The agreement gives the southeastern European country access to a U.S.-managed marketplace that links partner nations with counter-drone technology as part of the Pentagon’s push to speed up procurement systems that have struggled to keep pace with ever-evolving unmanned threats.

The marketplace is run by the Pentagon’s Joint Interagency Task Force 401, an organization established in 2025 to centralize and speed up how the military — and partner nations — field counter-unmanned aerial system, or C-UAS, capabilities. The department reports to the deputy Secretary of Defense.

Brig. Gen. Matt Ross, the task force’s director, said that the market expansion was intended to support different levels of needs instead of only top-of-the-line technology.

“It’s about a range of capabilities that can meet the needs of different users from the tactical edge to critical infrastructure protection in our homeland and for our allies and partners,” he said, adding, “as the market grows, the C-UAS industry must be positioned to scale their production and meet the needs of this broadening customer base.”

Allied countries can access a selection of interoperable technology, the Army said in a statement, and Romania’s inclusion is a step towards the Army Secretary’s goal of having at least 25 partner nations in the marketplace by the end of summer.

The United Kingdom in March signed an agreement with the Pentagon to create “common data standards” for C-UAS technology, according to a separate release. Compliance to shared standards, the statement said, would be a replacement for vendors looking to sell products on the marketplace.

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and General Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will also participate in the briefing, the official said.

The official did not disclose the range of options that will be discussed but said the briefing was expected to be focused on actions needed to compel Iran to negotiate an end to the conflict.

U.S. Central Command and the White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Hegseth and Caine will be testifying before the Senate at 11 a.m. EST, with questions expected to focus on the conflict launched by the U.S. and Israel on Feb. 28. The White House briefing was expected to take place following that hearing.

Axios reported on Thursday that Central Command had prepared a plan for a “short and powerful” wave of strikes on Iran, likely including infrastructure targets as well as another one for taking over part of the Strait of Hormuz to reopen it to commercial shipping.

Such options, however, have long been part of the U.S. planning and it did not appear that Axios was suggesting any departure from such planning.

The Iran war, which remains unpopular in the U.S., has shaken markets and raised oil prices.

The war has brought traffic close to a standstill through the ​strait, a chokepoint for about 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments.

The service, according to a Sources Sought notice from the Combat Feeding Division of the Army’s Combat Capabilities Development Command Soldier Center, “is exploring how the emerging alternative-protein sector can help meet several objectives, including enhancing food supply chain resilience, enabling biomanufacturing of foodstuffs in combat-forward environments, and providing tailored, high-quality nutrition to the warfighter.”

Titled “Alternative Protein Technologies for Military Field Feeding,” the notice, which lists a deadline of May 15, is aimed at industry and academia that can work with the Army to develop technologies for manufacturing alternative proteins that soldiers will actually eat.

One track seeks “advanced technologies and processes, involved in fermentation, precision fermentation, or other novel biomanufacturing methods, that enhance the production of alternative proteins,” the notice reads.

“These technologies should focus on creating lightweight and nutrient-dense ration solutions to reduce logistical burdens and physical load on warfighters while maintaining or enhancing nutritional value and operational performance.”

Another track is to explore product development to create meatless proteins that are lightweight, nutritious, shelf-stable and “palatable.”

The Army also seeks partners who can help with consumer research, such as focus groups and tasting panels, to determine what military personnel like.

Also wanted are contractors who can provide food samples of alternative proteins that the FDA has classified as Generally Recognized as Safe, or GRAS, products.

“These prototypes will be provided to the government for sensory acceptability and other performance characteristics and will be consumed by our test panel of experts,” the notice said.

The alternative protein project is part of an Army Broad Agency Announcement published last year. It included research into combat rations, personal protective gear and other equipment.

It follows an Army plan announced last year to offer plant-based MREs, a decision that delighted vegan and animal rights groups.

In response to a mandate by Congress, the Navy began testing plant-based meats on its menus in 2023, while the Air Force offers meatless dishes.

While military rations have unique requirements such as remaining edible under harsh conditions, they do have to follow culinary trends in the larger society.

Thus, coming to the 2026 MRE menu are Buffalo Chicken, Cuban beef picadillo and Thai red chicken curry, meals that would have been regarded with disbelief — or appreciation — by GIs eating C-Ration meat stew in WWII, or the infamous ham and lima beans in Vietnam.

Plant-based meats, such as Beyond Burger, and non-dairy cheeses soared in popularity a decade ago. However, sales of plant-based meats have recently slumped as prices rose and consumers became concerned that faux-meat products are heavily processed.

Meanwhile, demand for beef soared in 2025.

A hearing on the Pentagon’s $1.45 trillion budget request for fiscal 2027 became a hotly contested debate on Iran, with House Armed Services Committee members asking how long the secretary expected the operation to last and Hegseth bristling at those who questioned the administration’s decision to go to war.

Committee members praised the work of the U.S. service members currently deployed to the Middle East, but they also wanted Hegseth to address the ultimate outcome.

Ranking committee member Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., asked Hegseth where the war was going. Rep. John Garamendi, D-Calif., said the military had executed the war with “tactical success” but called the administration’s strategy an example of “incompetence.”

The comments struck a nerve with Hegseth, who argued that President Donald Trump is the only U.S. leader to decide to physically stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.

“The biggest adversary we face at this point are the reckless, feckless and defeatist words of congressional Democrats and some Republicans,” Hegseth said, addressing Garamendi and others who have opposed the operation.

“Shame on you calling this a quagmire two months in the effort,” Hegseth added.

When the U.S. and Israel launched combat operations in Iran on Feb. 28, Trump said the goals were three-fold: destroy Iran’s missile capability; “annihilate” their navy; and ensure that the country would never have nuclear weapons.

The operation killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and several key leaders, destroyed Iran’s navy and wiped out key military installations. In retaliation, Iran launched missiles and air assaults on U.S. military facilities, killing 13 and damaging U.S. bases across the region, as well as civilian targets in Meddle East countries.

Hegseth noted that the Iranian navy has been destroyed, but Iran continues to have nuclear ambitions despite losing capabilities as a result of Operation Midnight Hammer last summer that Hegseth said “obliterated” facilities.

“You have to stare down this kind of enemy who’s hell bent on getting a nuclear weapon and get them to a point where they’re at the table giving it up,” Hegseth said.

The questions over the war’s future come as a 60-day deadline approaches Thursday under the War Powers Act. The legislation requires the president to seek congressional authorization to continue the operation or withdraw troops.

The law allows Trump to request an extension if the time is needed to safely withdraw U.S. troops.

According to testimony, the Iran war has cost $25 billion to date, with the highest costs coming at the beginning of the conflict as a result of the use of thousands of bombs and missiles.

Iran war has cost $25 billion so far, Pentagon official says

The Defense Department’s $1.45 trillion budget request for fiscal 2027 is 44% higher than the Pentagon’s current budget — the highest in modern history. It would fund an increase in military end-strength of 44,000 service members, provide a 5% to 7% pay raise to troops depending on rank and boost procurement funding by 76%.

“Under the leadership of President Trump our builder-in-chief, we are reversing … systemic decay and putting our defense industrial base back on a war-time footing,” Hegseth said.

During the hearing, lawmakers raised concerns about the firing of former Army Chief of Staff Randy George and the decision to remove general officers from promotion lists, with several praising the former’s 40-years of service and dedication to soldiers.

“Let’s talk about a guy who is a patriot. Someone who everyone on this dais has huge admiration for,” said Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Penn., an Air Force veteran, referring to George.

In his response to Houlahan, Hegseth hinted that he fired George as part of a war on “woke” — Hegseth’s efforts to eliminate diversity or equity initiatives in the services.

“Out of respect for these officers, we never talk about the nature of their removal, but every one of them, including myself, knows that they serve at the pleasure of the president,” Hegseth said.

But, he added, “it’s very difficult to change the culture of a department that has been destroyed by the wrong perspective.”

During testimony, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine remained above the political fray, declining to answer questions he perceived as political.

“My duty is to ensure our civilian leadership has a comprehensive range of military options and the associated risks that to those leaders who make the nation’s hardest decisions and offer my military advice privately,” Caine said.

“My blueprint for this role is Gen. George C. Marshall. His commitment to civilian control of the military and nonpartisan military remains a constant standard, and something I borrow from often,” he added.

Acting comptroller Jules Hurst III, testifying before the House Armed Services Committee, said that the bulk of the figure has been devoted to ordnance.

“Approximately, at this day, we are spending about $25 billion on Operation Epic Fury, most of that is in munitions,” Hurst told lawmakers, adding that some of the costs also included operations, maintenance and equipment replacement.

“We will formulate a supplemental [bill] through the White House that will come to Congress once we have a full assessment of the cost of the conflict,” he noted.

Wednesday marked the first time that President Donald Trump’s administration has publicly disclosed the war’s financial toll.

Senior Pentagon officials appeared on Capitol Hill for what had been scheduled as a review of the Department of Defense’s $1.5 trillion budget proposal for fiscal 2027, only for the proceedings to be subsumed by the war in Iran, which began with a joint U.S.-Israeli attack on Feb. 28.

Thirteen American service members have been killed in the operation, with 400 others wounded, according to Pentagon data.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, in a contentious exchange with Rep. Salud Carbajal, D-Calif., insisted that the war’s expenditure is justified to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

“The question that I would ask this committee is, ‘What is it worth to ensure that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon, considering the radical ambitions of that regime?’” Hegseth said.

