Leaked Attack Plans Lay Bare National Security Divisions

When the military campaign—the largest of President Donald Trump’s second term so far—began four days later, Goldberg knew what to expect. The White House later confirmed the journalist’s account. 

The fallout from the bombshell report is still ongoing, but the deliberations over the strikes hinted at a broader debate unfolding within the administration: whether robust overseas military engagements should be a priority. Recent efforts to reconfigure defense spending, as well as reported proposals to dramatically restructure U.S. command structures, have likewise hinted at divisions over defense policy at a moment of international heightened instability. 

On the one hand, a group of officials, led chiefly by Waltz and Rubio, are committed to vigorously defending American interests overseas—a longtime role they believe the U.S. relinquished under the leadership of former President Joe Biden. On the other, a Vance-led faction believes that the U.S. has radically overstretched itself in recent decades, advocating for a dialed-back international role. 

Attacking Houthi targets to restore freedom of maritime navigation in the Red Sea, through which 11 percent of global trade moves, might seem like an obvious move for a Republican White House. Ensuring the free flow of trade worldwide has long been a top U.S. priority, and Republicans were uniformly critical of the Biden administration for not doing more to punish the Houthis for their ongoing attacks, which since November 2023 have forced many merchant vessels to avoid the Red Sea and divert around the tip of Africa. 

But as top administration officials moved toward authorizing strikes in Yemen, Vance sounded notes of caution: “I think we are making a mistake.”

“I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now,” the vice president added, in an apparent reference to Trump’s public complaints about Europe’s failure to invest in its own defense. “3 percent of US trade runs through the [Suez Canal]. 40 percent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary. … [If] you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.”

Vance’s private frustration at Washington’s European allies echoed his public criticisms. In a speech at the Munich Security Conference last month, he pushed for increased European defense spending. And in the now-infamous Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Vance accused Zelensky of being “ungrateful” for U.S. support. 

But as the group deliberated on when and whether to attack the Houthis, Waltz cited limited European military capabilities in explaining the apparent refusal of several countries to participate. “Whether it’s now or several weeks from now, it will have to be the United States that reopens these shipping lanes,” he said, adding that the U.S. could get Europe to foot the bill in other ways.

Meanwhile, Hegseth struck a middle ground.  “I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It’s PATHETIC,” he said, before arguing that the U.S. military needed to move forward with the campaign because no other country could. The next day, on March 15, the chat resumed as Hegseth shared what Goldberg described as sensitive operational details about the U.S. deployments, targets, and attack sequencing. Hours later, U.S. fighter jets were in the air.

The now-public back-and-forth between Trump’s top national security officials followed multiple reports last week that the Pentagon is considering a major reorganization of its command structure. The shakeup would include canceling a planned expansion of U.S. Forces Japan, reversing a Biden-era initiative aimed at modernizing command structures and increasing the number of personnel stationed on the island nation. According to draft documents detailing the cuts, the administration believes scrapping the project could save the federal government an estimated $1.1 billion. 

But Trump’s advisers also claim that retreating from Europe will enable the U.S. to focus on China, which they see as the chief threat to U.S. interests. This week, Hegseth is in Asia for a series of high-level meetings beginning in the Philippines, a U.S. ally currently contending with Chinese aggression in the South China Sea. The journey is slated to conclude with a stop in Japan. “These engagements will drive ongoing efforts to strengthen our alliances and partnerships toward our shared vision for a free and open Indo-Pacific,” Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said Friday. 

To some analysts, the White House’s stated desire to stand up to Chinese aggression appears to be in tension with its efforts to limit Washington’s international commitments. “We have two policies that are conflicting,” Mark Cancian, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told TMD. “One is pivot to Asia, focus on China, but the other one is Trump hates overseas bases and thinks that our allies are cheating us.” It remains to be seen whether Hegseth’s trip to Japan will resolve that dilemma. But Cancian noted that in the event of an American confrontation with China, a U.S. military presence in Japan would be crucial. 

According to a briefing document obtained by CNN, the Pentagon restructuring could also include merging U.S. European Command and U.S. Africa Command, two of the U.S. military’s seven geographic combatant commands, into one. Meanwhile, NBC News reported last week that the Pentagon was deliberating whether to give up the role of NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR). A post held by a U.S. general since the alliance’s inception, SACEUR’s occupation by a non-U.S. official would be a significant symbolic shift away from the traditional alliances that have underlined American foreign policy.

The moves also came as the Department of Government Efficiency—tech CEO Elon Musk’s White House team attempting to slash staff and spending throughout the federal government—turned its attention to the Department of Defense. On Friday, Musk met with Hegseth for a two-hour meeting at the Pentagon to discuss plans to streamline defense spending. 

