“We’re now starting the process of clearing out the Strait of Hormuz,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post, adding that “all 28” of Iran’s “mine dropper boats are also lying at the bottom of the sea.”

Minutes before Trump’s post, reports started to emerge about the presence of U.S. Navy ships in the strait.

An Axios journalist, citing an unnamed U.S. official, posted that “several” U.S. ships had crossed the strait on Saturday, though Iranian state TV soon after reported a denial from an official with Iran’s military.

Trump has repeatedly said that American forces have destroyed Iran’s navy and air force while crippling its ballistic missile and nuclear programs.

But fear of Iranian attacks on shipping over the past several weeks has effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz, a critical conduit for global oil supplies. Throttling the strait has disrupted global energy markets.

U.S. gasoline prices have spiked even though most of the oil that flows through the waterway does not go to the United States.

Representatives from the U.S. and Iran began talks hosted by Pakistan in Islamabad on Saturday amid a fragile ceasefire in the conflict.

The agreement came after the FAA conducted testing in New Mexico on the laser system used by the Pentagon and Homeland Security Department and validated that proper safety controls are in place and do not pose undue risks to passenger aircraft.

Two earlier incidents posed serious concerns.

The U.S. military errantly shot down a government drone with the ​laser-based system on Feb. 25, leading the FAA to expand an area in which flights are ​barred around Fort Hancock, Texas.

The incident followed the Feb. 18 decision by the FAA to halt all flights for 10 days at the nearby El Paso airport because of the use of ​the Pentagon laser system by a Homeland Security agency without completion of an FAA safety review. The ​El Paso shutdown order was lifted by the FAA after about eight hours following ‌the ⁠White House’s intervention.

“Following a thorough, data-informed Safety Risk Assessment, we determined that these systems do not present an increased risk to the flying public,” FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford said on Friday.

The Pentagon has said there are more than 1,000 drone incursions along the U.S.-Mexico border each month. ​U.S. security officials have increasingly ​expressed alarm about ⁠the use of drones by Mexican cartels to drop drug packages or surveil trafficking routes.

Several media outlets reported last month drones were seen over Fort McNair in Washington where Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth live.

There is no indication the Pentagon plans to deploy the laser at the base, which is close to Reagan Washington National Airport.

Democratic Sen. Tammy Duckworth last month called on federal watchdogs to review the ​decision-making process leading to the use of the systems and the ​FAA’s decision ⁠to close airspace.

No decision has been made, and the White House has not directed the Pentagon to draw up concrete plans for a troop reduction on the continent, said the official, who requested anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

But the discussions alone underscore how sharply relations between Washington and its European NATO allies have deteriorated in recent months. They also suggest that a visit to the White House on Wednesday by NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte failed to significantly improve transatlantic relations, which are arguably at their lowest point since NATO’s 1949 founding.

The White House has publicly said that Trump has considered withdrawing from the alliance altogether. Removing troops from Europe would allow Trump to dramatically lessen Washington’s security commitments on the continent, without formally withdrawing, a move that would test constitutional law.

The U.S. currently has more than 80,000 troops in Europe and has played a central role in Europe’s security architecture since World War Two. More than 30,000 of those troops are located in Germany, with sizeable numbers also stationed in Italy, the United Kingdom and Spain.

The official did not say which countries could be affected or how many troops might ultimately be withdrawn if Trump decides to move forward with the idea.

Asked for comment, a NATO spokesperson referred Reuters to Rutte’s interview with CNN on Wednesday.

In that interview, Rutte said that he understood Trump’s frustrations with the alliance, but that the “large majority of European nations” had been helpful to Washington’s war effort in Iran.

Following Rutte’s meeting with Trump, the secretary general told European governments that Trump wants concrete commitments to help secure the Strait of Hormuz within days, Reuters reported earlier on Thursday.

Alliance in crisis

While Trump has long had a tumultuous relationship with NATO — for years accusing European capitals of skimping on defense spending — the last three months have been particularly rocky.

In January, Trump provoked a transatlantic crisis when he renewed longstanding threats to annex Greenland, an overseas territory of Denmark. Since the war with Iran broke out on Feb. 28, he has expressed deep frustration that NATO allies have not offered to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a vital route for global energy supplies that has remained largely closed despite a fragile ceasefire announced this week.

NATO diplomats have previously said the U.S. has not made clear if it expects any mission in the Strait of Hormuz to start during or after the conflict, and they have also said the U.S. has not specified what particular capabilities it expects of each NATO country.

The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday that senior administration officials were discussing moving troops stationed in Europe out of countries whose leaders had been critical of the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran and into European countries whose leaders had been more supportive.

The White House official told Reuters that Trump was specifically discussing bringing troops back to the U.S., rather than moving them to different foreign countries.

The official said Trump was particularly irked about what he perceives as Europe’s attempts to brush off his attempts to acquire Greenland.

After meeting with Rutte in Switzerland in January, Trump had suggested a deal was in sight to end the dispute over the Danish territory. No such agreement has come to fruition.

“He asked NATO specifically to come up with a plan when we were in Davos, and they’re sort of not taking it seriously,” the official said.

The shockwaves have rippled outward, contributing to global economic strains and bringing conflict to Gulf neighbors whose economies depend on stability.

“This war will be remembered as Trump’s grave strategic miscalculation. One whose consequences reshaped the region in unintended ways,” Middle East scholar Fawaz Gerges told Reuters.

Before the war, the Strait, a narrow passage carrying around a fifth of the world’s oil and gas, was formally treated as an international waterway. Iran monitored it, harassed shipping and intermittently intercepted vessels, but it stopped short of asserting outright control.

In the new reality, Tehran has moved from shadowing tankers to effectively dictating terms. It currently functions as the de facto gatekeeper of the shipping route, selectively deciding on passage and on what terms. Iran wants to charge ships for safe passage.

Additionally, Iran has demonstrated resilience under sustained attack and retained the capacity to escalate further, projecting influence across multiple fronts and strategic choke points.

Its reach extends through Lebanon and Iraq via Hezbollah and Shi’ite militias, and into the Bab el-Mandeb in the Red Sea, leveraging the sphere of influence of its Houthi allies.

At home, Iran’s leadership remains firmly in control - even though the country’s economy is in tatters and great swathes of infrastructure in ruins from American and Israeli bombs.

“What did the U.S.–Israeli war actually achieve?” asked Gerges. “Regime change in Tehran? No. The surrender of the Islamic Republic? No. Containment of Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium? No. An end to Tehran’s support for its regional allies? No.”

Iran has absorbed the blows while retaining — and in some cases strengthening — its core instruments of power, said four analysts and three Gulf government sources who spoke to Reuters for this story.

As well as Iran’s control of Hormuz, the political picture now, they noted, is of a more brutal, empowered establishment, unaccounted nuclear material, continued missile and drone production, and ongoing support for regional militias.

Echoing Trump, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday said Washington had won a decisive military victory, and that Iran’s missile program had been functionally destroyed. The State Department and White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The United States, Israel and Iran agreed to a two-week ceasefire and U.S. and Iranian officials are expected to hold talks from Friday to discuss a long-term settlement.

While the ceasefire may halt the fighting, the Gulf officials said its durability hinges on addressing the deeper conflicts shaping the region’s security and energy landscape.

Any deal that falls short of a comprehensive settlement risks entrenching Iranian leverage rather than constraining it, they add.

Ebtesam Al‑Ketbi, president of the Emirates Policy Center described the truce as a fragile pause, one likely to institutionalize new forms of instability unless it expands well beyond a narrow cessation of hostilities.

“This ceasefire is not a solution; it is a test of intentions,” Ketbi told Reuters. “If it does not evolve into a broader agreement redefining the rules of engagement - in Hormuz and across proxy theaters — it will amount to little more than a tactical pause before a more dangerous and complex escalation.”

“If Trump reaches a deal with Iran without addressing core issues - ballistic missiles, drones, proxies, nuclear concerns, and the rules governing Hormuz - then the conflict is effectively left unresolved and the region exposed,” said Ketbi.