After eight weeks of fighting, diplomacy between Washington and Tehran has failed to yield a definitive peace deal. Trump, in a post on Truth Social on Wednesday, warned that Iran “better get smart soon” as negotiations remain stalled.

“Iran can’t get their act together,” the president wrote. “They don’t know how to sign a nonnuclear deal. They better get smart soon!”

Trump’s message was accompanied by a manipulated image of him clutching a weapon while explosions took place on a mountainous landscape in the background.

The figure is substantially lower than the Congressional Budget Office’s projection in January, which estimated the rebrand could reach as much as $125 million if it were adopted “broadly and rapidly.”

In a legislative proposal released this month, the department argued that the revised designation “serves as a fundamental reminder of the importance and reverence of our core mission, to fight and win wars. It serves as a strategic objective in which to measure and prioritize all activities.”

President Donald Trump signed an executive order in September establishing the “Department of War” as a secondary title for the Department of Defense — a move that has remained largely ceremonial in effect. Only Congress has the authority to permanently rename executive department names, and it has not yet done so.

Trump contends that reviving the nation’s original defense nomenclature — used until two years after World War II — is a “much more appropriate” reflection of the world today.

“The name ‘Department of War’ conveys a stronger message of readiness and resolved compared to ‘Department of Defense,’ which emphasizes only defensive capabilities,” the executive order states. “Restoring the name ‘Department of War’ will sharpen the focus of this Department on our national interest and signal to adversaries America’s readiness to wage war to secure its interests.”

The estimated costs allocate $44.6 million for the Defense Agencies and the department’s field activities; $3.5 million for the Military Departments; $3 million for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s office and Washington Headquarters Services; and $400,000 for the Joint Staff, Combatant Commands and National Guard Bureau.

Hegseth and Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will testify before the House Armed Services Committee Wednesday and the Senate Armed Services Committee Thursday on the Pentagon’s fiscal 2027 budget proposal. The Trump administration is requesting $1.5 trillion in defense spending, the largest expenditure in modern U.S. history.

The rebranding would have “no significant impact” on the administration’s 2027 budget, “as the relevant changes were already implemented in 2026,” the Pentagon said.

Within a few hours, that cannonade would come steadily closer until the British 3rd Brigade marched into Washington, D.C., virtually uncontested and proceeded to burn the city’s public buildings, including the Capitol, the chambers of the Senate and House of Representatives, the Treasury Department and the War Office.

Adm. George Cockburn himself helped his men loot the White House — who purportedly sat down and helped themselves to President James Madison’s still-warm dinner — before setting the seat of democracy ablaze.

The following day, the arson continued until a serendipitous squall of rain extinguished the flames. The massive storm then spawned a rare tornado that, according to the National Weather Service, killed more British soldiers than American guns did during their brief occupation of D.C.

In just 10 days, the British had penetrated enemy territory, won a battle against a larger army and captured and burned the enemy’s capital — all at the loss of fewer than 300 men, according to historian Rick Britton.

Two years into the War of 1812, the ransacking of the capital was a national embarrassment, with an incensed Madison demanding the resignation of Secretary of War John Armstrong Jr. as the city lay smoldering.

It was an unmitigated military disaster, save for a small band of U.S. Marines whose desperate defense of the nation’s capital allowed for the Declaration of Independence — and the president — to be whisked away to safety.

A final stand

It was close to noon on Aug. 24 when a 4,500-man British army finally marched within sight of Bladensburg, Maryland. At just nine miles northeast of Washington, D.C., the seemingly vacant river town gave Maj. Gen. Robert Ross a commanding view of the American forces just across the Anacostia River.

The Americans — mostly untested and under-equipped — were strung out along three stacked lines. Hastily dispatched from all across the eastern seaboard to intercept the British, the men chaotically attempted to fall in line, standing facing the river’s only bridge.

There they stood in the open field and waited.

Earlier that morning, according to Britton, Madison had received a message from the sleep-deprived William H. Winder, one of the two brigadier generals tasked with defending Washington.

As Madison later put it, that morning Winder required the “the speediest counsel” from Madison.

At a subsequent meeting at Winder’s camp — attended by most of the cabinet secretaries — it was reported that the British were marching on Washington via Bladensburg.

Secretary of War Armstrong Jr., silent for most of the meeting, finally spoke up, saying, according to a later memorandum from Madison, that the American militiamen — roughly 7,000 strong but varying wildly in quality, training and enthusiasm — “would be beaten” by “Wellington’s Invincibles,” seasoned soldiers so named for their string of successes against Napoleon.

According to Britton, Madison, upset at Armstrong’s remark, instructed him to join Winder at Bladensburg, while also promising to be on the battlefield himself, should there be any “difficulty on the score of authority.”

Winder, according to the U.S. Naval Institute, “made and unmade plans, shuffled units around, and wore himself as thin as his straggling army.” Things were not improved by the presence of Madison and his Cabinet, “to whose ‘officious but well-intentioned information and advice’ the general was compelled to listen,” wrote historian Benton J. Lossing.

As Washington’s most senior leaders dashed off to Bladensburg, so too did Cmdr. Joshua Barney, mustering a group of 103 Marines and flotillamen from the Washington Navy Yard.

Even as the Marines took their positions at the center of the third line, the British attacked.

The first wave of British troops, repelled by cannon and rifle fire fell back, before a second wave managed to cross the bridge. Panicked, the first line of American troops turned and fled.

Charles Ball, an escaped enslaved worker that Barney took into his flotilla, noted that the militia “ran like sheep chased by dogs.”

The second line of defense, primarily Maryland militiamen, were outnumbered and outgunned as British forces poured over the now unguarded bridge. They too soon melted away in the face of the more experienced British units.

“In less than an hour,” according to the USNI, “nearly two-thirds of the American army had evaporated. Only the third line remained, anchored on Barney’s guns.”

Now, only the Marines stood in the way of the British and the U.S. capital.

As the British surged toward them Barney’s men repelled them once, twice, three times.

After the final failed attempt to overrun the battery stalled 50 yards in front of the Marine line, Barney counterattacked with his flotillamen, driving the British back into the ravine with cries of “Board ‘em, board ‘em!” according to the USNI.

The Marines and flotillamen fought alone for nearly two hours more hours — even as Barney’s ammunition wagons drove off with his resupply.

Dozens of Barney’s men were killed or wounded as they became enveloped by the British. Barney himself was wounded when a bullet became lodged deep in his thigh.

As the escape route began to close, Barney finally ordered a retreat as a few American gunners and Marines held the line while the rest ran a gauntlet of fire to make their way back to the capital, writes the USNI.

Six hours after British forces first engaged the Americans near Bladensburg, the red coats strolled into downtown D.C.

But the Marine’s defense was not entirely in vain — their desperate fight allowed precious minutes for Madison, government officials and civilians to flee.

It also allowed for State Department clerks to run to the Library of Congress and evacuate the Declaration of Independence, first to an unused gristmill near Chain Bridge over the Potomac River and later to a private home near Leesburg, Virginia, according to the National Archives.

The actions of the Marines that day were so decisive that even the British were impressed. According to USNI, Barney, unable to leave the field due to his wound, was captured and exchanged words with Adm. Cockburn and Gen. Ross.

“I am really very glad to see you, Commodore,” said Gen. Ross.

“I am sorry I cannot return the compliment, General,” Barney retorted.

Ross smiled and turned to Cockburn. “I told you it was the Flotilla men.”

“Yes,” Cockburn said, “you were right, though I could not believe you — they have given us the only fighting we have had.”

In a further act of chivalry, as the nation’s capital lay in smoldering ruins, only two buildings remained unscathed as the entire neighboring Washington Navy Yard was burned to the ground — the Marine Corps Commandants’ home and the Marine barracks lay untouched.

“Honoring the British king might seem an ironic beginning to our celebration of 250 years of American independence,” the president said to the crowd. “But in fact, no tribute could be more appropriate.”

“Long before Americans had a nation or a Constitution, we first had a culture, a character, and a creed,” Trump continued. “Before we ever proclaimed our independence, Americans carried within us the rarest of gifts: moral courage, and it came from a small but mighty kingdom from across the sea.”

The rain abated just minutes before the monarch was feted with a meticulously choreographed ceremony: a fife-and-drum corps in perfect unison, as well as “The President’s Own” Marine band performing both national anthems, and a 21-gun salute reverberating across the South Lawn.

The president and the king went on to preside over the first-ever pass in review conducted at the White House, which featured 300 U.S. service members. Nearly 500 personnel drawn from all six branches of the armed forces were present at the event, according to the office of the first lady.

The occasion also marked the debut of a Space Force Honor Guard detachment.

To bring the pageantry to a close, the Trumps and the royals, standing on the Truman Balcony, observed an official flyover of four F-35s. The president raised a fist after the jets roared overhead.

Trump, during his remarks, praised the U.S. and U.K. militaries for their long history of fighting side by side — a shift toward warmer rhetoric amid chilly relations between Washington and London as of late.

“In the centuries since we won our independence, Americans have had no closer friends than the British,” Trump asserted. “We share that same root, we speak the same language, we hold the same values and together, our warriors have defended the same extraordinary civilization under twin banners of red, white and blue.”

