Pentagon

June 8 (UPI) — Days after sharing a shortened list of religious affiliations for service members, the Pentagon has issued a new list removing the “Christian” category. The change was apparently spurred by backlash that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints was not originally listed in that category.

Last week, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell shared a list of 31 religious affiliations from which service members could choose. This was a change from the prior list of 200. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth earlier called the lengthier list of faith codes “impractical and unusable” and said the Pentagon would shorten it.

“An overwhelming majority of the military population used only six of the codes,” Hegseth said in March, The Hill reported. He said a shorter list would help chaplains minister to service members “in a way that aligns with that service member’s faith background and religious practice.”

However, the list shared last week gave 21 of the affiliations a “Christian” label — and the Church of Latter-Day Saints was not among them. This drew ire from several lawmakers, including Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, a Mormon and a staunch supporter of President Donald Trump; Rep. Mike Kennedy, R-Utah; and Sen. John Curtis, R-Utah.

“I find this offensive, not just because that happens to be my faith, and not just because that happens to be the faith of tens of thousands of U.S. military personnel, but it’s also just repugnant to any sense of decency, any sense of our common heritage and our common belief that the government needs to not weigh in doctrinal disputes between various religious denominations,” Lee said in a video posted Sunday on social media.

Parnell’s original post on the list said that the Pentagon wasn’t making “any claims on the legitimacy of any faith or religious belief” but trying to streamline matters.

The new list shared Monday removes the “Christian” label altogether. The Pentagon said the original list had “redundant and unnecessary labeling” and the new list fixes that.

“The Pentagon’s job is not to adjudicate theological debates, but instead to ensure sincerely held faith is respected and encouraged in our ranks,” the post said. It also noted that “the goal of this effort is to simplify a previously out-of-control ‘belief’ coding system.”

Lee said he was grateful to Hegseth for “correcting the error,” CNN reported.

Under the new list, service members can pick from about 20 Christian faiths or chose to be identified as Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Bahá’i or agnostic. They can no longer chose from many codes including those for Unitarian Universalist, Wicca, pagan or humanist. There are codes for “no religion” or “other religion.”

The US defence department has reportedly raised its assessment of the espionage threat posed by Israel to the highest category of “critical”, according to media reports citing American intelligence and defence officials.

The assessment, first published by NBC News on Friday and followed by The New York Times, comes at a time when Washington is pursuing diplomatic engagement with Iran, while its ally Israel is opposed to the talks aimed at ending the conflict now 100 days long on Sunday.

US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have publicly diverged in their approach to the war – Washington wants to extricate itself amid political pressure, while Israel is still pushing to topple the Iranian government.

This is not the first time Israel has been accused of espionage against the US – its closest ally and benefactor – with which it maintains extensive security and intelligence cooperation.

Here is what you need to know:

What did the Pentagon say?

According to NBC News and The New York Times (NYT), citing anonymous current and former US officials, the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) arm recently upgraded Israel’s counterintelligence threat level from “high” to “critical”, the most serious designation in its internal assessment system.

The warning was based on Israeli intelligence agencies intensifying efforts to collect information on US military personnel, government officials and policy discussions.

The news reports said the concern was focused on American officials involved in shaping Washington’s approach towards Iran, as the two foes continue to negotiate an end to the war that has sent global energy prices soaring.

“An intensified Israeli effort to learn about US positions in talks with Iran has crossed a line, according to some American officials,” the NYT said.

According to the news outlet, intelligence assessments pointed to increased Israeli surveillance efforts in recent weeks targeting US military and government figures.

They include Trump envoy and key negotiator Steve Witkoff; the Pentagon’s top policy official, Elbridge A Colby; and one of his deputies, Michael P DiMino IV, the NYT reported.

Witkoff was chief negotiator in the nuclear talks before Israel and the US launched the attack on Iran on 28 February.

The reports also referenced incidents in which US defence personnel working in Israel allegedly discovered software on their phones “to tap their communications had been surreptitiously installed on their phones”, the NYT added.

The newspaper said the DIA reports found Israeli spying on the US, which has occurred before, surged from late 2024 onwards, coinciding with US President Joe Biden’s administration stepping up pressure on Israel over its genocide in Gaza.