HORMUZ IS RED LINE FOR GULF COUNTRIES

Iran, for its part, has put forward to Washington terms that include sanctions relief, recognition of enrichment rights, compensation for war damage and continued control over the Strait, underscoring just how far apart the sides remain.

Trump acknowledged receiving the Iranian plan and called it “a workable basis to negotiate.”

For Gulf countries who rely on Hormuz to export their oil, the Strait remains a non-negotiable red line, added Saudi analyst Ali Shihabi.

“Any outcome that leaves the waterway effectively in Iranian hands would be a defeat for President Trump,” with the potential repercussions of high energy prices extending into the midterm elections, he said.

What the war may nonetheless open up for Tehran, Shihabi added, is the prospect of a negotiated settlement — potentially including sanctions relief.

From a Gulf perspective, the picture is deeply unsettling. Mistrust of Iran is running high following Tehran’s strikes on energy facilities and commercial hubs across the region. More troubling still, the war has transformed Hormuz into an explicit instrument of leverage and coercion, analysts say.

The economic stakes are equally stark. Iran wants to charge fees for ships passing through the Hormuz shipping lanes as part of any permanent peace deal, a move that would reverberate far beyond the Gulf, hitting global energy markets and the economic lifelines of states along the opposite shore.

“If Iran can extract millions per ship, the implications are enormous — not just for the Gulf, but for the global economy,” Ketbi said. “In that sense, the outcome is not just a regional setback, but a systemic shift with worldwide consequences.”

More broadly, the analysts warned, it would signal a fundamental change in the regional order, from a strait governed by international norms to one effectively policed by a hostile state emboldened, not weakened, by war.

GULF DEMANDS

The ceasefire, brokered by Pakistan, followed a war launched on February 28 by Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said they aimed to curb Iran’s regional power, dismantle its nuclear program and create conditions for Iranians to topple their rulers.

Both sides declared victory. Trump called the ceasefire a “total and complete victory,” saying U.S. forces had achieved their objectives, while Iran’s Supreme National Security Council claimed Trump had accepted its conditions.

But the war has yet to deprive Iran of its stockpile of near‑weapons‑grade enriched uranium or its ability to strike neighbors with missiles and drones. The leadership, which faced a mass uprising months ago, withstood the superpower onslaught with no sign of collapse.

A Gulf source said restoring trust with Tehran would require stringent, written commitments — not informal assurances — covering non‑interference, freedom of navigation, and the security of key maritime corridors, including Hormuz, as well as the national security requirements of the Gulf states.

Those conditions, the Gulf source said, were conveyed to Pakistani mediators to be included as part of a comprehensive settlement.

An Israeli official said senior Trump administration officials had assured Israel that they would insist on previous conditions, such as the removal of Iran’s nuclear material, a halt to enrichment and the elimination of ballistic missiles.

Pakistan’s prime minister said Iranian and U.S. delegations were expected to meet in Islamabad on Friday for what would be the first official peace talks since the war began.

The remarks came one day after President Donald Trump declared a two-week ceasefire with Iran, stepping back from earlier threats to level Iranian civilization. The president said he hopes the pause will pave the way for negotiations toward a longer-term agreement.

Hegseth noted that the United States had carried out more than 800 strikes against targets in the hours leading up to the pause in hostilities.

He added that if Tehran had refused to agree, attacks would have expanded to include “power plants, the bridges and oil and energy infrastructure.”

The defense secretary went on to hail Operation Epic Fury as a “historic and overwhelming victory on the battlefield,” painting a picture of an Iranian military in ruins.

“Central Command, using less than 10% of America’s total combat power, dismantled one of the world’s largest militaries, the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism,” Hegseth said during a news conference at the Pentagon. “Their mission program is functionally destroyed. Launchers, production facilities and existing stockpiles, depleted, and decimated.”

Hegseth and Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, enumerated the claimed results of the U.S. offensive in Iran: 80% of Iran’s air-defense systems destroyed, 800 one-way attack drone storage facilities and 450 ballistic missile storage facilities hit, and 150 ships sunk.

“Epic Fury decimated Iran’s military and rendered it combat ineffective for years to come,” Hegseth asserted. “Iran’s Navy is at the bottom of the sea...Iran’s Air Force has been wiped out.”

But despite the devastation, Tehran has remained defiant. The Islamic Republic, using a decentralized command structure built to survive decapitation, orchestrated an average of 120 drone and missile attacks per day across the region throughout the conflict’s duration. Crucially, it also maintained effective control over the Strait of Hormuz — a strategic leverage that sent oil prices soaring.

Since the start of the war on Feb. 28, 13 American service members had been killed in action and more than 365 had been wounded, according to the Pentagon.

Caine, for his part, struck a note of more guarded pragmatism.

“We welcome the ongoing ceasefire,” he said. “Let us be clear: a ceasefire is a pause, and the joint force remains ready if ordered or called upon to resume combat operations with the same speed and precision as we’ve demonstrated over the last 38 days. And we hope that that is not the case.”

Asked by reporters about Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium, Hegseth expressed hope that Tehran would hand it over to Washington “voluntarily.” If not, he warned, America might still try to seize the material by force.

“It’s buried, and we’re watching it, we know exactly what they have,” Hegseth said.

“They’ll give it to us voluntarily,” he continued. “Or if we have to do something else ourselves — like we did in Midnight Hammer or something like that — we reserve that opportunity."

Adm. Brad Cooper, the head of U.S. Central Command, gave the order after intelligence indicated a nexus of senior IRGC leaders was meeting at the location, the official said.

The B-2s are equipped to drop 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs, also known as GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators, to destroy deeply fortified structures. Their immense payload allows them to strike targets at a depth beyond the reach of conventional munitions, while their flying-wing design enables them to penetrate sophisticated defenses with minimal detection.

US special forces rescue second F-15 airman from Iran

That weapon was key to last June’s Operation Midnight Hammer, when bunker busters battered three of Iran’s nuclear installations. The B-2s made roughly the same 7,000-mile journey this time.

At the six-week mark of the assault against Iran, CENTCOM reported that U.S. forces had struck over 13,000 sites across the country. Other bombers in America’s squadrons, such as the B-1 and the B-52, have played prominent roles in the current campaign, Pentagon officials say.

Cooper’s directive coincided with a high-stakes search-and-rescue effort focused on two American airmen who ejected from a fighter jet over Iranian territory on Friday. President Donald Trump would later liken that operation to a Hollywood scene during a press conference at the White House.

“You would call it central casting if you were doing a movie for location,” he said Monday, revealing that hundreds of personnel were involved in the extraction. “Those pilots came in so fast and so quick and got out of there.”

Moments after extolling U.S. forces from the lectern, the president declared that when it came to the reach of the American military, nothing was off-limits. He warned he could destroy Iran’s critical infrastructure, including bridges and power plants.

The following day, in a post on Truth Social, Trump escalated the rhetoric even further, threatening to eradicate Iranian civilization if Tehran did not capitulate to his demands by 8 p.m. ET on Tuesday.

“A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again,” Trump wrote. “I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will.”

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Military Times that “only the president knows where things stand and what he will do.”

The official, who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity, described at least some of the strikes as targeting sites that had been previously struck before and said the attack occurred in the early morning hours of Tuesday.

Vance, speaking separately in Budapest, said the strikes were not a change in U.S. strategy, with the Trump administration confident that it can get a response from Iran by 8 p.m. Eastern Standard Time in negotiations to end the conflict.

President Donald Trump is demanding Iran forswear nuclear weapons and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a critical oil transit waterway.

“We were going to strike some military targets on Kharg Island, and I believe we have done so,” Vance said.

“We’re not going to strike energy and infrastructure targets until the Iranians either make a proposal that we can get behind or don’t make a proposal,” he added. “I don’t think the news in Kharg Island ... represents a change in strategy, or represents any change from the President of the United States.”

Trump had earlier vowed to enforce a Tuesday night deadline for Iran to agree to a ceasefire deal or face broad attacks on power plants and other critical infrastructure. Trump is demanding Iran forswear nuclear weapons and reopen the Strait of Hormuz oil transit waterway.

