be beholden to both Bezos and Musk to handle the single most complex and expensive endeavor in modern espionage.In fact, Musk and Bezos are in a position during the Trump administration to personally exert significant influence over the direction of the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and the rest of the US national security apparatus. The two pro-Trump billionaires have already been awarded massive contracts with the US intelligence community, including some that predate Trump’s first term in office.The emergence of Musk, Bezos and a handful of other pro-Trump billionaires as key players in US intelligence marks a radical change in US spy operations, which have traditionally been controlled by career government officials working closely with a few longstanding defense and intelligence contractors, giant corporations such as Lockheed Martin, RTX and Northrop Grumman that are adept at lobbying both Democrats and Republicans in Washington. But with Musk, Bezos and other pro-Trump Silicon Valley figures gaining an edge through their personal ties to Trump, civil servants in the intelligence community may be reluctant to deny them ever-larger contracts, especially since Trump has already fired several inspectors general who investigated Musk’s businesses in other areas of the government.Anticipating big rewards, Musk is reportedly joining forces with other pro-Trump billionaires to try to carve up the defense and intelligence business. SpaceX is working with Palantir, a hi-tech data analytics intelligence contractor co-founded by Peter Thiel, one of the most prominent rightwing figures in Silicon Valley; Anduril, a new defense contractor founded by 32-year-old pro-Trump tech bro Palmer Luckey; and several other Silicon Valley firms to form a consortium geared towards loosening the grip of the defense industry’s traditional players.Tech leaders eager to get into intelligence contracting have long complained that the business has become so consolidated around a few big players that it is nearly impossible for outsiders to compete, leading to a lack of innovation. “Consolidation bred conformity,” argued Shyam Sankar, the chief technology officer of Palantir, in a widely read public memo, The Defense Reformation.Swapping one oligarchy for anotherIt is hard to separate Silicon Valley’s calls for breaking up the oligarchy now controlling the defense and intelligence business from the eagerness of pro-Trump tech bros to grab as much power and cash as possible while creating a new oligarchy of their own.“The idea of overturning the contracting process did intrigue me, but now, under Trump, I think it is just about greed,” observed Greg Treverton, a former director of the National Intelligence Council, the intelligence community’s top analytical arm. “Now, with Trump, it is mostly about money and connections.”In the eyes of their critics, tech entrepreneurs offer a simplistic, black-and-white picture of the defense and intelligence business in which Silicon Valley conveniently has all the answers.“Beware the instant expert,” said Peter Singer, a defense analyst at the New America Foundation. “It’s like they are saying ‘I watched a YouTube video and now I know everything.’ They have this narrative that only Silicon Valley can drive innovation.”Elon Musk, satellite spymasterAs he eagerly slashes and burns through the ranks of federal employees with his Doge apparatus, Musk has emerged as the most powerful and polarizing figure in the Trump administration. But what is less well known is that Musk has also gained an influential role in the US intelligence community despite never having served inside the spy world.Musk’s SpaceX has already become one of the main rocket contractors launching American spy satellites and is seeking to overcome the edge held by United Launch Alliance, a joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin, the traditional giant in the niche. In addition, Starlink, Musk’s commercial satellite communication network, is playing a critical role in US foreign policy, providing internet service in remote regions of the world including in Ukraine, where it operates a communications network for the Ukrainian army. Starlink’s role in the Ukraine war has placed Musk squarely in the middle of the dispute between Trump and the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Meanwhile, questions about whether Musk is assuming a dual role as both a player in Trump’s national security policymaking and a major contractor grew after he received a private briefing at the Pentagon on 21 March and visited the CIA headquarters 10 days later.SpaceX has a head start over Blue Origin in the spy satellite business, and Musk has a big lead over Bezos in Trump world. But Blue Origin and Bezos are working hard to catch up in both.