The reported increase in spying continued after Trump was elected to a second term in November 2024 and began shaping his administration’s policy towards Iran.

Tensions between Trump and Netanyahu have come to the surface in the past week, amid reports the US president called the Israeli prime minister “f****ing crazy”, due to Israel’s escalation in Lebanon. At least 3,500 people have been killed in Israeli attacks in Lebanon.

Trump has been pressing Israel to halt its attacks on Lebanon, but the bombardment in the south has continued, undermining a potential deal with Iran which insists both issues are inseparable.

While intelligence gathering between friendly nations is not unusual, some US officials reportedly believe recent Israeli activities have gone beyond what Washington traditionally considers acceptable among allies.

According to officials cited in the reports, US intelligence agencies have become increasingly concerned that Israel is seeking greater insight into US policy discussions and negotiating positions, specifically with Iran.

What has been the response from the Israeli and US governments?

Israel has denied the allegations.

According to NBC, the Israeli embassy in Washington said it was “completely false” that the country spies on US government officials or American institutions.

“Israel does not gather intelligence on American entities, let alone US government officials,” NBC quoted the spokesperson as saying.

A White House official also reportedly dismissed the NBC report, saying the “entire story is false and sourced to someone who doesn’t have any knowledge of what’s going on”.

Al Jazeera could not independently verify the media reports and the US and Israeli responses.

Has Israel previously spied on the US?

Yes. Israel has previously been involved in espionage cases targeting the US, although such incidents have not been spoken about much given their close ties.

The most famous example is the Jonathan Pollard affair. The civilian intelligence analyst working for the US Navy was arrested in 1985 after passing large quantities of classified information to Israel. He later pleaded guilty to espionage and served 30 years in prison before being released on parole in 2015.

The Pollard case remains one of the most significant espionage scandals in the history of US-Israeli relations and continues to shape perceptions within parts of the American intelligence community.

However, espionage between close allies is not uncommon, says academic Andreas Kreig.

“Israel has a particularly long track record of conducting intelligence operations inside the United States,” the professor at the Department of Security at King’s College London told Al Jazeera.

“Over decades, Israel has sought to penetrate US policymaking circles through both formal and informal networks, including intelligence and lobbying channels, in order to gain insight into American strategic thinking and decision-making,” he added.

Nevertheless, Washington has for years provided billions in military aid and weapons sales to Israel, including throughout the ongoing Israeli genocide in Gaza.

The US Congress is also currently debating a section of a new defence bill, which would integrate the two countries’ research and development for weaponry to an unprecedented degree. The US has also provided diplomatic cover to Israel at the UN and other international bodies.

Why has Israel allegedly ramped up its espionage activities in the US?

According to academic Kreig, Israel is “deeply concerned” about the trajectory of US negotiations with Iran.

“From the Israeli perspective, the recent conflict with Iran was effectively a joint US-Israeli war, yet the United States is now in a position to shape the diplomatic endgame,” he told Al Jazeera.

“The principal Israeli concern is that Washington could agree to a deal that establishes an enduring diplomatic framework, potentially lasting years or even decades, which would constrain Israeli freedom of military manoeuvre against Iran in the future. Israeli policymakers therefore have a strong incentive to stay ahead of US deliberations and understand negotiations in real time.”

Moreover, Kreig said Israeli intelligence gathering also serves a “strategic purpose”, which is to identify “opportunities to influence, derail, or undermine negotiations if Israeli leaders judge the process to be contrary to their security interests”.

“While Israel sees the United States as its indispensable patron and closest strategic partner, it has simultaneously treated the US as a legitimate intelligence target whenever interests diverge,” he added.

“What surprises many observers is the extent to which Israel, despite being heavily dependent on American military, diplomatic and financial support, has developed the capacity to penetrate multiple layers of US policymaking and cultivate influence across key institutions involved in American statecraft.”

According to analyst and Iran expert Negar Mortazavi, Israel’s reported espionage in the current context is not new and has past precedent. Israel’s opposition to US-Iran negotiations goes back to the time of US President Barack Obama when he signed a nuclear deal with Iran in 2015, which the US under Trump withdrew from in 2018.