“The entire country can be taken out in one night, and that night might be tomorrow night,” Trump said during a White House press conference.

“I hope I don’t have to do it,” Trump said.

Critics have said Trump would be committing war crimes if the U.S. attacked civilian power plants, a point that Trump dismissed on Monday.

“I’m not worried about it. You know what’s a war crime? Having a nuclear weapon,” Trump said earlier on Monday during an Easter egg event for children on the White House South Lawn.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told the briefing that the largest volume of strikes since day one of the operation against Iran would take place on Monday and warned Tuesday would have even more.

Rescue operation

Trump, joined by Hegseth and other top national security advisers, described in detail the weekend U.S. operation to recover a downed American airman who hid in mountainous Iranian terrain and eluded capture by Iranian forces.

He said the airman, identified only by “Dude 44 Bravo,” kept climbing higher in order to improve the chances for recovery. He said the airman was seen moving via an unidentified U.S. camera link. “It was like finding a needle in a haystack,” Trump said.

Hundreds of American forces were involved in the search and recovery mission and to prevent the Iranians from finding him first, he said.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe, who joined Trump at the event, said the agency had engaged in a “deception campaign” to convince the Iranians the airman was somewhere else.

Ratcliffe said that on Saturday morning the CIA got confirmation “one of America’s best and bravest was alive and concealed in a mountain crevice, still invisible to the enemy, but not to the CIA.”

The pilot, shot down on Friday, was recovered on Sunday morning.

US special forces rescue second F-15 airman from Iran

“In a breathtaking show of skill and precision, lethality and force, America’s military descended on the area, the real area, engaged the enemy, rescued the stranded officer, destroyed all threats and exited Iranian territory while taking no casualties of any kind,” Trump said.

Hegseth said the lost airman used an emergency transponder to show where he was and his first message was: “God is good.”

General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the recovered airman had been the “back seater” on the downed aircraft.

“In this case, the back seater’s absolute commitment to surviving made much of our efforts possible,” Caine said.

‘Willing to suffer’

Trump said, without providing evidence, that the United States has “numerous intercepts” from Iranian civilians urging the U.S. not to let up in trying to dislodge the Iranian government from power.

“They would be willing to suffer that in order to have freedom,” Trump said.

Speaking to reporters earlier at a White House Easter event, Trump said a proposal offered by Iran was inadequate.

“They made a proposal, and it’s a significant proposal. It’s a significant step. It’s not good enough,” Trump told reporters during the event.

Trump said the five-week conflict could end quickly if Iran does “what they have to do.”

“They have to do certain things. They know that, they’ve been negotiating I think in good faith,” he said.

The incidents show the risks still facing U.S. and Israeli aircraft over Iran, despite assertions by President Donald Trump and his Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that U.S. forces had total control of the skies.

The prospect of a U.S. service member alive and on the run in Iran comes days after Trump threatened to bomb Iran “back to the Stone Ages” in a war that has killed thousands, sparked an energy crisis and threatened lasting damage to the world economy.

With Iran’s leadership defiant since the start of the war, its foreign minister in principle left the door open for peace talks with the U.S. via mediation from Pakistan, but gave no sign of Tehran’s willingness to bow to Trump’s demands.

“We are deeply grateful to Pakistan for its efforts and have never refused to go to Islamabad. What we care about are the terms of a conclusive and lasting END to the illegal war that is imposed on us,” Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said on X.

Trump on Saturday repeated his threats to intensify attacks on Iran if it failed to reach a deal, or open the key Strait of Hormuz waterway.

“Remember when I gave Iran ten days to MAKE A DEAL or OPEN UP THE HORMUZ STRAIT. Time is running out - 48 hours before all Hell will reign down on them. Glory be to GOD!” he said in a post on Truth Social.

As hostilities continued, Iran attacked an Israel-affiliated vessel with a drone in the Strait of Hormuz, setting the ship on fire, Iran’s state media said on Saturday, citing the commander of the Revolutionary Guards’ navy.

Iran has virtually shut the ​strait, which normally carries about a fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas.

IRAN TOUTS NEW AIR DEFENSE SYSTEMS

Iranian fire brought down a two-seat U.S. F-15E jet, officials in both countries said, while two U.S. officials said the pilot ejected from an A-10 Warthog fighter aircraft that crashed in Kuwait after being hit by Iranian fire.

Two Black Hawk helicopters engaged in the search for the missing pilot were hit by Iranian fire but made it out of Iranian airspace, the two U.S. officials told Reuters.

The scale of injuries to the crew was unclear.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps said it was combing a southwestern area near where the pilot’s plane came down, while the regional governor promised a commendation for anyone who captured or killed “forces of the hostile enemy.”

Iranians, pummelled by air power since the U.S. and Israel began their attacks on February 28, celebrated the plane downings.

The Khatam al-Anbiya joint military command said it used a new air defence system on Friday, which targeted a U.S. fighter jet, three drones and two cruise missiles.

“The enemy should know that we rely on new air defense systems built by the young, knowledgeable, and proud people of this country, unveiling them one after another in the field,” a Khatam al-Anbiya spokesperson said, according to Iran’s state media.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards said they had targeted various areas in Israel in a wave of missiles and drones. They also targeted U.S. HIMARS rocket launcher batteries in Kuwait and Patriot missile batteries in Bahrain, according to a statement read on state TV.

Increasingly frustrated with the political fallout from the war, Trump is considering a broader cabinet shake-up in the wake of Attorney General Pam Bondi’s removal this week, people familiar with the discussions said.

Any potential reshuffling could serve as a reset for the White House as it confronts rising gas prices, falling ratings and worries for Republicans heading into November’s midterm elections.

“They’ve (U.S.) got themselves caught in a sort of double bind. If they simply leave, it’s really bad, and if they try to get the comprehensive defeat of Iran ... that looks really bad as well,” said Gareth Stansfield, a professor of Middle East politics at the UK’s Exeter University and senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.

“They’ve managed to get themselves into a lose-lose situation with this one.”

PETROCHEMICAL ZONE STRUCK IN IRAN

Iranian state media reported air strikes at a petrochemical zone in southwestern Iran, with five people reported injured so far.

A projectile also hit an auxiliary building near the perimeter of Iran’s Bushehr nuclear plant, the Tasnim news agency said, killing one person. The operations of the plant were unaffected.

Russia’s state nuclear company Rosatom evacuated a further 198 of its staff from the site on Saturday, Russian news agencies reported, in evacuations already planned before the latest incident.

The Israeli military meanwhile said it had carried out “a wave of strikes” on Tehran.

Israel has been waging a parallel campaign against Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon after the militant group fired at Israel in support of Iran. Early on Saturday, Israel’s military said it was striking the militants’ infrastructure sites in Beirut.

The 2027 budget request comes as the president faces risky choices abroad, with the administration sending U.S. service members to the Middle East, and a public at home feeling the economic crunch of skyrocketing gas prices due to the conflict.

The request ultimately requires approval by Congress, where disagreement over Trump’s spending decisions recently led to the longest government shutdown in U.S. history.

The president’s budget also reflects the administration’s political priorities ahead of the 2026 midterm elections in November, when Trump’s Republicans hope to maintain their small majorities in both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.

The huge proposed surge in defense spending to $1.5 trillion, up from about $1 trillion in 2026, includes a 5-7% pay raise for military personnel at a time when thousands of service members are actively deployed.

The defense request will please defense hawks on Capitol Hill, but also highlights how Trump is trying to pay for his doubling-down on military pursuits, even after Republicans boosted defense spending last year in party-line legislation.

The Pentagon already requested $200 billion in extra funding to pay for the Iran war, but the White House has not yet officially made that request to Congress, where it is also likely to face scrutiny from lawmakers in both parties.

Other specific funding increases proposed by Trump include his controversial Golden Dome missile defense shield, money to build up critical mineral supplies for the defense industry and $65.8 billion to build 34 new combat and support ships.

Funds for shipbuilding, a priority for Trump since his first term, include initial funding for the so-called Trump-class battleship as well as submarines.