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionBezos seeks to add to classified cloud contractDuring his first term, Trump repeatedly attacked Bezos over negative stories that were published in the Washington Post, which Bezos owns, and as revenge threatened Amazon’s business dealings with the US Postal Service. Since the 2024 election, though, Bezos has turned himself into a Trump booster, lavishing praise and large donations on the president while also working to transform the Washington Post’s opinion page, which he says should focus on “personal liberties and free markets”.Bezos’s move into an alliance with Trump has put him in a position to expand his reach into the spy satellite business while also protecting the large stake he already holds in other aspects of intelligence. The billionaire, the second-richest person in the world after Musk, has been involved in the spy world for more than a decade through Amazon Web Services, a cloud computing subsidiary of Amazon, which Bezos founded and where he remains executive chair. Amazon Web Services has managed the CIA’s classified cloud since it won a $600m contract with the spy agency in 2013, and dramatically expanded its intelligence role when it was awarded a $10bn contract to manage the NSA’s classified cloud in 2022 through a program code-named “Wild and Stormy”.Palmer Luckey and Silicon Valley’s clique of young defense contractorsPlenty of other Silicon Valley billionaires are also seeking to crowd into Washington alongside Musk and Bezos. Palantir’s Thiel is a mentor of the vice-president, JD Vance, and his firm has a longstanding relationship with the intelligence community that is likely to expand under Trump. The CIA’s investment firm, In-Q-Tel, was one of the early backers of Palantir after its 2003 founding, and the company has had a major role in the development of data integration and data analytics systems for the intelligence community. Palantir is now seeking a broader role in developing AI for both the Pentagon and the intelligence community.Luckey, who made his name as a virtual reality entrepreneur by founding Oculus, has become a prominent new face at the intersection of Trump world and national security. Luckey’s Anduril now has a contract with the US army to develop battlefield virtual reality headsets, which would allow data to be sent directly to soldiers while also allowing them to control unmanned drones and other weapons. In addition, Anduril won a $642m contract with the Marine Corps to develop countermeasures against small drones in March. Luckey first supported Trump in 2016, when that was an unpopular position in Silicon Valley, but now that Trump is back, he has said that he’s on an “I told you so tour”, trumpeting his America-first political views.Luckey said in a recent interview: “I don’t think the United States needs to be the world police. It needs to be the world’s gun store.”Google once committed to not building artificial intelligence for weapons or surveillance in a watershed moment of divorcing tech from the defense and intelligence industry. Earlier this year, though, the company scrapped that pledge. The campaign by the tech bros to win bigger roles for themselves in defense and intelligence represents a return to Silicon Valley’s roots. Hi-tech originally grew in northern California because of its early connections to the military and defense industrial base in the region, observed Margaret O’Mara, a tech industry historian at the University of Washington.“Silicon Valley has always been in the business of war,” O’Mara said. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘Streamline’ or ‘lifeline’? Wyoming veterans divided over Trump’s VA cuts

      by

      Birgitt Paul has worked as a nurse at the Veterans Affairs (VA) in Cheyenne, Wyoming, for over a decade – five years on the floor, five and a half coordinating at-home care for veterans in the region.Like many people working at the agency, she has her gripes with the system: it could be more efficient, more streamlined, easier to navigate for the veterans in need of its care, and better for the 400,000 employees that keep its wheels spinning.But Donald Trump’s order for all federal employees to return to the office, coupled with an expected 80,000 cuts at the agency amid sledgehammer-style layoffs at the so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge), makes Paul worry that this top-down style of reform will have dire consequences for US veterans.There are many people with strong ideas of how to make the VA more efficient and cut costs, she argued.“But that’s not what they’re doing right now.”Wyoming is a land of superlatives. It’s the US’s least populated state, with under 600,000 residents. It’s possibly the country’s most conservative, going to Trump by the widest margin for three elections in a row. And it has the highest share of veterans in the lower 48 states. More than 9% of the state’s adult civilian population were veterans in 2022, and it has two large VA centers: one in the north Wyoming town of Sheridan, and the other in Cheyenne, the state capital.The state’s strong support for the president does not mean a unanimous endorsement from its veterans for Trump’s proposed VA cuts. In more than a dozen interviews, veterans said they were eager for reforms at the VA and across the military, saying they wanted less bureaucracy, and wished that policy that affected veterans had more input from veterans themselves. Some veterans said they believed Doge’s cuts would bring drastic benefits at no loss to veterans. But many feared veterans would lose a lifeline in a state whose veteran suicide rate is double the national average. They feared VA services would be increasingly privatized, hamstringing care, and were worried about far-reaching economic impacts to the region.Bobby Gray, who served in the army for 11 years, seeks care at the Cheyenne VA, and fears the impact of layoffs on his healthcare. Sitting at a round wooden table in a Cheyenne bar, Gray sipped on a soda and minced no words about the importance of the VA in his life.“They’re my lifeline,” said Gray. “I wouldn’t be here without the VA. I’d have been gone a long time ago.”Dwight Null, who served for two years in the army, concurred the agency plays a singular role in the life of many US veterans, offering a level of cultural understanding not available in the private sector.