In an extraordinary breach of national security protocols, the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, was inadvertently included in a group chat with top officials from former President Donald Trump’s administration, leading to the discussion of sensitive military plans. This incident has sparked significant outrage across party lines and raised concerns about the handling of classified information within the administration.
On March 13, 2025, Goldberg received a connection request on the Signal messaging app from a user identified as Michael Waltz, the national security adviser. Upon accepting the request, he found himself added to a group chat named "Houthi PC Small Group" which included prominent figures such as Vice-President JD Vance, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and a CIA officer, among others. Just two days later, the group began discussing a highly confidential plan for military strikes against the Iran-aligned Houthi rebel group in Yemen, culminating in an attack on March 15.
Goldberg, who noted the inclusion of sensitive details such as air-strike targets and operational timing, stated, "I could not believe that the national-security leadership of the United States would communicate on Signal about imminent war plans." His astonishment highlights the recklessness of including a journalist in such a serious and delicate discussion.
As the military operation was impending, internal messages showed concerns about the timing and legitimacy of the strike, with Vance questioning the rationale behind it. "Three percent of U.S. trade runs through the Suez Canal. Forty percent of European trade does," Vance wrote. He worried about the public’s understanding of the operation, suggesting a potential delay to manage messaging effectively. This debate, however, took place in a chat platform that is not sanctioned by the U.S. government for sensitive communications.
Goldberg’s account in The Atlantic described how he initially doubted the legitimacy of the connection, suspecting it might be a hoax or part of a disinformation campaign. However, he soon realized the messages shared critical military information, including specific operational details that raised alarms about possible breaches of the Espionage Act. As defense experts pointed out, the fact that such information was transmitted through an app like Signal could represent a serious violation.
This situation drew immediate ire from various political leaders. Jack Reed, the senior Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, condemned the incident, calling it "one of the most egregious failures of operational national security and common sense I have ever seen." Goldberg articulated the fundamental breach of security that occurred, while Republican Congressman Mike Lawler stated, "Classified information should not be transmitted on unsecured channels — and certainly not to those without security clearances, including reporters. Period."
In the aftermath of the airstrikes, messaging within the group took a celebratory turn. Waltz posted emojis celebrating the operation that resulted in the death of at least 53 individuals, according to Yemeni health authorities. The casual nature of these messages among high-ranking officials using a commercial app in the days of stringent security protocols left many baffled at the security competence within the Trump administration.
White House spokesman Brian Hughes defended the chat, asserting it demonstrated "the deep and thoughtful policy coordination between senior officials." Yet this explanation did little to alleviate concerns regarding the sheer nature of classified communications on unsecured platforms. In response to Hughes' comments, Goldberg retorted, "No, that's a lie. He was texting war plans," reaffirming the gravity of the leak.
The gravity of the situation extends beyond politics, potentially affecting U.S. relationships with allies, particularly those who are part of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, which includes Canada, the UK, and Australia. Confidence in the U.S. security apparatus may be shaken as security and defense experts call for thorough investigations into the breach. Former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton echoed the call for scrutiny, expressing disbelief at the administration's handling of classified operations.
Amid the chaos, the question lingers: will anyone be held accountable for this blunder? The agencies typically responsible for investigating such breaches are under the control of Trump loyalists, complicating the prospects for a robust inquiry. As Washington grapples with this incident, it serves as a stark reminder of the potential consequences of unsecured communications in a world where national security hangs in the balance.
In conclusion, the National Security Council has confirmed the authenticity of the group chat, leading to a review of how an "inadvertent number" was added to the conversation. Whether this will lead to lasting changes in protocol remains to be seen, but the incident certainly showcases the urgent need for greater oversight and security around the delicate matters of national defense.