It is unclear how this new spending would impact the U.S. budget deficit because the projections were not included by the White House. The deficit is expected to grow slightly in fiscal 2026 to $1.853 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill often treat White House budget requests as suggestive, as appropriators try to negotiate behind the scenes to maintain their own legislative priorities. But Trump’s latest budget will likely add to the ongoing tension with congressional Democrats over funding federal programs that they see as important — and plan to campaign to protect — as the president seeks to cut federal programs.

“Savings are achieved by reducing or eliminating woke, weaponized, and wasteful programs, and by returning state and local responsibilities to their respective governments,” the White House said in a budget fact sheet.

The abrupt move, one of three significant changes made by Hegseth the same day, cuts short George’s tenure, which began in September 2023, well before the end of the typical four-year term.

The Pentagon intends to replace him with a leader aligned with Hegseth and President Donald Trump’s vision for the Army, the official added. They did not specify what this vision entails.

George has more than four decades of military service, according to the Army. He was commissioned as an infantry officer from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in 1988 and served in the Gulf War, with subsequent deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said that the current vice chief of staff of the Army, Gen. Christopher LaNeve, will replace George on an interim basis.

Parnell asserted that LaNeve is “a battle-tested leader with decades of operational experience and is completely trusted by Secretary Hegseth to carry out the vision of this administration without fault.”

The Department of Defense said it “has nothing further to provide at the moment.”

Hegseth on Thursday also removed Gen. David Horne, 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, a Pentagon official confirmed to Military Times.

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.

The latest shakeup coincides with the Pentagon’s deployment of thousands of troops from the Army’s elite 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East, as the war with Iran enters its fifth week.

The ouster was first reported by CBS News.

Trump said he viewed U.S. membership in the defense pact as not merely up for debate but “beyond reconsideration.” However, he cannot withdraw unilaterally; doing so would require a two-thirds Senate majority or an act of Congress. Neither option, senators say, is likely to materialize.

“Any President that contemplates attempting to withdraw from NATO is not only fulfilling Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping’s greatest dreams but would be undermining America’s own national security interests,” Senators Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., and Thom Tillis, R-N.C., co-chairs of the Senate NATO Observer Group, said in a statement.

“Let us be clear, Congress will not allow the United States to withdraw from NATO,” they continued. “Congress and the American people know we are stronger when we stand with our allies. This is a basic fact and one that we ignore only to our own detriment.”

The president’s ire at European allies stems from what he describes as lackluster backing for the U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran. From the other side of the Atlantic, many governments attribute their reluctance to Trump’s failure to consult them before launching the operation — and to the perception that it was a war of choice.

Trump has repeatedly called on allies to help reopen the Strait of Hormuz — a critical waterway that typically carries a quarter of the world’s oil — which Iran has effectively blocked in retaliation for the war. NATO, so far, has demurred.

Trump has since dismissed the alliance as a “paper tiger,” but Shaheen and Tillis argue this is belied by NATO’s response after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Roughly 3,500 American and allied troops died over the subsequent 20-year war in Afghanistan.

Trump threatens to walk away from NATO

Former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Senator Chris Coons, D-Del., also issued a joint statement on Wednesday underscoring NATO’s fight alongside American forces.

“The only time NATO has gone to war has been in response to an attack on America,” McConnell and Coons wrote. “The United States must not take this sacrifice — nor our allies’ commitment to make it again — lightly.“

The senators added: “Alliance disputes are as old as the alliance itself. Americans are safer when NATO is strong and united. It is in our interest for all allies to tend this unity with care.”

French President Emmanuel Macron on Thursday warned that the tension between Trump and NATO, and the U.S. president’s constant “chatter,” could fundamentally weaken the alliance.

“Alliances like NATO are valued from the unspoken — meaning the trust behind them," Macron said during a state visit to South Korea. “If you create daily doubt about your commitment, you hollow it out.”

Funding for Trump’s marquee but controversial $185 billion “Golden Dome” missile defense shield is expected to be included in the budget request as well as Lockheed Martin F-35 jets and warships.

Procurement of Virginia-class submarines made by General Dynamics, and Huntington Ingalls Industries as well as other top shipbuilding priorities is expected.

Last year, Trump asked Congress for a national defense budget of $892.6 billion then added $150 billion through a supplemental budget request, sending the total price tag over $1 trillion for the first time in history.

While the budget request framework for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027 is set to be unveiled on Friday, a Pentagon official said more details on the defense budget will be announced on April 21.

Earlier this year, the administration was contemplating whether the $1.5 trillion budget request could be in the form of a $900 billion national security budget, with a $400 billion to $600 billion additional request, similar to the structure used in 2026.

The administration plans to use funds for more weapons production in the hopes of deterring Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific region and to rebuild weapons stocks depleted by conflicts in Israel, Iran and Ukraine.

The budget request will be debated in Congress in the coming weeks and months.

Asked by The Telegraph whether he would consider pulling the United States out of the alliance after Operation Epic Fury, Trump replied: “Beyond reconsideration.”

“I was never swayed by NATO. I always knew they were a paper tiger, and [Russian President Vladimir Putin] knows that too, by the way,” he said.

Trump, however, cannot unilaterally withdraw the U.S. from the alliance it helped found in 1949. A 2023 law — co-authored by then-Sen. Marco Rubio, now secretary of state — vests that power in Congress, not the president. Even then, NATO rules impose a one-year notice period before an exit takes effect.

Trump’s rebuke of NATO allies stems from their reluctance to support American efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic chokepoint responsible for roughly one-fifth of global oil supplies under normal circumstances. Tehran’s effective blockade has exacerbated energy costs and granted the Islamic Republic strategic leverage over the U.S. and its allies as the conflict enters its fifth week.

“There was no consultation with the Europeans about this war, and the closing of the Strait is a direct result of the U.S.-Israeli military operations,” Max Bergmann, a former state department official and the current director of the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told Military Times.

Referring to Trump’s jabs at NATO — and key members like the United Kingdom and France in particular — Bergmann added: “It’s in some ways a clear deflection for the failures of the U.S. military campaign, and sort of saying ‘Well, it’s your problem now.’”

But the expert warned that the transatlantic alliance could falter without American military might.

“NATO is built around the United States serving as the backbone of European security,” Bergmann said. “It’s not defenseless because Europeans haven’t spent money. It’s defenseless because if you remove the backbone from an entity, then the appendages don’t work. And that is the fundamental dilemma that Europe faces.”

In a post on X, Poland’s defense minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz acknowledged NATO’s dependence on Washington, while noting that the alliance “works both ways.”

“Amid the emotions surrounding Donald Trump’s words, one must keep a cool head,” he wrote. “There is no NATO without the USA, but there are no strong United States without allies either.”

At the heart of the alliance is Article 5 — the core commitment that an attack on one member is an attack on all. It has been invoked only once: in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

European leaders have rejected Trump’s assertion that the pact’s cohesion is unproven. They see the joint U.S.-Israeli offensive on Iran as a war of choice, quite different from the kind of circumstance to which Article 5 applies.

“This isn’t the first time he’s done this, and since it’s a recurring phenomenon, you can probably judge the consequences for yourself,” Stefan Kornelius, the spokesman for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, told reporters. “I simply want to state on behalf of the German government that we are, of course, committed to NATO.”

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, a frequent target of Trump’s broadsides, has rejected any direct participation in the conflict — but maintains that Downing Street remains dedicated to the alliance.

“I’ve been absolutely clear that this is not our war and we’re not going to get dragged into it,” Starmer said in a press conference. “NATO is the single most effective military alliance the world has ever seen, and it has kept us safe for many decades, and we are fully committed to NATO.”

A White House official told Military Times on Wednesday that the secretary general of NATO, Mark Rutte, is expected to meet with Trump in Washington next week.

Rutte has generally worked hard to keep in Trump’s good graces — an approach that has led the secretary general into controversy at times, most famously when he referred to the U.S. president as “Daddy” at a NATO summit last June.

Two weeks earlier, on March 13, five KC-135 Stratotanker refueling aircraft were damaged on the flight line, two U.S. officials told the Wall Street Journal, as reported by Military Times.