“A high percentage [of VA employees] are veterans in one service or the other, or have family that were veterans, or have worked at the VA working with veterans long enough that they understand our culture,” said Null, who now helps veterans access resources and care. “If you’re sitting down with a therapist that doesn’t know what a combat veteran went through, there’s not much value in it.”View image in fullscreenTrevor Smith served in the air force for 18 years and gets his care through the VA as well. Sitting beside his wife in their north Cheyenne home, a cane resting against his leg, Smith talked about his second suicide attempt.“I got one of my guns out and charged around and put it to my head, and she fought me and called the police,” Smith said.Smith credits the VA’s care with keeping him alive. He worries about other traumatized veterans that have not had the same luck accessing care, and said that vets can be a “difficult” population to care for. If left to the private sector, Smith’s thoughts on behalf of vets and their caregivers are simple: “We’re fucked.”“I have been extremely fortunate. I have very good care, I have very good people. And even with that, you can still get to a point, even with the best care, where you have a gun to your head,” Smith said. “People that are barely holding their heads above water now. What’s gonna happen if they take some of that away?”Rosemarie Harding served 11 years in the army and 22 in the national guard and represents Laramie county on the Wyoming Veterans Commission, a government board whose mission is “to develop, enhance and promote programs, services, and benefits to Wyoming veterans”. Speaking in her own capacity, Harding wondered what alternatives would exist for veterans who would struggle to access care under layoffs.“If they don’t have the VA, where are they going to go? Medicaid, which the state of Wyoming did not expand and hasn’t expanded?” Harding said.When Doge looks for areas to cut, Paul, the nurse, worries that they will target at-home care, which she says is a vital VA service. She estimated that more than half of the female veterans she works with have sexual trauma, and the VA can accommodate this in a way the private sector cannot.“There are women who need help who won’t accept it from a [private] agency because they don’t know who’s coming into their house,” Paul said. “So I have a program where you can pick your caregivers that you trust.”‘There is a need for these cuts’Other veterans said that they were not worried about the cuts affecting their care. Arthur Braten served eight years in the navy and eight in the army. He works at the VA as an HVAC tech, and is a disabled veteran himself, receiving comprehensive benefits. He said he is not worried about job security or losing access to his care, and supports the cuts.“There is a need for these cuts. Biggest reason is, I believe that the VAs are top-heavy,” Braten said, leaning on the counter in an east Cheyenne bar. “I think all these cuts are going to streamline the VA and in the long run, it’s going to give us better-quality people and better care.”Braten used his workplace as an example, saying he saw overstaffing in high departments but vacancies in his own role. Braten voiced support for Doge and disdain for the “corruption they’ve found … Our tax money went to Afghanistan, it went to all these other countries for stupid, stupid things.”He said many people in his surroundings felt similarly: “I haven’t come across a person yet that has been against it.”A man in a yellow University of Wyoming sweatshirt took a break from ordering a drink to interrupt Braten’s interview.“I’m against it. Now you’ve come across me,” the man said.Dan, another disabled veteran (“I’m all beat up”), is firmly in Braten’s camp. Dan served for 24 years in the air force, and is not worried about his VA healthcare access in the face of layoffs , or about his current job at a separate federal agency. “I do believe that I’m going to get the care that I need,” he said.“America got itself in such a deficit that it takes extreme measures to fix the damage,” Dan said.Dan refers to himself as a “sacrificial lamb”. He was hired remotely, and the federally mandated return to office will split him from his family and push him to a Denver suburb 100 miles (160km) south. He will rent an apartment, receive an increase in pay, and believes his productivity will suffer – “there’s no efficiency in that regard.”But he stands behind the cuts. His views were shaped by what he considered large amounts of wasteful spending in the military, he said.View image in fullscreenLeadership would tell him: “If you do not spend this amount of money, you’re not going to get it next year,” Dan said, or “if you don’t spend our budget, if you don’t spend a million and a half dollars, and you only spend $500,000, then next year, we’re only gonna get $500,000. So you need to make up for the difference.”‘Everybody doesn’t know what to expect’Eric, a 24-year army veteran (“I’ve been blown up four times and shot twice”), and an employee at the Cheyenne VA, speaks bluntly and has no fondness for the federal bureaucracy or its spending habits. But the Doge cuts and impending VA layoffs, follow a structure he cannot get behind. He wants to see more input from veterans and less from inside the beltline, he said.