“The Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu did not want any deals or serious negotiations or normalisation between Tehran and Washington, and he tried to stop it publicly and privately in any way he could,” she told Al Jazeera.

Moreover, Mortazavi said the ongoing war on Iran was “not going as planned or as promised”, and that Trump wants “to exit the war and he has to do it through diplomacy”.

“At this point it is very clear that US interests and Israeli interests are no longer overlapping, they’re divergent,” she added.

WASHINGTON — After Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth cut nine Navy officers, including all the women, from a promotion list, several female officers say they see the unusual intervention as a sign that their careers now have a ceiling and worry for the future generation of female military leaders.

The Navy had selected 31 sailors to promote from the rank of captain to one-star admiral, but Hegseth recently intervened to strike nine people from the list, including three women and two Black men, according to a Defense official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss information not permitted to be released publicly.

As a result, the Navy is not promoting a single woman to the one-star admiral rank this year even though women make up about one-quarter of all Navy officers and nearly one-third of the sea service’s midgrade ranks, according to military data from 2024.

The Associated Press spoke with eight female Navy officers of varying ranks and time in service after Hegseth’s cuts, which were reported earlier by the New York Times, became public. They spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear of retribution from their superiors.

The more junior officers said they saw the development as a sign that their careers would become politicized if they rose too far in the ranks, and some said they felt they now had a limit on how far they could be promoted. Some said it made them feel less valued within the military and wondered whether that wasn’t part of the intent.

The Pentagon has not offered any rationale on why the women, or any of the other six people, were removed from the promotion list.

Sean Parnell, the Pentagon’s top spokesman, said on social media last week that “military promotions are given to those who have earned them” and that the Pentagon “will never consider the color of a service member’s skin or their gender as a factor in promotions.” The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request seeking further comment.

The Navy’s process for choosing which officers to promote to the one-star rank has been relatively constant and transparent over the years. The service convenes a group of officers, called a promotion board, that examines the records of eligible officers and chooses those deemed to be the most qualified.

The board that selected the initial slate of 31 officers for promotion was directed by then-Navy Secretary John Phelan, an appointee of President Trump, to “recommend for promotion the best qualified officers within their respective competitive category.”

The order from Phelan, who abruptly departed his post in April, said the board should consider an officer’s performance, competence and character, among other traits, as part of those qualifications.

It also said that given China’s prominence in the Trump administration’s National Defense Strategy, “special consideration shall be given to officers who have excelled in their knowledge of the political military affairs and U.S. strategic interests in the Indo-Pacific region, and operational contingency planning for Indo-Pacific war plans.”

Hegseth has long argued, without offering evidence, that women in the military benefit from preferential treatment and are not suited for combat roles.

“For too long, we’ve promoted too many uniformed leaders for the wrong reasons based on their race, based on gender quotas, based on historic so-called firsts,” Hegseth told hundreds of military leaders in September.

The approach, he asserted, made the Pentagon “less capable and less lethal.”

‘A break from tradition’

Phelan’s order said the Navy cannot discriminate based on criteria such as race and sex, and it specifically noted that “this guidance shall not be interpreted as requiring or permitting preferential treatment of any officer or group of officers on the grounds of race, religion, color, sex.”

The full list of 31 people to be promoted was approved by Phelan, other Navy leaders and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Dan Caine, before it reached Hegseth, who chose to make the changes, the Defense official said.

While Hegseth is within his rights to intervene in the list, “it’s just not the norm” and is “a break from tradition,” said Katherine Kuzminski, a researcher specializing in military recruiting and retention at the Center for New American Security think tank. She said that promotions historically have been seen as “the services’ business.”

Kuzminski noted that “this is a decision that’s not being made by the Navy — it’s being made by the secretary of Defense,” and she said Hegseth’s growing interference in operational aspects of the military services such as promotions is creating “tension” about what “normal” will look like going forward.

Some of the more senior Navy officers who spoke with the AP expressed concerns about the message it sends to the next generation of young sailors.