In recent weeks, the president has reserved particular ire for British Prime Minister Keir Starmer over his unwillingness to join the U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran. Trump has castigated Starmer’s refusal to commit military support, describing him as a “coward” and “no Churchill.”

Officials on both sides of the Atlantic have expressed hope that the monarch — who remains politically neutral — might help catalyze a détente between the White House and Downing Street and restore the so-called “special relationship” that bonds the two governments. Asked ahead of the arrival whether the king has the power to repair relations, Trump responded: “Absolutely. He’s fantastic. He’s a fantastic man. Absolutely. The answer is yes.”

Gannon Van Dyke, 38, entered the plea before U.S. District Judge Margaret Garnett’s courtroom in Manhattan. Van Dyke sported a shaved head and wore a black blazer, jeans and brown shoes as he arrived to the courtroom with his lawyers, Zach Intrater and Mark Geragos.

Last week, Van Dyke was arrested on a federal indictment charging him with placing $33,000 in bets on prediction market Polymarket between December 27, 2025, and January 2, 2026, that Maduro would soon be out of office and that U.S. forces would soon enter Venezuela.

Markets at the time assigned low probabilities to those events, leading to a big payout for Van Dyke, prosecutors said.

The case marks the first time the Justice Department has filed insider trading charges involving a prediction market. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission also filed civil charges against Van Dyke.

Unregulated prediction market may endanger US national security, experts and lawmakers warn

Van Dyke, a master sergeant with U.S. Army Special Forces who is stationed at Fort Bragg in North Carolina, was involved in the “planning and execution” of the January 3, 2026, raid that captured Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, prosecutors said.

Van Dyke faces five criminal counts: unlawful use of confidential government information for personal gain, theft of non-public government information, commodities fraud, wire fraud and making an unlawful monetary transaction.

Polymarket said it flagged Van Dyke’s trading to the authorities and cooperated with the investigation.

Rival prediction market Kalshi had previously blocked Van Dyke from opening an account due to the platform’s ID requirements, Reuters reported on Friday, citing a person familiar with the matter.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Brian Meyers in Raleigh, North Carolina, ordered Van Dyke released on $250,000 bond at his initial court appearance on Friday in Raleigh. Garnett is expected to oversee Van Dyke’s case going forward.

The cruise missile-killing high-energy laser weapon the U.S. Defense Department envisions as part of its “Golden Dome for America” domestic missile defense shield is beginning to take shape.

The new Joint Laser Weapon System — a collaboration between the U.S. Army and U.S. Navy that Laser Wars first reported about in June 2025 — will initially consist of a containerized 150-kilowatt system with the potential to scale to at least 300kw to defeat incoming cruise missile threats, according to the Navy’s fiscal 2027 budget request.

The system will also include a Joint Beam Control System “capable of supporting” a 300-500kw laser weapon, the documents say.

The JLWS effort will leverage research and development lessons from the Navy’s 60kw High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-Dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS) system, which is currently installed on the Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyer USS Preble, and the Army’s 300 kw Indirect Fire Protection Capability-High Energy Laser (IFPC-HEL) system, the first prototype of which the service plans on taking delivery of later this year.

The Navy will also “conduct upgrades” to its High Energy Laser Counter Anti-Ship Cruise Missile Project (HELCAP) test bed “as appropriate” in support of future JLWS testing.

While last year’s Army budget request detailed $51 million in mandatory funding for JLWS through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act reconciliation bill under its Expanded Mission Area Missile program element, this year’s request does not contain any R&D funding for fiscal 2027. Instead, the proposal details plans for $337.8 million in spending starting in fiscal 2028 and running through fiscal 2031.

Based on the budget documents, it looks as though the service plans on closing out its IFPC-HEL activities first before kicking off its part of the JLWS effort.

The Navy, however, isn’t waiting around.

The service requested $94.825 million under its Directed Energy and Electric Weapon Systems program element in fiscal 2027 — up from just $14.5 million in fiscal 2026, as Laser Wars previously reported.

That amount includes $79.84 million under its Surface Navy Laser Weapon System effort to jumpstart JLWS R&D, sustain the service’s lone HELIOS system for future testing activities and upgrade the HELCAP test bed, which is also receiving a separate $14.978 injection, according to the service’s budget request.

The service plans on investing an additional $243.3 million into JLWS R&D under that program element through fiscal 2031.

Together, the Army and Navy requests total a vision of $675.93 million in R&D spending for the JLWS through fiscal 2031. The Navy plans on awarding $31.7 million in contracts for JBCS development as soon as the fourth quarter of 2026 and the $30 million in contracts for the procurement and testing of containerized JLWS by March 2027, according to budget documents.

It seems likely that Lockheed Martin will receive those contract. Not only is the defense prime the technical lead on both the HELIOS and IFPC-HEL efforts that will inform the JLWS, but it’s also already developing a containerized version of the former, a company executive revealed in August 2025.

While the Pentagon’s fiscal 2027 budget request also contains $452 million in R&D spending for the “development, integration, and assessment” of directed energy weapons in support of Golden Dome, the exact relationship with the Army and Navy’s JLWS efforts is unclear.

Pentagon seeks funds for Golden Dome, drones, AI in largest-ever budget request

The Navy budget documents state that the $79.84 million allocated under SNLWS also includes funds to “begin development of a consolidated implementation plan” for all Golden Dome-related directed energy projects, “leveraging synergy and common weapon architectures between these efforts where possible” in coordination with the U.S. Missile Defense Agency.

The dream of a laser weapon capable of shooting down cruise missiles is nearly as old as the laser itself.

The Pentagon first demonstrated the concept in the 1970s with the Navy ARPA Chemical Laser, or NACL, a deuterium fluoride system developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency that successfully engaged small missile targets but proved far too large and complex for practical deployments.

Those same challenges would befall its successor, the megawatt-class Mid-Infrared Advanced Chemical Laser, or MIRACL, despite the system successfully neutralizing a supersonic MQM-8 Vandal missile during testing in 1989.

The Gulf War briefly revived this dream in the U.S. Air Force’s ill-fated Airborne Laser program, which consumed more than $5 billion over nearly two decades before its cancellation in 2012.

More recently, the Navy’s Layered Laser Defense system, developed by Lockheed Martin in conjunction with the Office of Naval Research, successfully downed a target drone simulating a subsonic cruise missile in a 2022 demonstration at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico in the military’s latest attempt to validate the concept under realistic conditions.

The US Navy brought a ‘one-of-a-kind’ laser weapon back from the dead

The Pentagon clearly hopes that the JLWS will finally push its laser-based cruise missile defense efforts over the finish line. But as Laser Wars previously reported when the JLWS first became public in June 2025, such threats pose a far more complex challenge for directed energy weapons than the low-cost weaponized drones that are reshaping warfare on battlefields from Ukraine to the Middle East.

Cruise missiles fly low and fast, hug terrain and execute evasive maneuvers that compress reaction time, while their hardened casings require far more sustained energy to defeat than the soft-bodied drones that current tactical lasers are optimized for.

Compounding the challenge, atmospheric interference can scatter or absorb beam energy before it reaches the target; even at 300kw power levels, laser weapons demand a degree of beam control and aim-point precision that no known system has yet demonstrated against a realistic cruise missile threat.

After years attempting to scale laser weapons to power levels suitable for cruise missile defense, the Pentagon’s push for a containerized solution also represents a departure from past vehicle-mounted or warship-integrated systems.

For the Navy in particular, Chief of Naval Operations and noted laser weapon champion Adm. Daryl Caudle has explicitly emphasized the pursuit of modular capabilities that the service can rapidly swap across its surface fleet for particular missions without lengthy and expensive stays in shipyards.

Look no further than the service’s October 2025 live-fire test of the Army’s 20kw Palletized High Energy Laser (P-HEL) system, based on the LOCUST Laser Weapon System from defense contractor AV, from the flight deck of the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush.

The JLWS isn’t the only modular laser weapon the Navy is exploring.

The aforementioned Directed Energy and Electric Weapon Systems program element also includes $4.82 million in funding to support the “development, integration and marinization” of the Army’s Enduring High Energy Laser systems — the modular, 30kw laser weapon based on lessons from P-HEL and the aborted Stryker-mounted 50kw Directed Energy Maneuver-Short Range Air Defense system that the service envisions as its first directed energy program of record.

The US Army is already ditching its most powerful laser weapon yet

The Army planned on procuring two E-HEL units in fiscal 2026 and another pair the following year, according to the service’s budget request, with plans to “produce and rapidly field” up to 24 systems total in the coming years.

With its LOCUST system proven as a counter-drone capability both abroad and at home, AV appears the leading contender to clinch that contract in the coming years.

With institutional support for developing and fielding directed energy weapons at scale at a historic high, JLWS may prove a significant opportunity for the Pentagon to finally make its dream of missile-killing laser weapons a reality.

But the history of counter-cruise missile laser development is littered with programs that cleared every bureaucratic hurdle only to stumble on the physics and operational realities.

A containerized 150kw system may be a more modest and achievable goal than the behemoths that came before it, but whether JLWS can survive contact with both the budget process and real-world complexities of blasting cruise missiles out of the sky remains the open question.

For a swimming task, the pair forgot to swim the entire length of the lane, skipping out on 100 meters of the event.

Despite being upset and confused, 1st Lt. Bryce Sullenger said the duo “knew we had to brush it off our shoulders and move on to the next event.” And move on, they did.