“It never works top-down,” said Eric, who asked the Guardian to only use his first name due to his current VA employment. “I wish I could have 10 minutes alone with [VA] secretary [Doug] Collins. It might cost me my job, but I really don’t care. Let me put together a team out of the VA employees that are there and figure out what the hell is the problem at the VA and fix it.”Eric spoke acidly about seesawing emails from Doge creating an atmosphere of insecurity at the department, and said the cuts would have the opposite of the advertised effect, with the VA’s best doctors moving to the higher-paying private sector.“They love the veterans, but goddamn, they’ve got to look out for their families. They’ve got to look out for their mortgages. They’ve got to look out for what happens when all of this goes to hell and everybody’s looking for a job at the only other hospital in town,” Eric said. “And the ones that we want to leave, the ones that aren’t performing, the underperformers, they’re digging in like ticks.”Robert, another Cheyenne VA staffer and 20-year air force veteran, said the atmosphere after the initial “Fork in the road” email has been heavy.“Everybody doesn’t know what to expect. I feel like every day, you’re worried about checking your email because you don’t know what it’s gonna say,” said Robert, whom the Guardian is identifying by his first name.Robert’s wife is a federal employee who was hired remotely. While Robert has some confidence that he will survive the VA layoffs, his wife’s in-person office would be in Bethesda, Maryland, which Robert dryly labels “a bit of a commute”.“What we had thought was going to be the next 10 years has vastly changed,” Robert said.Harding, at the Wyoming Veterans Commission, worries about the economic impact on Cheyenne, a city of 65,000 that is deeply dependent on the military. Along with the VA, the city boasts FE Warren air force base, as well two national guard outposts.View image in fullscreen“Cutting all those positions is going to have an immediate economic impact on the city, I don’t think that those people can readily be absorbed by the local economy,” Harding said.Lee Filer, a Republican state representative, was born on FE Warren and served for eight years in the Wyoming air national guard. Filer has economic concerns about reducing the VA’s workforce and benefits, but practical ones as well – would military recruitment suffer further if young people enlisting were skeptical that the government would take care of them?“They sign a contract. They’re entitled to all these different benefits. And if we’re going to take care of them, if they get hurt or anything else, whatever happens, we’re here to take care of you as the American people in a society,” Filer said. “But all it takes is a strike of a pen and no Congress to push back and guess what? Now they can lose that.”Filer emphasized that he believes waste exists, and supports “streamlining” the federal government. But he wants to see a more methodical approach, and worries Congress doesn’t have the political willpower.“They don’t want to cross the president in any way, whether because of primary threats or fear of losing re-election,” Filer said. “But we need to get past that. If we look at our federal delegation, they all ran on supporting veterans.”When Paul, the VA nurse, hears politicians decry soaring VA costs, she thinks of widespread rallying behind the Pact Act, which passed in Congress with large bipartisan support, and was one of the largest increases to the VA budget in recent years.Paul said she has been vocal about her concerns over Doge and potential VA privatization, to the point that she’s been advised by higher-ups to not say so over government channels. She has “come to peace” with the prospect of retaliation for having “spoken truth”, she said, but she won’t accept being told, like probationary employees in earlier Doge layoffs, that she is being fired for poor performance. After the initial February firings, Paul and her colleagues printed out their performance evaluations, just in case.“The evaluation I have is outstanding,” Paul said. “So if you’re gonna try to fire me because I had poor performance, I will be suing you.” More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats decry reported dismissal of NSA director Tim Haugh

      by

      Top congressional Democrats are protesting against the firing of Gen Tim Haugh as director of the National Security Agency (NSA), with one lawmaker saying the decision “makes all of us less safe”.Haugh and his civilian deputy at the NSA, Wendy Noble, have been dismissed from their roles, the Washington Post reported late on Thursday, with CNN reporting likewise, both outlets citing multiple unnamed officials and other senior sources close to the matter who had requested anonymity.US defense department spokesperson Sean Parnell on Friday thanked Haugh “for his decades of service to our nation, culminating as US cyber command commander and National Security Agency director”.“We wish him and his family well,” Parnell’s statement said, confirming Haugh’s departure without elaborating on why.The ousting had not been officially confirmed by the government or the individuals by Friday afternoon, but the NSA website had been updated with both Haugh and Noble no longer listed in their roles.Lt Gen William J Hartman is now listed there as acting director of the NSA and Sheila Thomas as his acting deputy.Haugh also headed US Cyber Command, which coordinates the Pentagon’s cybersecurity operations. Hartman has been appointed acting head of the command, according to its website.The NSA notified congressional leadership and top lawmakers of the national security committees of Haugh’s firing late on Wednesday but did not give reasons, the Associated Press reported, citing a source. Senior military leaders were only informed on Thursday, the news agency said.The NSA declined to comment and referred the Guardian to the Department of Defense, which said it would provide more information when it became available.Outrage from critics was fulsome. Senator Mark Warner, vice-chair of the Senate intelligence committee, said in a statement: “General Haugh has served our country in uniform, with honor and distinction, for more than 30 years. At a time when the United States is facing unprecedented cyber threats … how does firing him make Americans any safer?”Representative Jim Himes, the ranking member on the House intelligence committee, said he was “deeply disturbed by the decision”.