Since Feb. 28, Iran has struck radar systems, satellite communications and mission-critical aircraft at at least seven U.S. bases across Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. The attacks have focused on infrastructure that U.S. forces depend on to detect threats, refuel aircraft and direct air operations in the region.

By late March, Iranian missile and drone launches had dropped more than 90% since the conflict began, according to U.S. Central Command. Meanwhile, the attacks that persist have zeroed in on radar sites, SATCOM terminals, tankers and now an AWACS.

Kelly Grieco, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center, said the pattern points to deliberate targeting, rather than opportunism. The strikes are systematic and target three “distinct functional categories,” she said, including radar and communications infrastructure, aerial refueling tankers and now the AWACS.

“Each is a critical enabler of U.S. air operations,” Grieco told Defense News. “That’s not random. That’s a target set derived from an understanding of how U.S. airpower functions and where it is most exposed. The pattern suggests deliberate doctrine, or something close enough to it, not opportunism.”

Joe Costa, director of the Atlantic Council’s Forward Defense program and former deputy assistant secretary of defense for plans and posture, said Iran’s targeting approach makes tactical sense.

“It’s much easier to hit stationary infrastructure on the ground than planes flying in the air,” Costa said. “The U.S. has a dynamic process to quickly reallocate global resources to mitigate risks to troops and the mission, but the real cost is the cumulative impacts this operation will have on long-term readiness for other U.S. priorities.

“The more assets we use and lose now, the less will be available later until maintenance cycles, repairs and new purchases are complete.”

Strikes on communications, missile defense infrastructure

Iran’s retaliatory campaign targeted communications infrastructure from the opening hours of the conflict.

On Feb. 28, an Iranian drone struck Naval Support Activity Bahrain, home of the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet. Satellite imagery later obtained by The New York Times showed damage to large SATCOM terminals at the installation.

Satellite imagery also confirmed damage to the AN/FPS-132 phased array early warning radar in Qatar, with at least one of the system’s three arrays struck in the opening days of the conflict, according to Planet Labs imagery obtained by the Middlebury Institute of International Studies. Similar strikes hit radar facilities at Al Ruwais and Al Sader in the UAE, according to satellite imagery reported by The War Zone.

Qatar purchased the AN/FPS-132 radar system from the U.S. in 2013 for $1.1 billion. The Iranian drones used to strike it cost an estimated $20,000 to $60,000 per unit.

CENTCOM and Space Force Public Affairs directed Defense News to previously released operational updates and declined to comment further about the strikes.

The targeting also extended to missile defense infrastructure.

Satellite imagery confirmed the AN/TPY-2 radar for a U.S. THAAD battery at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan was struck and apparently destroyed in the opening days of the conflict, later confirmed by a U.S. official. The AN/TPY-2 is the primary sensor for the THAAD system. Without it, a THAAD battery cannot independently search for or track targets.

An already waning E-3 fleet

The damage to the Prince Sultan E-3 on March 27 comes at a time when the fleet is already stretched thin. The Air Force’s E-3 inventory has dwindled to 16 aircraft, the last delivered by Boeing in 1992.

In fiscal 2024, the fleet posted a mission-capable rate of 55.68%, according to Air Force data reported by Air & Space Forces Magazine, meaning fewer than nine aircraft were operationally available on any given day.

As of March 26, the Atlantic Council’s Forward Defense program, which tracks U.S. military assets committed to Operation Epic Fury, estimated that between 66% and 75% of the available E-3 fleet was deployed to the theater.

Air & Space Forces Magazine, which reviewed imagery of the damaged aircraft, reported the extent of the damage likely renders the E-3 unrepairable.

Grieco said the near-term impact is real, but manageable. Prior to the damage, six aircraft were forward-deployed, and the theater was operating “at the margins of what continuous battle management coverage requires,” she told Defense News.

“Five aircraft means accepting either a single continuous orbit or periodic gaps when a second cannot be regularly sustained. In those gaps, the air picture degrades, air battle management is less effective and the theater’s ability to coordinate a complex, multi-aircraft operation becomes significantly more constrained,” she said.

“The United States could send another E-3 to the theater,” Grieco added, “but there are only 15 left in the entire fleet — and every one deployed to the Middle East is one less available everywhere else.”

Philip Sheers, an associate fellow in the Defense Program at the Center for a New American Security, said the loss emphasizes the burden on the airborne battle management fleet. About half of the 16-aircraft E-3 fleet is mission capable, he said, and with six in the Middle East, only two or three remain for other needs.

“There is very little slack remaining for flexibility and adjustment, and that places a huge burden on the remaining fleet as well as other systems to fill in the gaps, potentially at the expense of other priorities,” Sheers said.

A ‘massive alarm bell’ for air defense

A March 2026 report by the Center for a New American Security warned that proposed alternatives to dedicated airborne battle management aircraft, including space-based sensors and fighter-based networks, are either longer-term technological prospects, unproven at battle management or highly vulnerable, and should be treated as complements rather than substitutes.

Replacing the airborne capability will take time.

The Pentagon moved to cancel the E-7 Wedgetail program in its fiscal 2026 budget request, citing cost growth, from $588 million to $724 million per aircraft, as well as survivability concerns in contested airspace. Congress reversed the decision, preserving the program in the fiscal 2026 National Defense Authorization Act and blocking further E-3 retirements until enough Wedgetails are in service.

According to the Government Accountability Office, the E-7’s first flight has slipped to May 2027, with full operational capability now projected for the early 2030s. Space-based systems proposed by the Pentagon as a longer-term alternative face a similar timeline, according to Space Force officials.

Near-term, Sheers said the loss will increase operational strain on the remaining E-3s and could result in increased dependence on carrier-based E-2 Hawkeyes and the Australian E-7 Wedgetail.

“The demand for airborne sensing to manage cruise missile and drone threats is not going anywhere,” he told Defense News. “Medium and long-term, this all bodes very poorly for E-3 readiness and highlights the need for DoD and Congress to resource a real solution to the shrinking and aging E-3 fleet.”

The KC-135 tanker fleet faces parallel pressures. Already cannibalizing parts from the boneyard, the Cold War-era jets have absorbed repeated strikes.

In addition to the five KC-135s damaged at Prince Sultan on March 13, multiple refueling aircraft were also hit in the March 27 strike, according to Air & Space Forces Magazine.

Costa pointed to broader implications that outlast the current conflict.

“The continued use and possible reallocation of high-demand, low-density assets like air defense systems will impact readiness for other U.S. global priorities,” Costa said. “That’s the real strategic tradeoff.”

Sheers said the conflict should serve as a warning well beyond the Middle East.

“The entirety of this conflict should be a massive alarm bell on the need for passive defenses, not just for U.S. forces in the Middle East, but over the homeland where drone incursions are increasingly frequent, and especially in the Indo-Pacific, where the Chinese missile threat is orders of magnitude larger and more difficult to suppress,” he told Defense News.

“Airbase vulnerability has been an issue for decades, and the drumbeat of independent analysis on this issue could not be louder,” he added. “If DoD doesn’t take these events as a wake-up call, we are setting ourselves up for disaster in a future great power conflict.”

Grieco suggested the effects may already be rippling through the campaign in ways that don’t show up in publicly available strike counts.

Those “less visible metrics” include tanker availability, AWACS coverage gaps and stockpile constraints, she said.

“If Iran’s strikes on radar and communications infrastructure are compressing warning times and creating gaps in the missile defense network, that’s operationally significant even if no additional aircraft are destroyed,” she said.

“The threshold for material degradation isn’t a single dramatic loss. It’s the accumulation of constraints that make the campaign more expensive, less flexible and less effective over time. We may already be past it in ways that won’t be visible until the campaign’s operational history is written.”

Hegseth, speaking during a press briefing at the Pentagon, asserted that morale is high and service members are determined to “finish the mission.” He declined to disclose the precise location of the bases that he toured over the weekend.

More than a month into the joint U.S.-Israeli assault on Iran, Hegseth warned that the coming days could prove pivotal, even as the broader course of the conflict remains unsettled.