Representing the 75th Ranger Regiment, Sullenger and his partner, 1st Lt. Christopher Barrett put aside the setback and won first place out of 42 teams at the Best Sapper Competition, held last week at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.

The event brings together two-person teams from across the force to compete in a strenuous multi-day assessment of physical fitness, technical skills and grit. Competitors participate in lanes that test their mountaineering, steel cutting, breaching, marksmanship and reconnaissance skills, among others.

This year, teams moved up to 65 miles over the course of the competition, which started on April 20th and concluded on April 23.

In the Army, combat engineers — often referred to as sappers — support infantry units by clearing explosives, breaching obstacles and making sure front-line troops are able to maneuver.

The competition is modeled on the Army’s Sapper Leader Course, a grueling weekslong school with a high attrition rate that covers combat engineering tasks like demolitions, rappelling, land navigation and small unit tactics.

Soldiers of all ranks from different specialties can enter the competition but priority is given to teams with two members who have successfully completed the school and earned the Sapper tab, a patch worn on the left shoulder sleeve of the uniform.

The Army launched the Best Sapper Competition in 2005 and it has been held nearly every year since.

This was the second year in a row that the Regiment took home the gold.

Former Army telecommunications technician Ronald Christoforo, along with Michele Christoforo, filed suit Monday in the U.S. District Court of Connecticut, alleging that the VA discriminates against thousands of disabled children of Vietnam veterans by providing compensation to those whose mothers served but not their fathers, with one exception: children born with spina bifida.

In the suit, the Christoforos note that Michele’s birth defect, which causes dwarfism, is specifically covered by the VA for the children of female veterans who served in Vietnam.

Ronald Christoforo applied for VA Agent Orange-related disability benefits for Michele in 2022 but was denied. According to the suit, the VA told Christoforo that Michele’s mother would have had to serve in Vietnam or Korea to qualify.

The Christoforos argue that the decision was unconstitutional because it is based on sex discrimination.

“When the VA rejected my claim, they didn’t say my condition wasn’t real or that it wasn’t caused by Agent Orange. They said my father’s service didn’t count the same as a mother’s would. How can that be legal?” Michele Christoforo said in a statement Monday.

According to the suit, roughly 200 children were born with birth defects to female Vietnam veterans, while an estimated 350,000 children of fathers who served have birth defects.

The VA began awarding disability benefits to the children of Vietnam veterans born with spina bifida in 1996, and four years later, expanded the list of eligible conditions for the children of women Vietnam veterans to 18. The expanded list includes achondroplasia, the defect that caused Michele Christoforo’s dwarfism.

The Christoforos, represented by Yale Law School’s Veterans Legal Services Clinic, want the courts to declare the VA’s sex-based disability awards as unconstitutional and provide disability benefits to all children who qualify, regardless of whether their mother or father served in Vietnam.

“All other circumstances equal, if Mr. Christoforo were female, he could rely on the benefits provided under [the law] to ensure his child would receive the medical care, educational benefits and income support she needs. The only difference in his ability to have this assurance is his sex,” the lawsuit noted.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., has sponsored legislation that would increase research on birth defects in veterans exposed to environmental pollutants, such as Agent Orange and the burn pits used in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere to dispose of waste.

On Monday, Blumenthal said children with a disability related to their parent’s service-connected exposure “deserve equal benefits without exception.”

“Michele’s condition is real, her father’s service is unquestionable, and the damage caused by Agent Orange is well-documented. Denying her VA benefits solely because her father served rather than her mother is both unjust and cruel,” Blumenthal said.

Linda Schwartz, a Vietnam veteran and adviser to Vietnam Veterans of America, added that research does not “justify this distinction” between maternal or paternal exposure and birth defects and she supports the suit.

“Our members came home from Vietnam carrying wounds that didn’t always show up right away, and some of those wounds were passed on to their children. … It is long past time it does the same for the children of the men who served alongside them,” Schwartz said in a statement.

Agent Orange is the name given to defoliants used in Vietnam and elsewhere to strip combat zones of vegetation that could be used by enemy forces for camouflage. The herbicides contain a type of dioxin that is a known carcinogen linked to cancers, chronic conditions and birth defects.

The Justice Department, which represents the VA, did not respond to a request for comment by publication.

The service wants to add 606 ISV-Heavy vehicles to its existing fleet of roughly 1,105 ISVs through a three-contract effort, signaling a shift in how it intends to use the platform.

While the original ISV was designed to rapidly move a nine-soldier squad across rugged terrain, the ISV-H is built to do more than just transport troops. Instead, it emphasizes onboard power generation and mission system support.

According to a GM Defense factsheet, the ISV-H is designed for “a myriad of mission areas to include command and control, counter UAA, medical evacuation, loitering munition and drone deliver launch and recovery.”

The hybrid-electric design also enables “silent drive” and “silent watch” modes, allowing for “stealthy ingress and egress for high threat zones, while powering equipment needed.”

The biggest change to the vehicle is its exportable power capability. In the solicitation, the Army said it wants the vehicle to generate and export 60 kW of continuous high-voltage DC power, 15 kW of 28V DC power and 4.8 kW of 120V AC power — effectively turning the ISV-H into a mobile energy source for small units in the field.

Despite its name, the ISV-Heavy is not an armored version of the original vehicle (though, it is “add-on armor capable”). Instead, it is built on the commercial Chevrolet Silverado 3500 HD platform, with “heavy” referring to its heavier-duty chassis rather than added protection.

That change comes with tradeoffs. The ISV-H weighs roughly 9,000 pounds more than the original and carries fewer troops. Early mockups show configurations ranging from two to six seats, compared to the nine-seat capacity of the baseline ISV.

The Army completed the first phase of the solicitation — collecting industry white papers — on April 13. Timelines for the remaining phases, including presentations and final proposals, have not been released.

“American Revolution: The Augmented Exhibition,” which opens Saturday at the museum, uses the camera scanning feature of a museum-provided tablet to bring dramatically backlit displays to life. Scenes like the site of the Boston Massacre and Washington’s famous Delaware River crossing are mixed with video game-style period characters and allow visitors to pan the screen for 360-degree navigation of the space.

Selecting hot spots on the screen will bring you to the center of a crowd listening to a preacher fomenting revolution or transport you to Thomas Jefferson’s talking head, animated through generative AI.

Those seeking a “gamified” experience can select a treasure hunt activity through the various scenes, while those less keen on the immersive elements can take their tablets over to a comfortable corner in the exhibit space and manually swipe through all the scenes at their own pace, said Susan Smullen, a public affairs officer for the museum.

A particularly interesting feature for the larger interactive scenes lets viewers scroll forward in time to the same location in the present day.

In scenes like the Delaware crossing, mythologized in an iconic 1851 painting by Emanuel Leutze, the recreated scene and the present-day site comparison also serve to dispel misconceptions about what they moment was actually like.

“You’ll see… they’re actually sailing these, kind of, barges across,” said Matthew Eng, a communications and social media specialist at the museum. “And there is ice in the Delaware River as they’re crossing from Pennsylvania into New Jersey, but it’s not as dramatic as [the painting].”

The exhibit, created by French company Histovery as a touring exhibition, will be a centerpiece of the Army museum’s America 250 celebration. Last year, a new permanent exhibition, “Call to Arms” opened on the museum’s second floor, showcasing nearly 300 artifacts of the Revolution donated and on loan from other collections.

Highlights include the sword believed to be surrendered by Lord Cornwallis at Yorktown to end the war in 1781; and a pair of pistols and a pocket watch exchanged as gifts between George Washington and the Marquis de Lafayette.

Later this month, a replica of Washington’s field tent — sometimes called the first Oval Office — will open on the green outside the museum as another historical touchpoint.

Paul Morando, the first chief curator of the museum and newly installed director, told Military Times during a preview visit that the Revolutionary War was a particularly good fit for an exhibit that reimagined historical scenes, since it took place before photography and many stories about the soldiers who fought have been lost to history.

“Folks are learning not just about a particular battle; they’re learning about the people,” he said. “But it’s done from a heavily researched perspective, and not just as a fun experience.”

For the museum, which opened in 2020, it also represents a chance to generate fresh interest among both visitors and donors. Located 40 minutes away from Washington, D.C.’s world-class Smithsonian collections, the museum has sometimes struggled to attract its full capacity of visitors.

While the U.S. Army funds museum infrastructure and operations, the foundation contributes fundraising for programming and construction and manages revenue-generating functions like the gift shop. For donors, being able to sponsor individual “time portal” Revolutionary War scenes is exciting, said Jamie Hubans, vice president of Marketing and Communications at the Army Historical Foundation.

“A lot of those are individuals who have family connections to these stories,” such as an ancestor who served at Yorktown, she said.

The free exhibit replaces a paid simulator gallery that was seeing waning foot traffic, Hubans said. This augmented reality experience, which follows a smaller, but markedly successful, AR exhibit about D-Day, will also allow the museum to market itself anew to tour groups and other visitors.

Between the immersive exhibit and the artifacts collection, Morando stressed that soldier stories remain at the forefront.

“A lot of people forget we only declared our independence in 1776; it was up to our soldiers to fight and die for that independence. And I think sometimes that gets lost,” he said. “And these are just, most of them, common folks who decided to take up arms and do something extraordinary. They risked not only their lives, but their families, their way of life. … So that’s the message we’re trying to get across with an experience like this.”

