A recent Pentagon investigation has criticized U.S. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth for using the messaging app Signal on his personal device to share sensitive details about planned strikes in Yemen. The report, conducted by the Pentagon’s independent inspector general, highlighted the potential risk to U.S. troops if this information was intercepted. Notably, the report did not address whether the information shared by Hegseth was classified, acknowledging his authority as the Pentagon’s head to determine what is classified.
Lawmakers received the review and had the opportunity to examine it in a classified setting at the Capitol. A redacted version of the report is expected to be made public later this week. The Pentagon stated that the review had exonerated Hegseth, a sentiment echoed by the defense secretary himself on social media, asserting that no classified information was involved.
Hegseth’s use of Signal came to light when journalist Jeffrey Goldberg was mistakenly added to a chat containing sensitive military information. The chat, organized by then-national security adviser Mike Waltz, included high-ranking officials discussing military operations against the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen. Goldberg later revealed the details of the chat in an article after being accused of exaggerating by Trump administration officials.
The inspector general’s report highlighted concerns regarding the classified nature of the information transmitted by Hegseth and the potential risks posed to U.S. service members and missions if intercepted. Hegseth, who denied sharing classified information, refused to be interviewed by the inspector general’s office during the investigation, attributing the probe to political motives.
The incident has raised legal concerns for Hegseth, especially in light of ongoing scrutiny over his leadership in overseeing U.S. military actions. This includes investigations into a reported strike on a suspected drug vessel in the Caribbean that allegedly resulted in the killing of survivors. Hegseth defended the strike, citing the complexities of wartime decision-making.
The inspector general’s report emphasized the critical nature of timing and targeting details in military campaigns, with concerns that advance knowledge of strikes could impact operational effectiveness. Despite this, the chat did not appear to disclose specific names or locations of targeted individuals. Hegseth’s selective provision of Signal messages for review led the investigation to rely on published screenshots from the Atlantic.