“The upcoming days will be decisive. Iran knows that, and there’s nothing they can militarily do about it,” he said. “We have more and more options, and they have less.”

Pressed on whether the influx of newly arrived Marines and Army paratroopers might be used in ground operations on Iranian territory, Hegseth offered no indication either way.

“You can’t fight and win a war if you tell your adversary what you are willing to do or what you are not willing to do, to include boots on the ground,” Hegseth said. “Our adversary right now thinks there are 15 different ways we could come at them with boots on the ground and guess what? There are.”

He added: “If we needed to, we could execute those options on behalf of the President of the United States and this department. Or maybe we don’t have to use them at all.”

Limited missions, big risks: What a US ground fight in Iran could become

Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, announced that B-52 Stratofortress bombers have begun conducting missions over Iran, taking advantage of U.S. forces gaining air superiority over the country.

Caine said the campaign remains focused on “interdicting and destroying the logistical and supply chains that feed” the Islamic Republic’s ballistic missile, drone and naval production facilities, aiming to limit Tehran’s ability to replenish key weapons.

The Pentagon news conference began roughly one hour after President Donald Trump, in a post on Truth Social, lashed out at American allies for resisting his demands for help in the Middle East. He told nations who are facing fuel shortages to “build up some delayed courage, go to the Strait, and just TAKE IT.”

The United States “won’t be there to help you anymore,” Trump said, adding that “Iran has been, essentially, decimated. The hard part is done. Go get your oil!”

The de facto shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz since the conflict began has sent global energy prices soaring, imperiling supply chains that under normal circumstances transport roughly a fifth of the world’s oil.

Hegseth echoed the president’s message in his Pentagon briefing, calling on America’s partners — specifically the United Kingdom — to assume a larger role.

“There are countries around the world who ought be prepared to step up on this critical waterway as well,” Hegseth said. “It’s not just the United States Navy. The last time I checked, there was supposed to be a big, bad, Royal Navy that could be prepared to do things like that as well.”

Military analysts point to several possibilities, including coastal assaults, nuclear site raids or operations deeper inside the country.

Any one of these missions could unfold alone or evolve into something more broad. But across each scenario, U.S. forces would enter an environment where Iranian missiles, drones and ground units could begin targeting them as soon as they arrive.

A battle for the waterway

One version of the fight would likely unfold along the water.

U.S. forces could be tasked with seizing islands or coastal positions to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a global shipping route that has been heavily disrupted by the war with Iran.

The mission could be a limited ground incursion, with Marines and airborne units deploying to seize important terrain, said Joe Costa, director of the Forward Defense program at the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center.

President Donald Trump has publicly threatened Kharg Island, Iran’s primary oil export hub, which is located off the country’s coast.

In a Truth Social post on Monday, he said the U.S. would finish its “stay” in Iran, by “completely obliterating” Kharg Island.

Costa, a former senior Pentagon official who worked on U.S. war plans, including Iran, acknowledged speculation about Kharg, but also described a scenario in which U.S. forces would try to secure islands such as Abu Musa, Larak and the Tunbs, off Iran’s southern coast.

“This helps us take out Iranian reconnaissance units as we think of ways to reopen Hormuz. If you have the ability to secure some of the ports along the coast as well, you go a long way to supporting naval assets to start to open up the Strait,” Costa said, adding that the operation could rely on Marine units for the initial assault, with airborne forces supporting limited incursions and air assault operations — all under U.S. air superiority.

The USS Tripoli and embarked 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit arrived in the region’s waters last Friday, and the elements of the 82nd Airborne Division are deploying to the Middle East, the Pentagon confirmed last week.

An opening fight would not be in isolation, Costa said, and though there are mixed reports about Iranian military capacity right now, the country still appears to have functional command and control and is capable of attacks.

The first waves of U.S. ground troops would undoubtedly face Iranian fire, Costa warned.

“We have overwhelming force and would likely be successful in securing territory, but at that point every commander will face the daily decision of assuming risk to troops or risk to mission — force protection becomes paramount, especially if we start to see casualties mount up,” he said, adding, “There’s a high risk of that in this operation.”

Targeting nuclear sites

A different type of operation would focus on Iran’s nuclear program instead of territory.

Instead of seizing ground, U.S. forces could be tasked with entering fortified sites and securing material, likely under fire and deep within Iranian territory.

An operation aimed at seizing enriched uranium would likely involve special forces at a nuclear site in Isfahan, a populous city in the center of the country, said Nicole Grajewski, an expert on Iran’s missiles and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Excavating nuclear material would require a myriad of support, from construction equipment to Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear assets, Grajewski, a professor at Sciences Po, said.

Ground forces would likely have to dig deep underground to access the highly enriched uranium canisters “and then go in there, excavate it, then get out of the country,” she added.

An extraction team would likely be met with force. The area is heavily trafficked, and the nuclear site in Isfahan is located near numerous military and missile facilities, making it exceedingly risky.

Grajewski described the operation as likely “one that the U.S. military has not really done before,” and said experts could only speculate on how it would be accomplished.

“I’m not sure how they’re thinking about doing it,” she said, pondering if “they’re going to fly in there and do this quick extraction under the guise of night?”

Iran’s response

Even targeted operations like seizing an island or extracting nuclear materials carry the risk of evolving into something larger.

Dan Grazier, the director of the National Security Reform Program at the Stimson Center, said the challenges U.S. forces may face goes beyond securing land or items. It centers on how Iran chooses to fight once American soldiers are on its ground.

“The Iranians are going to do whatever they can to kill and capture as many Americans as they can,” said Grazier, who is also a Marine Corps veteran, “for the propaganda victory alone.”

Rather than seeking decisive engagement, Iranian forces would likely avoid conventional confrontation and stretch the conflict over time, he said. Instead of defeating U.S. forces, he added, Iran’s objective becomes making the conflict costly and prolonged, forcing leaders in Washington to decide whether the fight is worth continuing.

Any sustained ground operation would also risk widening the battlefield, as Iran could activate proxy groups across the region to further target U.S. forces and partners.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies in early March estimated that the first 100 hours of the war cost billions of dollars, and experts warn that critical air defense interceptors could be depleted faster than the rate of replacement.

The human cost has also risen as the war enters its second month. Thirteen American service members had been killed and over 300 injured as of late March. A survey earlier in March found that a majority of Americans thought the war had gone too far, and a separate poll showed diminished confidence in the president’s handling of it.

“The Iranians don’t stand any chance of defeating the United States on the ground, I don’t think,” Grazier said. “They do stand a chance of defeating the United States politically back home.”

Trump, speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One while holding renderings of the plans, said the ballroom “essentially becomes a [shield] for what’s being built under by the military.”

He emphasized protective features — comprising thick, high-grade bulletproof glass — will be installed as part of the ballroom’s design to protect against drones and “any other things.”

Trump said that the initiative is progressing “ahead of schedule and under budget” and reiterated that it is being financed entirely by himself and private donors.

“There’s not one dime of government money going into the ballroom,” he stressed.

“I’m so busy that I don’t have to do this, but I’m fighting wars and other things,” Trump added. “But this is very important, because this is going to be with us for a long time, and it’s going to be ... the greatest ballroom anywhere in the world.”

The WWII origins of the (now demolished) East Wing of the White House

The president complained the military’s previously clandestine undertaking only became public because of a “stupid lawsuit” that seeks to halt the endeavor.

The suit, filed in December 2025 by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, contends that Trump violated at least four laws by bypassing required review processes. It asks a federal judge to suspend construction of the ballroom until the design undergoes a series of independent reviews, passes environmental assessments, secures congressional authorization and allows the public an opportunity to offer input.

A federal judge rejected the group’s initial request to pause construction but had been expected to rule by the end of March on the amended complaint, including whether to issue an injunction.

The Trump administration, however, has already begun demolishing the East Wing to make way for the project. A White House spokesperson asserted at the time that Trump has “full legal authority to modernize, renovate and beautify the White House — just like all of his predecessors did."