“American Revolution: The Augmented Exhibition” will remain open until at least July 2027.

While certain enhancements have been made throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, the core of the gun has remained relatively unchanged. So much so that a doughboy could likely pick up the modern-day M2 and operate it.

The highly versatile weapon has seen action affixed to the wings of P-47 Thunderbolts and P-51D Mustangs. It has floated down the Mekong Delta on the decks of America’s “Brown Water Navy” aboard patrol boats and river vessels. And it has surveyed terrain mounted atop Humvees during the Gulf, Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

That the M2 has managed to outlast all other small arms weapon is a testament to its maker: John Moses Browning.

The ‘Thomas Edison’ of guns

Born in Ogden, Utah Territory, in 1855, Browning was the son of Mormon gunsmith Jonathan Browning who fathered 22 children with three wives.

John was lucky number 13 and spent much of his youth tinkering in his father’s workshop. By his mid-teens, Browning was a skilled metalworker in his own right and could repair or copy any gun dropped off at his father’s shop.

“As soon as I started to make the gun,” he recalled, “I found my head so full of parts that my greatest difficulty was sorting them out.”

Browning eschewed blueprints in favor of trial-and-error cutting, chiseling, drilling and filing. By 1879 the 24-year-old had filed his first of 128 firearm patents for what would become the Model 1885 single-shot rifle.

The prodigious inventor went on to design seminal military guns such as the Colt M1911 semiautomatic pistol, history’s most enduring semiautomatic pistol design; the Winchester Model 1897 pump-action shotgun, the devastating American “trench gun” of World War I that was so effective that it drew diplomatic protests from Germany; the M1895 gas-operated machine gun; the .50-caliber M2 machine gun; and the M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle — the BAR of World War II fame.

Author Nathan Gorenstein estimates that roughly 35–40 million firearms have subsequently been patterned after the inventor’s designs, and he even conceded that number is likely low.

“As Henry Ford was to automobiles, and Thomas Edison was to electricity,” the author writes, “Browning was to firearms.”

A war’s on

By 1917, the horrendous “butcher’s bill” of the Great War was already in the millions as a result of numerous technological weapons advancements introduced on the Western Front — from the machine gun, tanks to airplanes.

As American doughboys poured into France, Gen. John J. “Blackjack” Pershing, commander of the American Expeditionary Forces, requested the development of a multipurpose heavy machine gun in response to both German 13mm antitank rifles and the emergence of thicker enemy armor, according to the Army.

Browning got to work that summer, teaming up with Colt engineer Fred Moore to create a gun that, per Pershing’s specifications, could shoot armor-piercing ammo capable of traveling 2,700 feet per second.

While Winchester Repeating Arms Company set off to develop the .50-caliber cartridges, Browning worked to exact a prototype to match.

Working off the M1917A1’s base design — Browning’s machine gun that received prodigious use during WWI — the subsequent M1921 would have water-cooled barrels, was recoil operated and fired from a closed bolt. The unique design made the receiver transformable into seven different configurations for all types of roles, from infantry to aircraft.

The first test of what was to become the M2 wasn’t exactly promising, however.

On Oct. 15, 1918, Browning fired 870 rounds in bursts of 100 to 250 rounds. The basic mechanism of the gun was sound, but a host of challenges remained.

The recoil, according to Gorenstein, made it practically impossible” to hold the barrel level.

Postwar development of the gun continued, albeit at a slower pace.

“Work on the 50 caliber going along rather slow,” Browning wrote on April 23, 1920. “I am not satisfied with the new cartridge and afraid it will kick the gun around so it will have no accuracy. … The cartridge we have jumps too much and new one will be 50% worse.”

Browning continued to tweak the gun throughout the 1920s until his death in 1926. Ultimately, the .50-caliber gun that is still in widespread use today was modified by Samuel E. Green, an engineer at the government’s Springfield Armory in Massachusetts, who took over its development in 1927, according to Gorenstein.

“He and his team developed a feed mechanism so that ammunition belts could be loaded from either the left or right side, important if multiple guns were mounted in the confined space of an aircraft wing or fit into a tank turret,” writes Gorenstein.

“He also figured out how to produce a version of the gun for use on land, air, or sea that could be made on a single assembly line. It was officially adopted as the ‘Browning, Caliber .50, M2’ to differentiate it from Browning’s first version. By the end of World War II, more than 2 million M2s had come off American assembly lines, and the gun acquired its still-used nickname, Ma Deuce.”

WWII and beyond

The advent of World War II firmly cemented the M2 as America’s heavy machine gun.

Equipped on both American bombers and fighters, the M2 provided a lethal wall of lead for its plane crews.

In 1941, as Japanese planes strafed American battleships at Pearl Harbor, it was an M2 Browning machine gun that Messman 2nd Class Dorie Miller wielded to defend the USS West Virginia, earning him a Navy Cross — the first Black American service member to receive the award.

As Audie Murphy mounted his tank on Jan. 26, 1945, near Holtzwihr, France, he used a .50-caliber machine gun to hold off advancing German troops in one of the war’s most famous stands.

In the Vietnam War, legendary Marine Corps sniper Carlos Hathcock killed an enemy soldier at a distance of 2,460 yards, writes Matt Fratus. It was not a rifle that notched the nearly mile-and-a-half-long kill, but an M2.

From the battlefields of Mogadishu, Iraq and Afghanistan to present-day Ukraine, the M2 has remained a staple in the U.S. — and the world’s — arsenal.

The machine gun, meanwhile, has come up for reevaluation, and at least four major attempts have been made to develop a lighter gun with less recoil, with only one making it past field tests.

Even in that instance, the weapon was only in the field for a brief time before it was replaced by the old M2, according to Gorenstein.

Roughly 50,000 Browning M2 machine guns remain in use by the American military today.

The U.S. military is once again pursuing flying directed energy weapons to counter threats to American airspace, according to the Defense Department’s missile defense boss.

Speaking to members of Congress during a House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces hearing on April 15 on the Pentagon’s planned missile defense activities for fiscal year 2027, U.S. Missile Defense Agency director Air Force Lt. Gen. Heath Collins stated that his organization was “all in” on “bringing directed energy to the fight,” including integrating such weapons into unmanned platforms for domestic air defense against hostile missiles and drones.

“We are certainly putting more attention into bringing potentially game-changing directed energy capabilities to bear in an unmanned platform,” Collins stated in response to a question from Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-New Mexico) regarding the MDA’s adoption of directed energy weapons.

“[An] air platform is what we’re focused on, so we can bring that capability to the edge of the fight and thin the herd on [unmanned aerial vehicles], potentially air threats and the like.”

While Collins did not identify specific directed energy capabilities of interest to the MDA, his written statement to the subcommittee notes that the agency is “accelerating the operational use of high-energy lasers on various platforms” to add a “critical, non-kinetic layer” to the existing U.S. missile defense architecture.

It’s unclear how much the MDA plans on spending on these efforts. While the “skinny” version at the Pentagon’s historic $1.5 trillion fiscal year 2027 budget request published in early April includes a significant boost to directed energy research and development for homeland missile defense under the Trump administration’s “Golden Dome for America” initiative, the documents do not contain any R&D or procurement efforts explicitly tied to the agency.

As Laser Wars readers likely already know, the Pentagon has been examining airborne laser weapons for missile defense since the 1970s, when the U.S. Air Force established its Airborne Laser Laboratory (ALL) program to explore the development of a laser-armed “aerial battleship” to protect strategic bombers from incoming interceptors.

In 2010, the service’s Boeing 747-based YAL-1 Airborne Laser Test Bed successfully destroyed several ballistic missiles in flight during testing but was subsequently canceled the following year due to “significant affordability and technology problems,” as then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates put it at the time.

As military laser weapons have evolved from bulky chemical-based systems to more compact and efficient solid-state designs in recent decades, U.S. military planners have increasingly explored integrating them into unmanned airborne platforms.

The High Energy Liquid Laser Area Defense System (HELLADS) effort, initiated in 2003 by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, sought to develop a 150-kW system to integrate into both manned and unmanned aircraft before grinding to a halt in 2015.

The MDA itself pursued outfitting drones with laser weapons for ballistic missile defense for more than a decade through its Low Power Laser Demonstrator (LPLD) initiative before then-Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Michael Griffin threw cold water on the effort in 2020, citing the unique technical and environmental challenges inherent to mounting lasers on aircraft.

“I think it can be done as an experiment, but as a weapon system to equip an airplane with the kinds of lasers we think necessary — in terms of their power level, and all their support requirements, getting the airplane to altitudes where atmospheric turbulence can be mitigated appropriately — that combination of things doesn’t go on one platform,” Griffin told reporters in May 2020, per Breaking Defense. “So, I’m just extremely skeptical of that.”

Griffin isn’t wrong. Despite advances in laser technology, engineering a directed energy weapon that’s both powerful enough to destroy an incoming target and compact enough to integrate onto a relatively small airframe like a multirole combat aircraft or drone is a significant challenge.

Even if an integration were technically simple, operational feasibility is an major question: atmospheric conditions are limiting factors for laser weapons in any domain, but turbulence is a particularly thorny one for fast-moving airborne platforms tasked with maintaining a coherent beam long enough to successfully neutralize targets moving at equally high speeds.