In addition to pulling the recent promotions of three women to admiral, Hegseth shortly after he took office fired Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the service’s top officer and the first woman to hold the job. He never explained his rationale.

Since then, he also has fired two other female three-star admirals without explanation.

Some of the officers who spoke to the AP said that while they were encouraging female sailors to stick with the Navy, they acknowledged that message is coming at a difficult time.

Kuzminski said the rhetoric and actions surrounding women in the military “affects individual service member decision-making and it also affects family unit decision-making,” including whether people make a career of the military.

Kuzminski said that following the months-long hold on military promotions by Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) during the Biden administration, surveys showed that partisan politics spilling into the day-to-day lives of troops affected their decision-making.

One officer said this impact was not confined to women.

In conversations with other sailors in her unit, she said that male sailors were hesitant to deal with what appears to be a growing politicization of simply following the orders of previous administrations.

Toropin writes for the Associated Press.

Department reports raise concerns about increased espionage activity amid US-Israeli war with Iran, ceasefire talks.

The Pentagon’s intelligence arm has raised the assessed threat level on Israeli spying from “high” to “critical” in recent weeks, according to US media.

NBC News first broke news of the change on Friday, with The New York Times issuing its own report the following day.

The news outlets cited anonymous sources as saying the switch came in light of concerns over increasingly aggressive tactics related to the US-Israeli war with Iran.

They said the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) had raised the alert level amid fears that Israel is increasingly attempting to surveil top US officials. The aim is allegedly to understand internal White House deliberations about ending the war.

US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu have publicly diverged in their approach to the war, which the US and Israel started on February 28.

Trump, on one hand, has repeatedly said he wants to bring the war to a close, amid mounting political pressure at home.

Netanyahu, meanwhile, has called for war to resume, despite an April 8 ceasefire. The fighting has been mostly paused since the temporary truce was announced, but efforts to reach a lasting agreement have repeatedly stalled.

The New York Times reported that, while Israel has been known to spy on the US, the DIA cited an uptick in activities beginning in late 2024, as the administration of US President Joe Biden increased pressure on Israel over its genocidal war in Gaza.

That increase continued into 2025, as Trump returned to the presidency and began deliberating about how to approach Iran.

The newspaper added that other recent intelligence assessments have also documented evidence that there are Israeli efforts to monitor Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff as well as Elbridge Colby, a top policy official at the Pentagon, and his deputy Michael DiMino IV.

Witkoff had been the lead negotiator in nuclear talks that preceded the initial US-Israeli attack on Iran in February.

Both NBC News and The New York Times cited unnamed US officials in their reports. The US Department of Defense did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Al Jazeera.

However, an unnamed spokesperson told both news organisations that the reports were “false”.

Still, the reported concerns are likely to raise questions over the close intelligence and military coordination between Israel and the US.

Washington has, for years, provided billions in military aid and weapons sales to Israel, including throughout the genocide in Gaza.

The US Congress is also currently debating a section of a new defence bill, which would integrate the two countries’ research and development for weaponry to an unprecedented degree.

While the US and its allies are known to regularly conduct intelligence operations on each other, officials told both NBC and The New York Times that Israel’s recent vigour was unique.

The New York Times reported that the increased DIA designation surpasses all current allies, as well as a handful of countries with more fraught relations.

Recent incidents included Israel’s military intelligence trying to plant listening devices at the DIA headquarters in 2021, according to the newspaper.

In 2025, Israel’s domestic intelligence agency, Shin Bet, was found to have tried to plant a similar device in a Secret Service vehicle, the report said.

WASHINGTON — The U.S. military is waiting for clarity from the Pentagon following President Trump’s back-and-forth on troop levels in Europe, upending the lives of military personnel and potentially costing taxpayers millions of dollars, two U.S. defense officials told the Associated Press.

NATO allies were bewildered in May when Trump said he would send 5,000 U.S. troops to Poland just weeks after ordering the same number pulled from Europe, following a spat with Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz over the Iran war. The Trump administration says troop reductions in Europe have long been planned and coordinated with allies.

The Republican president announced on social media two weeks ago that he was sending troops to Poland — the same day the Pentagon had officially ordered the cancellation of a rotation of soldiers heading there, one of the defense officials said.