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., placed a hold Wednesday on the promotions of Marine Lt. Col. Vincent Noble, Col. Thomas Siverts and Navy Lt. Cmdr. Thomas MacNeil, saying his objections to a process that would quickly approve the promotions as a bloc was based on “misconduct or concerning judgement.”

In responses provided to Military Times, Wyden’s office made clear that the holds were a direct response to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s reported decision to pull two Black and two female military officers from a list of troops up for promotion to general or flag officer.

“Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth have launched an unprecedented politicization of the military promotion process, most recently, reportedly blocking promotions for Black and female officers,” Wyden said. “I asked my staff to vet potential promotions, to ensure the Senate is doing its job to ensure the officers leading our armed forces continue to meet the services’ high standards.”

In the case of Noble and MacNeil, Wyden cited their proximity to highly publicized war crimes cases dating as far back as 2007.

Noble, then a captain, had been the leader of a Marine Corps special operations platoon deployed to Afghanistan in 2007 when the unit became involved in an ambush that left up to 19 Afghans dead and dozens more wounded.

The Marines were accused of war crimes, and Noble and another officer, Maj. Fred Galvin, were sent to a rare court of inquiry military proceeding back in the states. But ultimately, the government opted not to charge the men after a three-star overseeing the case determined they “acted appropriately.”

Military Times investigated the incident in 2015, finding through the examination of newly declassified documents that the Marines were unjustly held to account for what was a combat engagement.

Wyden described it differently in his statement Wednesday in the congressional record.

“Military investigations found that Lieutenant Colonel Noble’s platoon fired indiscriminately on civilians in Afghanistan in 2007, and he was disciplined for filing a false report and asking Marines under his command to lie about the attack, according to military records,” the senator said, though he linked to a New York Times report from the time that quoted a source saying neither Galvin nor Noble fired a weapon in the engagement.

Wyden’s office did not provide additional information or context when asked about the statements regarding Noble.

MacNeil’s war zone case, which dates to 2017, is linked to that of Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher, who was accused by his own unit of war crimes in Iraq, including stabbing a 17-year-old ISIS-linked prisoner to death. Gallagher was acquitted on charges linked to the death but found guilty of posing for photos with the prisoner’s corpse.

President Donald Trump intervened in 2019 to keep Gallagher from being stripped of his SEAL trident in the matter. MacNeil, then a lieutenant, testified against Gallagher in his trial but can be seen in a unit photo with him and nine other SEALs posing behind the corpse.

After Trump’s intervention with Gallagher, the Navy gave up efforts to strip MacNeil and two other SEALs of their tridents, and the matter was dealt with through internal “administrative measures,” acting Secretary of the Navy Thomas Modly said at the time.

“While MacNeil was the junior member of his platoon and eventually testified against Gallagher, he exercised poor judgement as an officer and should not be promoted within the United States military,” Wyden said in arguing against his promotion.

The case of Siverts is different. Wyden highlighted appearances on a podcast, The Berm Pit, co-hosted by the colonel’s brother, Scott Siverts. The Anti-Defamation League, a global anti-hate organization, describes the podcast as far-right and antisemitic, and its social media feeds reveal re-posts of antisemitic memes and other offensive content.

The left-wing news outlet RawStory, which regularly covers extremism, previously reported that Siverts, who has served most recently with the Joint Staff at the Pentagon, had been reported to the Defense Department Inspector General for appearing on an episode of The Berm Pit in which one of the co-hosts joked about wanting to put “six bullets” into Hegseth’s head.

The IG opted not to open an investigation into the matter, and it’s not clear whether any administrative action was taken.

Wyden’s statement highlights a March 2023 appearance by Siverts on the podcast, since removed from the internet.

“Siverts’s participation in a podcast whose hosts espouse such bigotry raises serious questions about his character and professionalism, which are both relevant to his promotion to Brigadier General,” Wyden wrote. “To date, the Marine Corps has not provided me with a copy of this podcast episode to verify the nature of his participation in this podcast, nor has Siverts publicly apologized or expressed regret for his association with this podcast.”

A co-host of The Berm Pit did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Wyden told Military Times that he didn’t know how the nominations for Noble, MacNeil and Siverts made it out of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“The military should not promote officers who violate military codes, were involved in war crimes, or fail to live up to the U.S. armed forces standards. Our country is stronger and more secure when military leaders are promoted based on their qualifications and records, and held accountable when they fall short of those standards,” he said. " … I won’t shortcut the Senate process to help unfit personnel lead our servicemembers and degrade the fitness of our armed forces."

Hegseth’s actions are in line with the broader Trump administration’s attacks on efforts across the federal government to support and promote the concerns of minority populations — what President Donald Trump and Hegseth have derided as “DEI,” which stands for diversity, equity and inclusion.

Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell disputed the Times’ reporting, telling the Guardian, “Under Secretary Hegseth, military promotions are given to those who have earned them. Meritocracy, which reigns in this Department, is apolitical and unbiased.”

Neither the Defense Department nor the White House has offered an explanation based on the officers’ performance or record for Hegseth’s decision. About three dozen officers remain on the promotion list, according to the Times; the majority are white men.

“This moment should not be separated from a broader, documented pattern,” Jose Vasquez, executive director of Common Defense and an Army veteran, said in a statement. “Since taking office, Hegseth has fired generals, renamed ships, and systematically targeted women and people of color in uniform. He is not making our military more lethal. He is making it more loyal to him and that is the true threat to national security and military readiness.”

The names of the four officers have not yet been released, but they include a Black armor officer who was singled out for having written a paper about Black officers’ choices to serve in support roles rather than front-line combat, according to the Times. One of the women targeted for exclusion from the promotion list was struck because she served during the U.S. military’s chaotic 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan, the outlet reported. It is not clear why the other two officers were removed from the list.

Under retired four-star Army Gen. Lloyd Austin, the first Black defense secretary, the Department of Defense made efforts to promote women and minorities into visible positions of power. Austin’s tenure during the Biden administration saw the elevation of Navy Adm. Lisa Franchetti to chief of naval operations, the first woman to serve as the Navy’s top officer and the first to serve on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Air Force Gen. CQ Brown to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the second Black man to hold that position.

“For too long, we’ve promoted too many uniform leaders for the wrong reasons — based on their race, based on gender quotas, based on historic so-called firsts,” Hegseth said in a speech to high-ranking officers in November.

Brown and Franchetti, among other top military officers, were fired by Trump in February 2025. That decision left no women in the top ranks of military leadership. In July, Hegseth reassigned Vice Adm. Yvette Davids, the first female head of the U.S. Naval Academy, and fired Vice Adm. Shoshana Chatfield from her position as the U.S. military’s envoy to NATO’s military committee last April, according to the Guardian. He also dismissed Air Force Lt. Gen. Jennifer Short from her job as senior military assistant to the defense secretary in early 2025.

“The depth of Secretary Hegseth’s prejudice is only overshadowed by the breadth of his incompetence,” said Richard Brookshire, co-founder and co-CEO of the Black Veterans Project. “The Trump administration is intent on instituting a caste system across our military, whereby anyone who isn’t white, male, straight and Christian is deemed less capable and deserving of leading our troops. Americans must all reject his bigoted, nonsensical and dangerous beliefs.”

It’s unclear whether Hegseth overstepped his authority by removing the names of the four from the promotion list himself, according to the Times. Army Secretary Dan Driscoll and other Army leadership reportedly refused to remove the names when Hegseth requested they do so. Ordinarily, promotion lists are either accepted or denied in full by the defense secretary, then sent to the president for review before heading to the Senate for confirmation, according to the Times.

The U.S. military has fired over 850 Tomahawk cruise missiles in four weeks of war with Iran, burning through the precision weapons at a rate that has alarmed some Pentagon officials and prompted internal discussions about how to make more available, The Washington Post reported on Friday, citing people familiar with the matter.

Reuters could not immediately verify the report.

“The U.S. military has more than enough munitions, ammo, and weapons stockpiles to achieve the goals of Operation Epic Fury laid out by President Trump — and beyond," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to Reuters.