Despite this skepticism, the dream of laser-armed drones appears alive and well. As recently as 2024, the MDA was gearing up for another run at airborne lasers, albeit with an initial focus on low-powered systems for tracking before ramping up to high-energy weapons.

In January 2025, the U.S. Navy released a slick vision of future naval operations that included notional drone wingmen outfitted with directed energy weapons running interference for manned aircraft. And in the last year, defense contractor General Atomics has released multiple renderings of its MQ-9B SkyGuardian and MQ-20 Avenger drones outfitted with laser weapons, although a company spokesman cautioned reporters that the systems were not designed for “any specific government program or contract.”

Directed energy weapons offer an alluring alternative to traditional missile-based air defenses, with low cost-per-shot, deep magazines and the ability to engage targets at the speed of light.

But the Pentagon has been here before: airborne laser concepts have repeatedly surged on waves of optimism, only to collapse under the weight of technical complexities and ballooning costs.

Indeed, the Air Force’s Airborne High Energy Laser (AHEL) and Self-Protect High-Energy Laser Demonstrator (SHiELD) efforts, which respectively sought to mount laser weapons on an AC-130J Ghostrider gunship and F-15 Eagle fighter jet, proved too challenging to even advance to airborne tests. (Undeterred, the service is poised to restart airborne laser efforts in fiscal year 2027 amid a surge in broad institutional support for directed energy. Time is a flat circle.)

Whether the MDA is barreling towards a genuine directed energy inflection point or just another familiar R&D cycle remains an open question.

For now, the message from Collins is clear: when it comes to determining whether airborne laser weapons are a viable missile defense capability, the U.S. military is once again willing to find out the hard way.

The USS Abraham Lincoln, USS Gerald R. Ford and USS George H.W. Bush are currently operating in the area’s waterways, the command said on social media, in addition to their carrier air wings and over 15,000 sailors and Marines.

Together, the three carriers bring together over 200 aircraft with capabilities ranging from electronic warfare to stealth striking. Some of the aircraft include the EA-18G Growler, F-35C Lightning II, F/A-18 Super Hornet and the CMV-22B Osprey.

Aircraft carriers serve as the focal point of U.S. naval power, as they are able to sustain air operations without relying on host-nation bases. Each carrier is accompanied by a strike group that often includes destroyers, cruisers and logistics support vessels.

At least twelve total ships are in the region: the three aircraft carriers and an assortment of accompanying destroyers, the command said. It did not include details about specific operations nor the duration of deployment.

The ships’ presence comes amid continuing tensions between the U.S. and Iran, including disruptions to shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.

The U.S. has implemented a blockade of Iranian ships and ports that CENTCOM reported in a separate post Friday had thus far “redirected” 34 ships.

The blockade began April 13, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said in a Friday press briefing that it would continue for “as long as it takes, whatever President Trump decides.”

In the weeks leading up to Maduro’s January 3 capture, Gannon Ken Van Dyke, a master sergeant with U.S. Army Special Forces, used sensitive classified information to make wagers on prediction market Polymarket that U.S. forces would enter Venezuela and that Maduro would be out of power.

A grand jury in Manhattan federal court indicted Van Dyke, 38, on charges of unlawful use of confidential government information for personal gain, theft of nonpublic government information, commodities fraud, wire fraud, and making an unlawful monetary transaction.

The case appeared to mark the first time the department had brought insider trading charges involving a prediction market.

“Our men and women in uniform are trusted with classified information in order to accomplish their mission as safely and effectively as possible, and are prohibited from using this highly sensitive information for personal financial gain,” Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement.

Polymarket says it cooperated

Defense attorney information for Van Dyke was not immediately available. He is expected to be presented before a judge in North Carolina later on Thursday, the Justice Department said.

The Pentagon deferred comment to the Justice Department.

Asked by reporters about the arrest, President Donald Trump said he was not familiar with the case but that it reminded him of Pete Rose, who was banned from Major League Baseball over a gambling scandal.

“That’s like Pete Rose betting on his own team,” Trump said. “If he bet against his team, that would be no good, but he bet on his own team. I’ll look into it.”

In a post on X, Polymarket said it had referred the matter to the Justice Department. “Insider trading has no place on Polymarket. Today’s arrest is proof the system works,” the post read.

Involved in ‘planning and execution’ of Maduro capture

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission also brought civil charges against Van Dyke.

Van Dyke has been an active-duty soldier in the U.S. Army since 2008 and had most recently been stationed at Fort Bragg in North Carolina, according to the indictment.

Prosecutors said Van Dyke was involved in the “planning and execution” of the Maduro capture, but did not go into detail. The indictment made note of a photograph Van Dyke uploaded to his Google account in the early morning of January 3, hours after the U.S. military brought Maduro to the USS Iwo Jima amphibious assault ship.

“That photograph depicts Van Dyke on what appears to be the deck of a ship at sea, at sunrise wearing U.S. military fatigues, and carrying a rifle, standing alongside three other individuals wearing U.S. military fatigues,” the indictment read.

The series is built around a covert government agency monitoring giant monsters called Titans. It stars father and son Kurt Russell and Wyatt Russell as different-era versions of the same Army officer — a soldier’s soldier who spends decades watching the brass refuse to take a threat seriously until it’s too late.

The story is fiction, obviously. But as anyone who’s sat through a joint readiness exercise knows, the scariest scenario is always the one nobody planned for. So, let’s run the tape.

The first problem is command authority. Under the current National Response Framework, a catastrophic domestic incident triggers a cascade of federal coordination flowing from local authorities up through FEMA, with the Defense Department stepping in for Defense Support of Civil Authorities. It’s a system built for hurricanes, mass casualty events and CBRN -chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear- incidents.

A 300-foot amphibious creature leveling a coastal city technically checks the “catastrophic” box. Still, the chain of command for a threat that moves under its own power, does not respond to law enforcement, and cannot be detained pending arraignment is untested at best.

In a real monster scenario, U.S. Northern Command would likely assume the lead for any domestic Titan event. The command has been quietly expanding its homeland defense footprint, with new component activations as recently as this past January. That’s encouraging, unless the thing you’re defending against walked right out of the ocean and into downtown Los Angeles. At that point, the question of what active-duty troops are actually authorized to do on U.S. soil becomes considerably more urgent.

The second problem is weapons. The U.S. military’s most powerful non-nuclear conventional munition is the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, a 30,000-pound bunker-buster delivered exclusively by B-2 Spirit bombers. It can punch through roughly 200 feet of reinforced concrete before detonating. According to Scientific American, the weapon saw its first real-world combat use last year against hardened nuclear facilities in Iran.

The GBU-57 is, by any reasonable measure, an extraordinary piece of engineering. It is also a weapon designed to destroy static targets. A Titan-class threat that can absorb a fuel-air explosion and keep moving rewrites the targeting calculus entirely. Missiles, artillery, carrier air wings: all work against a threat that can be fixed, tracked, and killed inside a standard engagement envelope. A creature that is in the bunker presents a problem that the current inventory was not designed to solve.

The third problem is the kill chain. Even if you could hurt the brute, authorizing the strike would be a bureaucratic event horizon.

Nuclear release authority is well-defined. Authority to conduct a sustained kinetic campaign against a living organism the size of a skyscraper in a populated coastal city would involve rules of engagement, collateral damage estimates, environmental review, and at least one congressional staffer asking if the move requires an Authorization for Use of Military Force.

Pick your favorite bottleneck.

The “Monarch” universe eventually arrives at the uncomfortable conclusion that the military is not the main effort: Containment is. The joint force is extraordinary at destroying thingsbut it is considerably less adept at managing them.

The season finale drops May 1 on Apple TV+.

So is the U.S. military prepared to fight a Kaiju? The answer is a firm “probably not” - but they’re going to try anyway.

After suffering a humiliating defeat at Rommel’s hands at Kasserine Pass in Feb. 19-23, 1943, however, from March 23 to April 3 the Americans demonstrated their ability to learn under the tutelage of Lt. Gen. George S. Patton Jr. at El Guettar. Among those quick learners were Pvt. Robert Booker.

Born in Callaway, Nebraska, on July 11, 1920, Booker joined the Army in June 1942 and after training he was assigned to B Company, 133rd Regiment, 34th Infantry Division. Arriving in Belfast on Jan. 26, 1942, the 34th was the first American division to reach UK soil and on Nov. 8, it landed at Algiers alongside elements of the British 78th Infantry Division and two British Commando units. From there, the division took part in a succession of battles: Kasserine Pass, Sened Station, Sidi Bou Zid, El Guettar, Faid Pass, Sbeitla and Fondouk.

It was at Fondouk that Booker had his moment of challenge. On April 9, 1943, he was carrying the machine gun and ammunition for his company across an open field when they came under heavy enemy mortar and machine gun fire. As Booker’s citation noted, “He continued to advance despite the fact that two enemy machine guns and several mortars were using him as an individual target.”

Although enemy artillery also began to register on him, the wounded gunner reached his intended location 600 feet ahead, immediately set up his weapon, commenced firing and eliminated one enemy machine gun position.

Booker then turned his weapon on a second enemy machine gun, but the enemy was focusing its attention on him and struck him a second time. Although mortally wounded, Booker “remained retrained and unfazed as he continued to encourage his squad and helped direct their fire.”

Slain at age 22, on April 25, 1944, Robert Booker was awarded the Medal of Honor on April 25, 1944, but followed it with an unusual epilogue.