The unit’s equipment was already on the way. Sending it cost the military $32 million, said U.S. Transportation Command, the military agency largely responsible for moving troops and gear across the globe.

The abrupt changes are forcing the military to “retroactively engineer” a policy in line with the president’s latest pronouncement, the official said. Both officials were briefed on the decisions and, along with others, spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military matters.

The uncertainty is not only rattling European allies worried about the message being sent to Russia, but it also risks hurting morale among American troops — some of whom had their rotations canceled shortly before departure — and comes as the Army budget is already strained.

Changes to troop deployments to Poland add up

The rotational deployment to Poland of 4,000 troops from the Army’s 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, based in Fort Hood, Texas, was canceled in a memo sent to the military at the beginning of May. European allies found out mid-month.

Some of those troops were told shortly before traveling not to get on a flight to Poland, while those who had been sent ahead — initially around 1,000 troops — are still waiting for confirmation they are being sent back, a U.S. military official said.

The military also is still waiting for details from the Pentagon on how to satisfy Trump’s order to send 5,000 troops to Poland, that official said. The working assumption is that they will come from units already in Europe, rather than an additional deployment from the U.S., the official said.

U.S. Transportation Command had chartered a ship to take the team’s equipment from Texas to Poland and transport a departing unit’s gear back to America. The incoming team’s portion of the cost was $32 million, including chartering the ship and loading and unloading the gear.

Because the ship was chartered to take one unit to Europe and bring another back, it is hard to say if that amount would have been saved had the decision to halt the deployment been made before the new team had already begun moving overseas.

However, the military official said the unscheduled move of personnel and equipment back from Europe is most likely not a cost the Pentagon budgeted for and would be an additional expense.

Total costs of canceling the rotation are hard to quantify because of many factors, said Joe Costa, a former senior Pentagon official who now focuses on challenges faced by the U.S. military as director of the Atlantic Council’s Forward Defense program.

They most likely stem from returning equipment and troops sent ahead of the deployment and would probably be on the low end of the rotation’s overall cost, Costa said. The greater impact is on the readiness of troops who were trained for one mission and may be deployed on another, he said.

U.S. military contracts with private companies to transport troops and equipment contain cancellation clauses that often add extra fees if a deployment is called off, said John Deni, a senior nonresident fellow at the Atlantic Council who has studied such costs.

“The question is what additional costs were incurred by deciding to send them back prematurely, changing the arrangements, changing the plan?” said Deni, a former U.S. military advisor and planner who focused on forces in Europe.

It is not clear if the Pentagon can recoup those costs or those associated with moving the unit to Europe. The Defense Department did not answer questions about the costs of changing the deployment plans, and the White House referred a request for comment to the department.

Pentagon officials have repeatedly said they planned to lower troop levels to have Europe shoulder more of its own defense and that the decision was part of a “comprehensive, multilayered process.”

Last month’s memo also led to the cancellation of a deployment to Germany of a battalion trained in firing long-range rockets and missiles.

Pulling troops stationed in Germany would be more expensive

When Trump first threatened to remove 5,000 troops from Europe, Pentagon officials initially suggested pulling back the 2nd Cavalry Regiment, which is based permanently in Germany, the defense official said.

Instead, officials decided to cancel the rotation of the other unit to Poland. Then Trump threw that plan into confusion as well.

Pulling the troops stationed in Germany could cost in the low billions because there is no dedicated space and infrastructure in the U.S. to accommodate them and their families, Costa said.

“The other option is basically breaking up the unit,” Costa said. “They move the equipment in different places. They move the people to different places. That carries significant readiness costs because now you’re artificially jamming pieces of units into places where they don’t necessarily belong.”

Pulling or pausing deployments also can hurt morale among soldiers and families because they plan for them months and years in advance, Deni said. The uncertainty can be disruptive.

“That’s often the last thing you want to do to military families,” Deni said.

It is still unclear what will happen to U.S. troops stationed in Europe, the two officials said. Options include moving military units assigned to Germany to Poland, but that could take several years and cost more, the military official said.

