At the heart of the Pentagon, a palpable sense of anxiety now lingers, as a series of abrupt firings and investigations under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have sent shockwaves through the ranks of the U.S. military. In the ten months since Hegseth assumed office under President Donald Trump’s second term, the Department of Defense has become a stage for high-profile purges, ideological battles, and what many insiders describe as a growing "culture of fear."
The latest—and perhaps most jarring—development came on October 3, 2025, when Navy Chief of Staff Jon Harrison was suddenly dismissed. According to Politico, the firing was executed without prior notification to Navy Secretary John Phelan, who only learned of the decision after the fact. The move followed a fiery speech by Hegseth at Marine Corps Base Quantico on September 30, where he doubled down on his commitment to restoring a "warrior ethos" and eliminating what he called "woke" policies from the ranks. Hegseth’s warning to the assembled generals and admirals was blunt: "If the words I’m speaking today are making your heart sink, then you should do the honorable thing and resign. We would thank you for your service."
But beneath the rhetoric lies a deeper, more troubling reality. As Politico reporters Paul McLeary and Daniel Lippman detail, Hegseth’s tenure has been marked by a string of firings at the highest levels, including the ousting of former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman C.Q. Brown. Many of these moves have come without public explanation, leaving both civilian and military staff on edge. "Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's latest firing of a top Navy official injected a fresh wave of fear into the Pentagon over the cost of speaking up and who might be next," they wrote on October 9.
The Harrison firing, in particular, has become a flashpoint. Five current and former defense officials told Politico that the move has only "added to concerns about Hegseth’s objectives." According to sources, Harrison had been working alongside Navy Secretary John Phelan to overhaul the Navy bureaucracy, specifically targeting the office of the Navy undersecretary. This effort to curb the influence of the service’s No. 2 civilian leader was already underway when Hung Cao—a retired Navy captain, MAGA loyalist, and former GOP Senate candidate—was confirmed as undersecretary on October 1. Cao, who had the backing of the White House and close ties to Trump’s inner circle, moved quickly to counter Harrison’s efforts. "Cao was keeping track of all this while waiting for his confirmation vote, and he moved fast once he was sworn in," a defense official explained.
For many at the Pentagon, the speed and opacity of these decisions have made it difficult to know where they stand. "There’s a culture of fear; there’s a culture of intimidation and retaliation," a senior defense official told Politico. "It’s better just to keep your head down and not necessarily try to do anything to the advantage of the organization, because it’s very much run from the top down." This sentiment was echoed by a former official, who remarked, "It adds to the climate of fear when randomly, people are just suddenly done."
The White House, for its part, has expressed unwavering support for Hegseth’s leadership. Anna Kelly, a spokesperson, stated, "President Trump has full confidence in Secretary Hegseth and his ability to ensure individuals across the Department of War are aligned with the president’s mission to Make America Strong Again," referencing the administration’s rebranding of the Defense Department. The Pentagon itself has maintained a terse stance, asserting, "We all serve at the pleasure of the president."
Yet the unease extends beyond personnel changes. In the wake of conservative influencer Charlie Kirk’s assassination on September 10, Hegseth launched investigations into nearly 300 military members, civil workers, and contractors suspected of mocking Kirk’s death, according to The Washington Post. While the Pentagon employs some 950,000 civilians and over one million active-duty personnel, the scale of the investigations is unprecedented. Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell emphasized the seriousness of the matter: "Those in our ranks who rejoice at an act of domestic terrorism are unfit to serve the military people." He added that mocking Kirk’s death was "a violation of the oath" and "dangerously incompatible with military service." So far, the probes have resulted in several disciplinary actions, with the clear message that such behavior will not be tolerated.
President Trump himself responded to Kirk’s killing by announcing a crackdown on what he described as "radical" left-wing terrorists, accusing them of fueling political violence. Critics—some of them prominent conservatives—warned that these policies could be used to stifle free speech under the guise of combating "hate speech." The Pentagon, however, has remained steadfast, reiterating that staff who make fun of Kirk’s death would be sacked.
Meanwhile, the churn at the top continues. Hegseth’s rapid-fire dismissals began with the surprise Friday night announcement in February that saw Joint Chiefs Chair C.Q. Brown and other senior leaders ousted. Senior aides have departed en masse, and the department has been described as being in "turmoil" by multiple outlets, including The Telegraph. The rationale for many of these firings remains opaque, with insiders speculating that loyalty to the administration’s ideological vision is now the primary criterion for survival.
Hung Cao’s arrival as Navy undersecretary has only accelerated this trend. As Raw Story reports, Cao’s influence was pivotal in Harrison’s dismissal. The pressure he exerted—and the speed with which he acted—sent a clear message: dissent or bureaucratic resistance would not be tolerated. "More alarming to insiders is that there seemed to be no rationale for Hegseth move other than at Cao’s urging," the outlet noted.
For those who remain, the atmosphere is one of caution and self-preservation. The repeated message from leadership is clear: challenge the prevailing vision at your own peril. The Pentagon’s own statement—"We all serve at the pleasure of the president"—serves as both a reminder and a warning. The result, as described by multiple officials across the political spectrum, is a department where innovation and honest dissent are stifled by the ever-present threat of retaliation.
As the Pentagon grapples with these internal upheavals, the broader implications for U.S. military policy and global engagement remain uncertain. But one thing is clear: the "culture of fear" now gripping America’s military establishment is not just a matter of personnel—it’s a question of principle, morale, and the very nature of service in a turbulent era.