“I have known General Haugh to be an honest and forthright leader who followed the law and put national security first – I fear those are precisely the qualities that could lead to his firing in this administration,” Himes added. “The intelligence committee and the American people need an immediate explanation for this decision, which makes all of us less safe.”Senator Jack Reed, a Democrat from Rhode Island, said Donald Trump “has given a priceless gift to China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea by purging competence from our national security leadership”.“In addition to the other military leaders and national security officials Trump has fired, he is sending a chilling message throughout the ranks: don’t give your best military advice, or you may face consequences,” Reed added.Earlier on Thursday, Donald Trump said he had fired “some” White House National Security Council officials, a move that came a day after far-right activist Laura Loomer raised concerns directly to him about staff loyalty.Loomer, during her Oval Office conversation with Trump, urged the president to purge staffers she deemed insufficiently loyal to his “make America great again” agenda, according to several people familiar with the matter. They all spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive personnel manner.Loomer posted on X in the first moments of Friday morning: “NSA Director Tim Haugh and his deputy Wendy Noble have been disloyal to President Trump. That is why they have been fired.”She added a screed about how they were hired by Joe Biden during his presidency and were, she said, “hand picked” by Mark Milley, then chair of the joint chiefs of staff, the most senior uniformed officer in the military. Milley served Trump in his first term in the White House but has since turned fiercely critical, calling the president dangerous and “fascist to the core”, and was fired in the early days of Trump’s second term. The 47th US president then also revoked Milley’s security clearance. Biden, the 46th US president, had preemptively pardoned Milley in his final days in office, following threats from Trump that the veteran was treasonous and should face the death penalty.Loomer added Haugh was “referred for firing” and Noble was Haugh’s “Obama loving protégé” who was nominated by Biden and promoted diversity, equity and inclusion at the agency. Loomer noted: “This is called VETTING”.She also said Noble was a protege of James Clapper, director of national intelligence in Barack Obama’s presidency, and said Clapper should be in prison.Trump spoke to reporters on Air Force One on Thursday afternoon after the earlier firing of six national security agency staffers below the level of Haugh and Noble, based on recommendations from Loomer, a extremist cheerleader for Trump and a white supremacist with an incendiary social media presence who has no political experience outside of unsuccessfully running for US Congress in Florida twice.“Always we’re letting go of people,” Trump said. “People that we don’t like or people that we don’t think can do the job or people that may have loyalties to somebody else.”The firings come as Trump’s national security adviser Mike Waltz continues to fight calls for his ouster after using the publicly available encrypted Signal app to discuss planning for the sensitive 15 March military operation targeting Houthi militants in Yemen.Warner said on Thursday night: “It is astonishing, too, that President Trump would fire the nonpartisan, experienced leader of the National Security Agency while still failing to hold any member of his team accountable for leaking classified information on a commercial messaging app – even as he apparently takes staffing direction on national security from a discredited conspiracy theorist in the Oval Office.”Haugh met last month with Elon Musk, whose so-called “department of government efficiency”, or Doge, has roiled the federal government by slashing personnel and budgets at dozens of agencies. In a statement, the NSA said the meeting was intended to ensure both organizations were “aligned” with the new administration’s priorities.Haugh had led both the NSA and Cyber Command since 2023. Both departments play leading roles in the nation’s cybersecurity. The NSA also supports the military and other national security agencies by collecting and analysing a vast amount of data and information globally.Cyber Command is known as America’s first line of defence in cyberspace and also plans offensive cyber-operations for potential use against adversaries. Defense secretary Pete Hegseth recently ordered the office to pause some offensive cyber-operations against Russia, in another sign of how Trump’s administration is transforming the work of the nation’s intelligence community.Renée Burton, a cybersecurity expert previously working for the NSA, told CNN the removal of the personnel was “alarming” and the disruption would “expose the country to new risk”.The Associated Press contributed reporting More