Troop changes happen during an Army budget shortfall

The moves come as the Army is facing a budget shortfall, which the service’s top uniformed officer, Gen. Christopher LaNeve, recently acknowledged to Congress.

Estimates put the deficit somewhere between $2 billion and $6 billion, according to an Army official who also spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive defense matters. One impact has been cutting training courses for soldiers nationwide, which ABC News earlier reported.

In a statement, the Army said it has issued guidance to its commands to “make tough and sound resource decisions that optimize and prioritize resources toward their most critical requirements, to include major training and readiness events.”

The Army official also noted that the service has been tasked with missions like the National Guard deployment in Washington, a bolstered presence along the U.S.-Mexico border and its part in the Iran war — all of which have strained its budget.

The Department of Homeland Security expects to reimburse the Army for its role in the border mission.

Army Secretary Dan Driscoll told lawmakers at a May 15 hearing that he was “optimistic” there would progress on those payments “within a week or two.” But to date, the Army has not been reimbursed.

“We want those backfilled payments,” Driscoll said then.

The U.S. military in Europe also is scaling back support for non-combat related training and ruthlessly prioritizing critical functions, the military official said.

Burrows, Finley and Toropin write for the Associated Press. Burrows reported from London.

WASHINGTON — A Trump administration policy illegally banned transgender troops from military service, a divided panel of federal appeal court judges ruled on Monday.

The majority opinion by a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit largely upholds a March 2025 ruling by U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes in Washington, D.C. Reyes concluded that President Trump’s executive order to exclude transgender troops from military service likely violates their constitutional rights.

The administration appealed after Reyes issued a preliminary injunction requested by attorneys for six transgender people who are active-duty service members and two others seeking to join the military. The appeal court’s majority decided that the injunction should be narrowed to the plaintiffs currently serving in the military but not those seeking to join.

The ruling won’t immediately go into effect, allowing the administration time to ask the full appeals court to hear the case.

The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the transgender military ban to go into effect last year, as litigation continues to play out. Another lawsuit challenging the ban was filed in Washington state and led to a ruling in favor of the plaintiffs challenging the policy in that case.

In January 2025, Trump signed an executive order that claims the sexual identity of transgender service members “conflicts with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one’s personal life” and is harmful to military readiness.

In response to the order, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a policy that presumptively disqualifies people with gender dysphoria from military service. Gender dysphoria is the distress that a person feels because their assigned gender and gender identity don’t match. The medical condition has been linked to depression and suicidal thoughts.

The policy “appears to be driven by the bare desire to harm a politically unpopular group: persons who identify as transgender,” Judge Robert Wilkins wrote for the majority. Wilkins was nominated to the court by Democratic President Obama.

In a dissenting opinion, Judge Justin Walker said judges lack the power to second-guess the decision to exclude transgender troops.

“We have neither the expertise nor the authority to decide whether the military can exclude the plaintiffs from its ranks. The Constitution assigns that authority to Congress and the Commander in Chief,” wrote Walker, who was nominated by Trump, a Republican.

Judge Judith Rogers, who was nominated by Democratic President Clinton, joined Wilkins’ opinion but also partially dissented.

Kunzelman and Whitehurst write for the Associated Press.

On Wednesday, the US Department of War confirmed it had awarded Dell Federal Systems, the government-focused unit of Dell Technologies, a five-year, $9.7 billion (€8.3bn) contract to supply the Pentagon.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

As part of the Core Enterprise Technology Agreement (CETA), a Pentagon-wide Microsoft licensing and software procurement framework, the company will provide and manage Microsoft software licences, cloud subscriptions and on-premises software licensing across the US military, intelligence agencies and the US Coast Guard.

Dell Technologies’ shares were up around 5% in pre-market to $320 due to the announcement after closing Wednesday’s session at roughly $305.

The company is set to report its earnings for the first quarter of this year on Thursday, with analysts from Zacks Investment Research forecasting revenues of approximately $35 billion (€30bn), representing annual growth of about 50%.

According to US DoW Chief Information Officer Kirsten Davies, who briefed reporters at the Pentagon, the CETA is expected to save the department roughly $422 million (€360.9mn) annually by consolidating fragmented technology budgets from across the military services into a single purchasing structure.