The meeting was apparently a significant departure from the original itinerary, which the New York Times reported last week was set to include a briefing on classified military plans for a hypothetical war with China (claims Trump denied). But Musk’s presence at the Pentagon may signal the White House’s desire to find savings in the U.S.’s $850 billion defense budget—or at least to move money around. In February, Hegseth directed the department to find ways to cut 8 percent of its budget for each of the next five years to reallocate those funds to other priorities. 

“I think you’re going to be hard-pressed to find fraud and abuse,” Jerry McGinn, a former U.S. Army officer, defense industry executive, and current executive director of George Mason University’s Greg and Camille Baroni Center for Government Contracting, told TMD. “It’s really less about fat, and more about just reprioritization,” he added, noting for example the Pentagon’s potential plans to scale back funding for a new generation of nuclear submarines.

But some Republicans in Congress aren’t happy with the administration’s impulses toward retrenchment and cost-cutting on defense. In a joint statement Wednesday, the respective Republican chairs of the Senate and House Armed Services Committees—Sen. Roger Wicker and Rep. Mike Rogers—urged the Trump administration against sweeping changes to the military structure. “We are very concerned about reports that claim DoD is considering unilateral changes on major strategic issues, including significant reductions to U.S. forces stationed abroad, absent coordination with the White House and Congress,” they wrote.

Could the backlash signal an emerging rift between Congressional Republicans and the White House, who were previously in lockstep? It’s likely too soon to tell, although a scheduled Senate Intelligence Committee hearing today with FBI Director Kash Patel, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, a prominent critic of American overseas intervention, might shed some light on the question.

But Congress’ confidence that Trump’s national security officials are up to the task of leading amid a period of global instability may have taken a hit with Monday’s report of leaked war plans. “It appears that mistakes were made, no question,” Wicker told CNN of The Atlantic report. “You can be sure the [Armed Services Committee], House and Senate will be looking into this.”

Rep. Don Bacon, a Republican from Nebraska, was even more blunt: “Putting out classified information like that endangers our forces, and I can’t believe that they were knowingly putting that kind of classified information on unclassified systems. It’s just wrong.”

• Writing for the Deseret News less than two weeks before her death on Sunday, former Rep. Mia Love offered a moving tribute to the American dream. “The America I know isn’t just my story and it isn’t just your story. It is our story. It is a story of endless possibilities, human struggle, standing up and striving for more. Our story has been told for well over 200 years, punctuated by small steps and giant leaps; from a woman on a bus to a man with a dream; from the bravery of the greatest generation to the explorers, entrepreneurs, reformers and innovators of today. This is our story. This is the America we know — because we built it — together,” she wrote. “As my season of life begins to draw to a close, I still passionately believe that we can revive the American story we know and love. I am convinced that our citizens must remember the principles of our story so that our children, and those seeking freedom around the world, will know where to look to find a place for their story. We must fight to keep the America we know as that shining city on a hill — truly the last best hope on earth. Like Benjamin Franklin and countless patriots down through the ages, I believe the American experiment is not a setting sun but a rising sun.”
• Could the Trump administration’s cuts to research grants threaten U.S. security? In the Washington Post, Republican Sen. Todd Young and former deputy National Security Adviser Matt Pottinger argued that robust investment in research and development is crucial if the U.S. hopes to compete with its global adversaries. “As President Donald Trump pledges to win the artificial intelligence race, send Americans to Mars and sustain U.S. military dominance, we would do well to remember a key reason the United States achieved its technological edge in the first place: federal investment in ambitious research and development. The U.S. is racing against its adversaries to lead not only in artificial intelligence but also biotech, quantum computing, robotics and other technologies that will be pivotal for U.S. prosperity and security,” they wrote. “Our policymakers should lock arms with the science-and-technology dreamers and doers across the country — from Silicon Valley to the Silicon Prairie — and recognize that basic research isn’t a federal handout to help sustain academia. Instead, it is a vital ingredient in our innovation future, economic and geopolitical competitiveness, and national security.”

Axios: Trump’s Colorado Capitol Portrait Will Be Removed After President’s Outcry

Colorado House Democrats issued a statement Monday saying the painting, on display since 2019, will come down at the request of Republican leaders.

“If the GOP wants to spend time and money on which portrait of Trump hangs in the Capitol, then that’s up to them,” the statement reads.

…

Russian leader Vladimir Putin sent Trump a “personal gift” during a meeting with administration special envoy Steve Witkoff last week, the Kremlin said Monday after it emerged he gave him a portrait.

Witkoff had earlier described the painting of the president by a “leading Russian artist” as “beautiful” during an interview with Tucker Carlson.

Cass McCombs, a vital voice in the indie-folk music scene, debuted his new single “Priestess” during an NPR Tiny Desk Concert on Monday. But we think the entire set, which revives the singer’s discography dating back to 2002, is worth a listen. 

How do you think the accidental leak of military plans to a journalist should be handled?