“Nevertheless, President Trump has always been intensely focused on (strengthening) our Armed Forces and he will continue to call on defense contractors to more speedily build American-made weapons, which are the best in the world,” Leavitt’s statement said.

Asked for comment, the Pentagon, which Trump has ordered renamed Department of War, said the military had all it required.

“The Department of War has everything it needs to execute any mission at the time and place of the President’s choosing and on any timeline,” chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement to Reuters.

In the first monthly Christian worship ceremony in the Pentagon since the Iran war began, Hegseth recited what he said was the “premission reading” and prayer given by a military chaplain to troops involved in the capture of Venezuela’s then-President Nicolás Maduro earlier this year.

“I pursued my enemies and overtook them. I did not turn back til they were consumed. I thrust them through so that they were not able to rise. They fell under my feet,” Hegseth read from the Book of Psalms during the prayer service.

“And those who hated me, I destroyed. They cried for help, but there was none to save. They cried to the Lord, but he did not answer them. I beat them fine as dust before the wind. I cast them out like the mire of the streets,” Hegseth continued.

Hegseth then prayed what he said was the same prayer that a military chaplain gave troops during the Maduro operation, calling on God to behold the “wicked who rise against your justice and the peace of the righteous” and to “break the teeth of the ungodly.”

“Let every round find its mark against the enemies of righteousness and our great nation. Give them wisdom in every decision, endurance for the trial ahead, unbreakable unity, and overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy,” Hegseth prayed.

He continued the prayer, saying “let justice be executed swiftly and without remorse, that evil may be driven back, and wicked souls delivered to the eternal damnation prepared for them.”

Hegseth called on those in attendance of the service to pray with thoughts of the U.S. service members in harm’s way right now, insinuating those involved in the Iran war.

Hegseth has faced backlash from advocacy groups, like Americans United for Separation of Church and State, for hosting monthly worship ceremonies at the Pentagon, as well as for his religious rhetoric in public appearances. He has previously prayed specifically “in the name of Jesus Christ” in events such as Pentagon briefings and White House dinners, like he did during Wednesday’s service.

Hegseth, a Christian who belongs to the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, has spoken about his faith in speeches, raising concerns that he is associating the Christian faith with politics and the military.

The CREC is a conservative network co-founded by Douglas Wilson who was the guest speaker at February’s Pentagon prayer ceremony after other CREC pastors attended previous services.

Hegseth, meanwhile, has sought to reform the military’s Chaplain Corps with the goal of refocusing on ministry since “a chaplain is first and foremost a chaplain and an officer second,” he said in a Tuesday video announcement. He announced that chaplains will no longer wear their rank insignia, but instead, will wear symbols of their faith.

The military consists of 70% Christians, 2% atheist or agnostic and 24% reported as unclassified or unknown, according to a 2019 Department of Defense report.

In a 50-48 vote, the Senate rejected a proposal by Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, to reinstate VA coverage of abortions.

Blumenthal said the ban, which went into effect last year, was the most restrictive in the federal health care system, noting that it bans the procedure in cases of rape or incest and prohibits physicians from advising veteran patients of their options.

“Many of them suffer from service-connected disabilities that increase the risks associated with pregnancy, and many have experienced military sexual trauma during their time of service. To betray them and take away this kind of health care — their ability to receive an abortion in the most harrowing situation — is unconscionable,” Blumenthal said during a press conference prior to the vote.

The VA finalized a rule Dec. 31 that prohibits the procedure at VA medical centers unless the veteran’s life is at risk. The new policy overturned a policy implemented in September 2022 that allowed the VA to provide the procedure or cover the cost in cases of rape, incest or endangerment of the life or health of the mother.

That policy, implemented by then VA Secretary Denis McDonough, was made in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade, removing constitutional protections for abortions.

In overturning the 2022 decision, VA Secretary Doug Collins said veterans will continue to have access to the procedure in medical emergencies. He added that the change represents a return to VA regulations under administrations of Presidents George W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

A federal law known as the Hyde Amendment bans the use of federal funds for abortion with exceptions for rape, incest or threat to the life of the mother.

Democratic lawmakers say the VA change represents the most restrictive limitations on the procedure in the federal government. The Defense Department and other federal health agencies follow the Hyde Amendment, providing abortion services or covers the cost of the procedure in cases of rape, incest or threat to the mother.

“A female service member who was raped prior to transitioning out of the military … is no longer covered by the VA to have an abortion. If she was still on active duty, DoD would pay or perform the abortion. Even if she was serving in federal prison, she would be covered,” Disabled American Veterans Deputy National Legislative Director Naomi Mathis said during the press conference Wednesday.

Between September 2022 and August 2025, the VA had covered or provided abortions to roughly 100 veterans and 40 CHAMPVA patients, according to data provided by the VA.

Blumenthal’s proposal would have opened debate on whether to repeal the VA’s ban. The vote fell nearly unanimously along party lines, with 50 Republicans voting no and two Republicans, Sen. Susan Collins of Maine and Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, joining 46 Democrats voting yes.

The motion failed.

“Republicans just voted to uphold an abortion ban for 462,000 women veterans — even in cases of rape, incest, or if their health is endangered. Shamefully, they are denying women veterans who have been raped or whose health is at risk the essential health care they need,” Blumenthal said in a statement after the vote.

The legislation, known as the Airspace Location and Enhanced Risk Transparency, or ALERT, Act, would require the military services to adopt reforms put forth by federal investigators in an effort to prevent similar accidents. The committee voted 53-0 in favor of advancing the bill to the full House for a vote.

“Improving aviation safety and protecting our national security are not mutually exclusive,” committee chairman Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., said in his opening remarks Thursday, adding that “by taking our time and following regular order, we have produced a bill that does both.”

The bill would require all military aircraft to install crash prevention technology by 2031, with the exception of drones and military fighter and bomber aircraft. If enacted, the legislation would be implemented over several years, giving the services time to install new systems and update training protocols.

The bill also aims to balance safety requirements with national security concerns, making sure aircraft can operate without incident and without disclosing sensitive flight data.

Federal investigators found that a series of failures by both the Federal Aviation Administration and the Army contributed to the fatal Jan. 29, 2025, crash, to include an overburdened air traffic control system, congested helicopter routes and missed warnings from earlier close calls in the area.

The National Transportation Safety Board issued more than a dozen recommendations following the crash, including changes to training, airspace management and safety oversight.

The survey, conducted from March 19 to March 23, found 59% of respondents say the scale of Operation Epic Fury has gone too far, while 26% believe it has been about right. Only 13% think the campaign has not gone far enough.

A separate Pew Research Center poll released earlier this week showed low confidence in President Donald Trump’s handling of the conflict, with 37% approving and 61% disapproving.

Majority of American voters oppose the Iran war, poll finds

The public’s skepticism comes as Adm. Brad Cooper, the head of the U.S. Central Command, announced that American forces have struck more than 10,000 military targets across Iran since the operation began on Feb. 28. Cooper said the U.S. has significantly degraded more than two-thirds of the Islamic Republic’s missile, drone and naval production facilities and shipyards.

Trump, for his part, declared on Thursday that the war against Iran is “ahead of schedule” and going to “end soon.”

“It won’t be long,” Trump told reporters during a cabinet meeting at the White House. “It’s going to end soon. But we had to take a little detour, go to Iran, and we had to put out a fire, a very dangerous fire that could have blown up big portions of the world, if not the whole thing.”

The president reiterated that the Iranians are “begging to make a deal. Not me.”

Later in the cabinet meeting, Steve Witkoff, Trump’s peace envoy, said Washington has presented Tehran a 15-point plan to end the war in the Middle East. The proposal was transmitted to Iranian officials through Pakistani intermediaries.

“We’ll see where things lead if we can convince Iran that this is the inflection point with no good alternatives for them other than more death and destruction,” Witkoff asserted. “We have strong signs that this is a possibility, and if a deal happens, it will be great for the country of Iran, for the entire region, and the world at large.”

Meanwhile, the Pentagon emphasized that its offensive in Iran would continue.

“We pray for a deal and we welcome a deal,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Thursday. “But in the meantime, the Department of War will continue negotiating with bombs.”