In a different Washington, under a different president, a return to the well-worn playbook of all-out sanctions to counter Iran might have been the signal for a publicity-hungry US secretary of defense to adopt a lower profile. But these are no ordinary times. And Pete Hegseth is no ordinary defense secretary.
Barely a week after the treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, unleashed a supposed “economic D-day” aimed at crushing the regime in Tehran under the weight of commercial pressures, Hegseth once again returned to the limelight – and the center of controversy. The former Fox News host usurped Bessent from center stage as the conflict with Iran reverted to open warfare and discontent at the Pentagon was laid bare once more. Turf wars within Hegseth’s own fiefdom resurfaced with the resignation of the army secretary, fresh revelations of blocked promotions and leaked disclosures of resistance from military top brass of extended deployments to the Middle East.
While the Pentagon insists that any suggestion the defense department is in disarray under Hegseth is “completely baseless”, alarm over his conduct in the role – and the implications – has not merely been expressed by Hegseth’s political opponents. The strikes, on mainland Iran as well as Iranian islands in the Gulf, caused multiple casualties. In one incident, Iranian media reported that five people, including a six-year-old child, were killed in the southern city of Kuhestak when a missile struck a wedding party.
Iranian authorities labelled the deaths a war crime. The episode had echoes of strikes in the city of Minab on the first day of the war on 28 February, when more than 150 people, including 120 children, were killed when missiles hit an elementary school. The US has not formally admitted responsibility, although officials have said the incident is under military investigation.
The latest strikes were quickly followed by disclosures that Hegseth had extended military deployments in the Middle East, where the US currently maintains 50,000 troops and 19 warships – partly to enforce a naval blockade on Iran – into the middle of next year The extensions were ordered even after several commanders in other sectors voiced objections, formally known as “non-concurs”, to the deployments, arguing that they could leave the US at risk of being unable to meet its commitments in other areas, while subjecting forces to the additional strain of being at sea for too long. The non-concurs were recorded in the Secretary of Defense Orders Book of 14 August, a classified document whose contents were leaked and reported by the Washington Post. We tried going after their missile program.
We were not able to destroy it. Tried sinking the navy, but they still maintain a mining capability. But that would drive the price of oil much, much higher, and lead to retaliatory attacks on the energy infrastructure of our Gulf allies.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