Decades after his sacrifice, the Army commemorated him as the namesake of a new “armored infantry support vehicle,” the M10 Booker. Developed by General Dynamics Land Systems and unveiled in June 2023, the “assault gun” was a relatively lightly armored vehicle with a 105mm M35 cannon, a 12.7mm M2HB machine gun and a 7.62mm M240 weapon for use against light armor and defensive positions.

The M10, however, suffered from weight problems and shifting priorities in the Army budget, leading to its cancellation in 2025. By then, 80 had been produced and plans for their disposal, such as sale to another country, currently remains undetermined.

In an extraordinary and ongoing effort, specialists from the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency, using new techniques including “next generation” DNA sequencing, have resumed the effort to recover and identify remains from the prison camps and ships used to transport POWs that the U.S. gave up on in 1951.

One of the most recent identifications was that of Army Air Forces Pvt. Bennett H. Waters, who was serving on the Bataan peninsula with the 17th Bombardment Squadron, 27th Bombardment Group, when the forces of Imperial Japan invaded the Philippines on Dec. 8, 1941, the day after the Pearl Harbor attacks.

He was among a group of at least 20 American POWs from the Pacific whose remains have been identified and returned to their families from the first of the year through April 21.

Waters had survived the Bataan Death March; he survived more than three years of prison camp cruelty; and he would survive the sinking by U.S. aircraft on Dec. 14, 1944, of the unmarked Japanese transport Oryoku Maru, which had been taking him and more than 1,600 other POWs to Japan’s home islands to work as slave labor.

Waters, then 26 years old, would not survive a second attack by U.S. aircraft on a second Japanese “hell ship,” the Enoura Maru, on Jan. 9, 1945, in the port of Takao, Formosa (now Taiwan). Waters and more than 300 other U.S. POWs killed in the attack on the Enoura Maru were later buried in a mass grave in Takao, according to DPAA.

In both sinkings, the aircraft came from the same U.S. carrier, the Hornet (CV12), the namesake of the carrier Hornet (CV8) which launched the April 8, 1942, raid on Tokyo led by then-Lt. Col. James H. “Jimmy” Doolittle and was later sunk on Oct. 27, 1942, in the battle of the Santa Cruz Islands.

Following the identification, the remains of Waters were brought back to his southeast Georgia hometown of Blackshear with a military escort from his great-great nephew, Army Sgt. Andrew Walsh of the 10th Mountain Division, for interment on April 4 with full military honors.

Walsh told First Coast News that bringing home “Uncle Hubert,” as he was known, was “an important moment for me but not only me, but for my whole family.”

“We come from a long line of service in the Waters bloodline dating back to the Civil War,” Walsh said. “As a family member of Pvt. Waters, it means a lot that he was able to be found and finally be placed next to his mother” who had a plot at the Blackshear City Cemetery waiting for him

Years ago, Waters’ mother, Minnie Bennett Waters Kelly, bought a tombstone to mark the grave of the son that she believed would eventually return to his southeast Georgia hometown, the Blackshear Times reported.

The April 4 services for Waters at the First Baptist Church of Blackshear marked one extended family’s tribute to the service of a relative who went off to war in another century and whose memory could not be erased by the passage of time and generations.

As the Blackshear Times put it, “Over eight decades of pain, heartache and unanswered questions finally came to an end” when Waters was laid to rest.

Attending the services were several of Waters’ nieces and “numerous” great-nieces and great-nephews; great-great nieces and nephews; and great-great-great nieces and nephews, the Blackshear Times reported.

On his return to Fort Drum in upstate New York, Sgt. Walsh went to the Fallen Warrior Monument on the base to reflect on his unexpected mission to escort the remains of a great-great uncle he had only learned of through family lore.

“My reaction was happy, for one, because he is coming home after so many years of being a POW/MIA,” Walsh said in an article by the Fort Drum Garrison public affairs office. “And then I was excited that I could honor my family in such an important way. As a soldier, it makes me happy to have a fellow soldier coming home, and honoring his memory, and being able to pay respect to him for the sacrifices that he made for this great nation.”

Identifications continue

Another POW whose remains were recently identified was Army Air Forces Pfc. Weber S. Underwood, 25, a member of 28th Materiel Squadron, 20th Air Base Group.

He survived the Bataan Death March but was believed to have died while assigned to the infamous Tayabas Road work detail, according to prison camp and other historical records, DPAA said in a release.

The work at Tayabas Road was such that the POWs built a small cemetery where the remains of 35 POWs were recovered after the war, according to DPAA.

The work detail was a brutal forced labor project in which the Japanese Imperial Army used roughly 300 POWs to construct and repair a strategic jungle road in Tayabas Province, DPAA said.

Underwood died on June 3, 1942, according to the DPAA, and by then Japanese Prime Minister Hideki Tojo was getting ready to order the transfer of thousands of POWs aboard unmarked transports from the Philippines and other sites in the Pacific to Japan’s home islands to be used as slave labor.

Tojo, who was hanged after the war, ordered prisoners to be shipped to Japan on all available vessels, and “The Japanese military subsequently transferred large numbers of POWs to industrial sites throughout their empire— Formosa (Taiwan), Korea, Manchuria, China, Burma (Myanmar), and Siam (Thailand),” DPAA said in a release.

Thousands of prisoners had already died in captivity that began in 1942 when roughly 12,000 U.S. troops and more than 60,000 Filipinos surrendered on the Bataan peninsula in what was arguably the worst defeat ever suffered by the U.S. military.

Then began what has come to be known as the “Bataan Death March,” a 65-mile trek to a railhead in tropical heat with little food or water amid the unremitting cruelty of the Japanese guards who stood ready to kill anyone who fell out of line.

“We had no idea what was ahead” as the march began, Army Air Forces Cpl. James Bollich, who survived the war, said in a 2012 article published by Air Force Global Strike Command Public Affairs.

As the march continued, “All we were doing was burying the dead,” Bollich recalled. “I remember looking around and deciding that the way people were dying that within a few weeks we would all be dead. The big killer was dysentery. Once you caught dysentery you were gone.”

Bollich was later transferred in what the prisoners came to call “hell ships” to labor camps in Mukden, in what is now China, where he was eventually liberated by Russian troops.

Hell on land and sea

In all, the floating dungeons that were the hell ships made a total 156 voyages to transfer POWs, and an estimated 25 of them were sunk by U.S. aircraft or submarines, according to a report by the U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command.

The lingering question about the hell ships has been whether U.S. intelligence or theater commanders knew that American prisoners were aboard and still allowed the attacks to proceed.

In the case of the Oryoku Maru, the sinking “was the result of intercepted Japanese radio transmissions that would have revealed some information about POWs on board,” according to a November 2019 article by the NHHC.

“Whether that information made its way down to the theater commanders is unclear. At any rate, there is no evidence to suggest that commanders at sea had any knowledge of the presence of POWs on Japanese ships,” NHHC said.

According to figures compiled for the Department of Veterans Affairs Advisory Committee on Former Prisoners of War in 1981, the Japanese held a total of 27,465 American POWs during the war and of that total, 11,107 died in captivity.

The oral histories of survivors at the Veterans History Project of the Library of Congress attest to how they died: some were worked to death; some fell to disease and starvation; some died from the bayonet or the bullet of a prison camp guard.

Following the war, the American Graves Registration Service sought to recover and identify remains, including at the main Cabanatuan prison camp in the Philippines, but discontinued the effort in 1951, citing the poor condition of and the commingling of the remains that prevented identification.

More than 3,000 sets of remains were reburied as unknowns at the Manila American Cemetery where they have been cared for by the American Battle Monuments Commission. Others have been reburied as unknowns at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific in Honolulu, known as the “Punchbowl.”

In 2014, the Defense Department gave DPAA the mission of renewing the effort to identify, recover and repatriate the remains of POWs who died in the prison camps or aboard the hell ships.

In an e-mail to Military Times, Heath Kennedy, the DPAA Indo-Pacific Disinterment Manager, said that 761 unknowns have thus far been disinterred from the Manila American Cemetery, with most of those occurring since 2017 when DPAA sped up operations.

The 761 unknowns include 464 unknowns associated with common graves from the Cabanatuan POW camp, Kennedy said. “Of the 464 Cabanatuan POW Camp unknowns already disinterred, at least 142 have been identified,” he said.

As for the hell ships, DPAA has disinterred 430 unknowns associated with the hell ships in Fiscal 2023 “and both the Manila and Punchbowl cemeteries and the DPAA Lab are still working to identify as many as possible,” Kennedy said.

DPAA forensics specialists use dental and anthropological analysis, as well as circumstantial evidence, to make identifications. They are assisted by scientists from the Armed Forces Medical Examiner System who use mitochondrial DNA analysis to confirm identities, DPAA said in a release.

The most recent identifications were also aided by next generation DNA sequencing, which can identify remains using DNA samples from relatives who are several generations removed from the deceased individual.

At an April 1 briefing in Thailand, DPAA Director Kelly McKeague also announced that DPAA had begun its “largest, most complex underwater mission ever in the history” to recover and possibly identify the remains of POWs who were killed when U.S. Navy aircraft mistakenly bombed and sank the Oryoku Maru in December 1944.

