Donald Trump consulted his advisers on Pete Hegseth’s future after the Republican defeat in the November 3 elections. He then publicly defended his Secretary of Defense. In Congress, an attempted indictment could come back next week. The hypothesis of a preventive dismissal arises, but no decision is announced.
Private consultations and public support
The future of Pete Hegseth concentrates part of the tensions opened up by the American elections. According to CBS News exclusive information, Donald Trump questioned several advisors, directly and over the phone, about his continued existence. The channel cites several people who are aware of these exchanges. However, other sources indicate that no alternative decision has been taken.
When questioned on Wednesday afternoon, the president replied that he was not planning to replace him. He felt his minister was doing « very good work. » Spokesperson Anna Kelly also reaffirmed the White House’s confidence.
This public support comes at a time when the Democrats have won control of both chambers of Congress. The new majority, however, took office only on 3 January 2027. In the meantime, outgoing elected officials retain their powers and may initiate proceedings against the leader of the Pentagon.
Hegseth in the face of a Republican vote
The first deadline could precede the installation of the Democrats. Thomas Massie, the Republican representative of Kentucky, wants to provoke a vote as early as the week of 9 November. He announced it before the election. His approach is to refer the eight indictments presented in September to the House.
Massie intends to use a priority procedure, subject to her parliamentary admissibility. This may force the House’s management to quickly organize a vote. The elected representatives could then vote on the text or choose to reject it. The announcement of this initiative therefore does not guarantee its adoption or even a direct vote on each charge.
The representative relies on defections in his own camp. In his view, those elected who had been beaten or left Congress might be less sensitive to presidential pressure. This assessment remains a political bet. It does not constitute a count of votes in favour of indictment.
War in Iran at the centre of accusations
Massie’s text places the conduct of war in Iran at the forefront of grievances. He reproaches Hegseth for having engaged and continued operations without the required authorization of Congress. He also accuses him of failing to comply with the time limits laid down in the War Powers Act 1973.
Other leaders deal with the protection of civilians and the targeting of persons suspected of drug trafficking. The document also mentions the operation against Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela, the operations in Yemen and the measures aimed at Senator Mark Kelly. These are charges brought by their perpetrator, not judicial findings establishing the minister’s guilt.
A separate democratic initiative also exists. The Arizona representative Yassamin Ansari laid six charges in the spring. Its text includes war in Iran, the processing of sensitive military information, parliamentary control and the politicization of the armed forces. Both approaches overlap, without constituting a common text already adopted.
The Pentagon rejects the accusations and defends the record of his secretary. His spokespersons claim that he wants to continue his work until the end of the presidential term. Its official maintenance thus contrasts with the discussions reported on its future.
Taking the lead before a parliamentary sanction
A political reading of these consultations is possible: Trump could seek to keep control of a possible start. Sending Hegseth back before a vote would allow him to present this change as his own decision. He would then avoid the first decisive gesture coming from Congress and its opponents.
In this case, the president could also concentrate on his minister part of the political cost of the war. The replacement would become a visible response to the Pentagon’s difficulties, rather than a reduction imposed by parliamentarians. This scenario would therefore have a political interest even without certainty of a final removal.
But the facts do not make it possible to attribute this intention to Trump. Consultations on a minister may also involve its effectiveness or ability to negotiate with Congress. The President’s public support must be taken into account. At this point, talking about a strategy of anticipation remains an analysis hypothesis.
Above all, it would be premature to say that Trump is seeking to avoid a destitution that has become certain. The Chamber has not yet adopted the charges raised. And a favourable vote in this chamber would not be enough to remove Hegseth from his office.
Military financing increases pressure
Confrontation goes beyond indictment. Thom Tillis, a Republican senator from North Carolina, questioned Hegseth’s ability to obtain the necessary credits. He asked if the secretary remained the best interlocutor to defend the needs of the Pentagon before Congress.
Negotiations include a $70 billion request for emergency military credit in June. Annual defence funding for fiscal year 2027 is also among the outstanding files. Democrats have threatened to block these texts in the context of the war in Iran.
This budgetary conflict gives concrete scope to the critics. The secretary must convince elected officials, some of whom dispute his management, while defending the means of the American forces. A challenge to its continuation may therefore affect negotiations prior to any political trial.
An electoral majority is not enough to remove
The constitutional procedure has two distinct stages. The House of Representatives may adopt indictments by a simple majority. The Senate is then competent to judge the responsible person concerned. A conviction requires two thirds of the senators present and results in his departure.
A democratic victory in elections can facilitate investigations and a vote in the House. It does not remove this requirement in the Senate. If the hundred senators participate, it takes 67 votes to condemn. The necessary power ratio therefore exceeds that required to direct the upper chamber.
The Democrats are also preparing a wider control of military operations. They want to examine the decisions that led to war, its conduct and its cost. Elected officials indicated that a departure from Hegseth would not end their investigations. The change of person would therefore not resolve the policy dispute alone.
The next concrete step remains the return of representatives to Washington. Massie will then have to confirm her approach and the Republican leadership will decide how to respond. Discussions on military credits will take place in parallel, while Trump publicly maintains his support for Hegseth.
Comments