The contract was granted less than three weeks after US President Donald Trump stood at a White House event and urged Americans to “go out and buy a Dell. They’re great.”

Davies and acting US Navy Chief Information Officer Barry Tanner were both clear that the award followed a competitive process.

“The vendors were all evaluated based on competition, comparison to GSA schedule pricing and overall chain of value to the department,” Tanner noted.

Dell holds a long-standing commercial partnership with Microsoft and is one of its major buyers of Windows licences. Nonetheless, the contract arrives at the culmination of a period of visible alignment between CEO Michael Dell and the Trump administration.

In December 2025, Dell and his wife Susan appeared alongside Trump at the White House to announce a $6.25 billion (€5.3bn) donation to “Trump Accounts,” a tax-advantaged investment programme for children created under the “One Big Beautiful Bill”.

The pledge will provide $250 (€214) to roughly 25 million American children aged 10 and under from households with a median income below $150,000 (€129,000) and was described by Invest America, the nonprofit organisation spearheading the initiative, as the largest ever private commitment devoted to American children.

Michael Dell also sits on Trump’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, informing public policy regarding the economy, public health, national security, energy and emerging technologies.

The convergence of public presidential endorsements and subsequent federal contract awards is attracting scrutiny beyond Dell.

Financial disclosures released this month by the US Office of Government Ethics showed that investment accounts associated with President Donald Trump held Dell Technologies shares during the first quarter of 2026. The disclosures indicate some purchases were made before Trump publicly praised the company at a White House event.

The Trump Organisation has said the accounts are managed independently by third-party financial institutions and that neither Trump nor his family directs individual trades.

Last week, responding to questions about Trump’s financial disclosures at a White House briefing, Vice President JD Vance said the president’s investments are handled by independent wealth advisers and rejected suggestions that Trump personally directs individual stock trades. “He’s not making these stock trades himself,” Vance said.

Commentators and ethics critics have also pointed to trading activity involving companies such as Intel and Palantir, whose shares have at times moved sharply following public comments by Trump or announcements linked to government technology spending.

The Pentagon has said Dell’s selection followed a competitive procurement process.

Even so, the timing of the award alongside Trump’s public praise of the company and financial disclosures showing investments linked to Dell is likely to draw renewed scrutiny from ethics observers and political critics.

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is drawing down thousands of troops in Europe by canceling deployments to Poland and Germany as opposed to yanking forces already stationed there, U.S. officials say, as President Trump has tussled with allies over the Iran war and called for changes.

Several U.S. officials confirmed that 4,000 troops from the Army’s 2nd Armored Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division were no longer en route to Poland this week. The Trump administration had previously said it was cutting U.S. forces only in Germany, and the decision spurred questions and criticism in both Warsaw and Washington.

Two officials told the Associated Press that the deployments were canceled after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth signed a memo directing the Joint Chiefs of Staff to move a brigade combat team out of Europe. One of them said the choice of which unit was left to military leaders.

Besides the Army combat team based in Fort Hood, Texas, the memo also led to the cancellation of an upcoming deployment to Germany of a battalion trained in firing long-range rockets and missiles, according to the two officials, who like the others spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military operations.

Three U.S. officials said the changes were part of an effort to comply with a presidential order issued at the beginning of May to reduce the number of troops in Europe by about 5,000. The reasoning does not appear to have been well communicated because others based in Europe said they did not know if the halted deployment to Poland was part of the previously announced reduction.

Trump and the Pentagon have said in recent weeks that they were cutting at least 5,000 troops to Germany after Chancellor Friedrich Merz said the U.S. was being “humiliated” by the Iranian leadership and criticized Washington’s lack of strategy in the war.

The drawdown reflects a growing rift between the administration and traditional European allies, with the U.S. leader repeatedly criticizing fellow NATO members for a lack of support for the Iran war.

Polish officials on Friday insisted that the U.S. withdrawal was not targeted directly at Poland but was a consequence of Trump’s decision to reduce the number of troops in Germany.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said he “received assurances” that the decision was of a logistical nature and said it does not directly affect deterrence capabilities and Poland’s security.