“When the ship was sunk, it limped back into Subic Bay and it sank there. And we began this effort three years ago to underwater investigate the site and the wreckage from the standpoint of trying to understand what it was, what the ship looked like,” McKeague said.

“We estimate there might be over 250 missing Americans in the hold of the ship. We think they might be limited to one of two holds, and that’s where the divers are currently operating,” McKeague said.

In a 6-3 decision, the justices overturned a circuit court ruling that said veteran Army Spec. Winston Hencely could not cite state law to hold Fluor Corp. liable for an employee’s actions.

Hencely had sued the company for negligence in state court in South Carolina, where two Fluor subsidiaries were headquartered. The bombing killed five service members and civilians and injured 17, including Hencely, who suffered a traumatic brain injury and lost the use of his left hand, arm and side of his face.

Writing the opinion for the majority, Justice Clarence Thomas said Fluor’s argument — that it had immunity in wartime under federal law that shields the military from being sued for combat-related decisions — and the circuit court’s support of that defense swept “too broadly.”

“Fourth Circuit … nonetheless found preemption simply because the suit arose in a wartime combat setting. [Another case decision’s] rationale, [Boyle v. United Technologies Corporation] justifies no such blanket preemption,” Thomas wrote.

Thomas added that neither the Constitution or any federal statute explicitly preempted the suit.

“The Court has already held that the Federal Tort Claims Act’s combatant-activities exception does not itself apply to suits against federal contractors,” Thomas wrote.

In late 2016, Ahmad Nayeb, an Afghan national who worked for Fluor and had known ties to the Taliban, built a bomb in his on-base space using work materials and tools.

Nayeb failed to board an escort bus the morning of Nov. 12, 2016, after work but no one reported him missing. He then walked across the base toward a staging area for a 5K Veterans Day race and detonated the bomb in a crowd of more than 200.

The Army investigation found that Fluor violated its contractual duties by providing Nayeb with the tools used to carry out the attack and failing to monitor his movements during escort duties.

Troops are barred from suing the U.S. military for injuries sustained in service under the Feres doctrine, a legal restriction stemming from several 1950s era Supreme Court cases.

They are allowed to sue defense contractors for negligence in their duties working for the U.S. government in combat zones but have seen mixed success, either losing their cases outright or winning but seeing them later overturned by higher courts.

Hencely’s suit differed from most previous cases in that he filed in state court in South Carolina, where two Fluor subsidiaries are based, and made claims against the company under the state’s negligence laws.

In their opinion, Thomas, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson, upheld the state court’s jurisdiction over companies, adding that contractors do not automatically share the government’s immunity.

“Although the Constitution gives Congress and the President broad war powers, that assignment has never been understood to bar all war related tort suits,” they said. “Absent a statue to the contrary, states can regulate or tax federal contractors on the same terms as any private company.”

Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh disagreed and Alito filed a dissenting opinion.

“May a state regulate security arrangements on a military base in an active war zone? May state judges and juries pass judgment on questions that are inextricably tied to military decisions that balance war-related risks against long-term strategic objectives? In my judgment, the answer to these questions must be ‘no,’ and for that reason, this state-law tort case is preempted by the Constitution’s grant of war powers exclusively to the Federal Government,” Alito wrote.

The families of those who were killed and at least eight other injured service members also have filed a lawsuit against Fluor, but that case was on hold pending the Supreme Court’s decision in the Hencely suit.

Killed in the attack were U.S. soldiers Pfc. Tyler Iubelt, 20, Staff Sgt. John Perry, 30, and Sgt. 1st Class Allan Brown, 46, as well as Fluor contractors Peter Provost, 62, and retired Army Col. Jarrold Reeves, 57.

As a justice, Thomas has sided with U.S. troops harmed by negligence by the federal government in non-combat situations, including medical care and off-duty events.

He has argued that the Feres decision should be overruled. Last year, after the court rejected a case that would challenge the Feres decision, Thomas penned a strongly worded 14-page dissent, calling the law “indefensible” and a “senseless as matter of policy.”

Phelan, who this week attended the Navy League’s annual Sea-Air-Space symposium in Washington, is departing the role “effective immediately,” Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell announced.

U.S. Navy Undersecretary Hung Cao, a former Virginia Senate candidate and special operations veteran, will assume the role of acting secretary of the Navy, Parnell added.

“On behalf of the Secretary of War and Deputy Secretary of War, we are grateful to Secretary Phelan for his service to the Department and the United States Navy,” Parnell wrote. “We wish him well in his future endeavors.”

While the Pentagon provided no reason for the move in their initial announcement, a senior administration official told Military Times that “President Trump and Secretary Hegseth agreed new leadership at the Navy is needed.”

“Secretary Hegseth informed John Phelan of this news prior to it being made public,” the official said.

Just yesterday, Phelan spoke with reporters at a media roundtable about the Navy’s prioritizing of ship building capacity as the service looks to double its vessel requests, according to the 2027 fiscal defense budget.

He also delivered a lengthy keynote address at the conference.

Phelan, who was confirmed as the Navy secretary in March 2025 by a 62-30 vote, was just the seventh non-veteran to serve in the role in the past 70 years.

A founder of the investment firm Rugger Management LLC, Phelan was the first service secretary pick to be announced by President Donald Trump following his return to the Oval Office. Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, however, was the first service secretary to be confirmed.

Phelan’s abrupt dismissal comes as the sea service continues to grapple with the ongoing conflict with Iran and in the Strait of Hormuz. On Sunday, a U.S. Navy destroyer operating in the Arabian Sea enforced the service’s ongoing naval blockade of Iranian ports when it fired its Mk-45 gun at a cargo vessel attempting to sail toward an Iranian port.

Wednesday’s announcement also comes less than three weeks after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth asked U.S. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George to step down and immediately retire.

That April 2 move involving George, one of three significant changes made by Hegseth on the same day, cut short George’s tenure, which began in September 2023, well before the end of the typical four-year term.

Gen. David Hodne, a former Army Ranger who had been overseeing the Army’s Transformation and Training Command, and Maj. Gen. William Green, the Army chief of chaplains, were also removed from their roles on April 2.

Since taking office, Hegseth has fired over a dozen generals and admirals, including Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. C.Q. Brown and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti.

Phelan was the Navy’s 79th service secretary.

Cao, meanwhile, is a graduate of the United States Naval Academy. He deployed with special operations forces to Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia during a military career that spanned 25 years.

Military Times reporter Tanya Noury contributed to this report.

So, the U.S. Army would like a robot to do the work.

The service is seeking an unmanned ground vehicle that can handle both casualty evacuation and resupply for tactical units.

“The modern battlefield is characterized by persistent enemy surveillance and rapid application of lethal effects at and behind the forward line of troops (FLOT), making any movement to and from the FLOT highly vulnerable,” according to the Army’s Commercial Solution Opening notice, which has a deadline of April 28. “This environment challenges commanders’ ability to resupply units and evacuate casualties.”

For resupply, the UGV should be able to haul enough cargo to sustain a dismounted rifle platoon and a company headquarters.

“It should be able to transport various classes of supply and operate autonomously across diverse terrains and environments, maintaining reliable communications with supported units,” the Army said.

The UGV should also be easily reconfigured for evacuating casualties. It must be able to transport at least two casualties from the point of injury to a designated collection point — without further harming the wounded, the notice states.

The notice didn’t specify the size nor capacity of the vehicle. However, the Army does want a robot that can function autonomously.

“The UGV must be capable of teleoperation, autonomous navigation, and beyond-line-of-sight communications,” the service said. “The UGV should be able to navigate both on- and off-road routes, including areas without GPS, and support situational awareness. It should minimize detectable signatures and emissions during operations, including in the final approach to supported units.”

The U.S. military has previously used robots for tasks like clearing IEDs. The Army’s current Small Multipurpose Equipment Transport project aims to develop cargo UGVs, such as HDT Robotics’s Hunter Wolf, an ATV-sized vehicle which can carry 2,800 pounds of supplies — and can be armed with machine guns. The Army recently completed a study of requirements for S-MET Increment 2.

For now, the pioneer in last-mile tactical robots is Ukraine. With maneuver in the open rendered extremely dangerous because of Russian drones constantly overhead, Ukrainians are relying more on robots to evacuate casualties and transport supplies.

The new Combat Field Test is designed to evaluate how soldiers perform under conditions that more closely resemble warfare on the modern battlefield, the Army said, launching a program that emphasizes strength, endurance and movement with loads.

The test will also be age- and sex-neutral and scored on a pass/fail standard.

The test begins with a one-mile run, followed by 30 dead-stop pushups, a 100-meter sprint, 16 lifts of a 40-pound sandbag onto a 65-inch platform and a 50-meter carry of two Army water cans weighing 40 pounds each. The soldier then completes a 50-meter movement drill with high crawl and a 25-meter three-five second rush before a final one-mile run.

Soldiers have 30 minutes to complete the entire assessment — with a continuously running clock — while wearing the Army Combat Uniform with boots. The Combat Field Test does not replace the Army Fitness Test, the service said.

Hegseth orders review of military grooming and fitness standards

The Army will begin to implement the new test this month, and it will be required annually. The service said no adverse administrative actions would be taken against soldiers who fail to pass the test for the first year. Soldiers in combat specialties who cannot meet the new standards can request a voluntary reclassification.

The specialties that will require this assessment include soldiers in infantry, combat engineering, field artillery, armor and explosive ordnance disposal roles, among others.