Military officials say the decision to halt unit to Poland made recently

Joel Valdez, a Pentagon spokesman, said, “the decision to withdraw troops follows a comprehensive, multilayered process” and he argued that it was “not an unexpected, last-minute decision.”

Speaking to Congress in a hearing Friday, Army Secretary Dan Driscoll and Gen. Christopher LaNeve, the Army’s chief of staff, told lawmakers that discussions around the halted deployment occurred over the last two weeks but noted the decision itself was made in the last couple days.

Republican Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska said he spoke with Polish officials on Thursday and they noted they were “blindsided.”

The move also left many U.S. military personnel in Europe in the dark about how the Trump administration was reducing forces. A U.S. official based in Europe said a meeting was called with 20 minutes’ notice on Monday to discuss the cancellation of the deployment to Poland.

At that time, troops had already been sent to Poland and some, still in the U.S., were told shortly before departure not to travel to the airport, that official said. Another official said most of the Army unit’s equipment had already made it to Europe and was sitting in ports.

Change to troop deployment to Poland draws bipartisan criticism

The reductions drew criticism from Democratic and Republican lawmakers about the move sending the wrong signal both to allies and Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose forces this week have launched one of the deadliest attacks on the Ukrainian capital in the 4-year-old war.

At the House Armed Services Committee hearing Friday, LaNeve said he worked with U.S. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, commander in Europe of both U.S. and NATO forces, after Grynkewich received the instructions for the force reduction.

“I’ve worked with him in close consultation of what that force unit would be, and it made the most sense for that brigade to not do its deployment in theater,” LaNeve said.

Bacon called the decision “reprehensible” and said it was “an embarrassment to our country what we just did to Poland.”

Republican Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama, who chairs the committee, said the military is required to consult with lawmakers and that did not happen.

“So we don’t know what’s going on here,” Rogers said. “But I can just tell you we’re not happy with what’s being talked about.”

A State Department official said Friday at a security conference in Tallinn, Estonia, that the U.S. reductions in Europe were “right there in black and white” but also noted that “the U.S. isn’t going anywhere.”

“We’ll continue to work with the Pentagon and work with our partners to make sure we get the right fit and right mix of what’s happening here on the ground,” said Thomas G. DiNanno, U.S. undersecretary of state for arms control and international security.

NATO says the change in Poland won’t affect defense

With the halted deployments, the U.S. military presence in Europe will now be at pre-2022 levels, before Russia commenced its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, one U.S. official said.

European countries have been bracing for a U.S. reduction since Trump returned to the White House, with the administration warning that Europe would have to look after its own security, including Ukraine’s, in the future.

A NATO official said the U.S. decision to cancel its rotational deployment to Poland would not impact NATO’s deterrence and defense plans. Canada and Germany have increased their presence on the alliance’s eastern flank, which contributes to NATO’s overall strength, the official said, insisting on anonymity in line with NATO regulations.

Ben Hodges, former commanding general of U.S. Army Europe, said the move “reinforces the perception that the United States just does things without consultation with allies,” which ultimately “damages cohesion inside the alliance.” The decision would in the long run harm the U.S. defense industry as it reduces the trust of partners, he said.

Around 10,000 U.S. troops are typically stationed in Poland, the majority of them present in the country on a rotational basis. Only about 300 troops are permanently stationed in the country, according to the U.S. Congressional Research Service.

Polish officials had hoped they would be spared from any cuts as Poland spends the most in NATO on defense as a proportion of its economy — around 4.7% in 2025. Hegseth has called it a “model ally” in NATO for spending so much on defense.

When Poland’s conservative president, Karol Nawrocki, visited the White House in September, Trump said he didn’t intend to pull U.S. troops out of Poland. “We’ll put more there if they want,” Trump said at the time.

Toropin, Burrows, Finley and Ciobanu write for the Associated Press. Burrows reported from Tallinn, Estonia, and Ciobanu from Warsaw.

The Pentagon has outlined plans to acquire at least 10,000 lower-cost cruise missiles over the next three years, as well as a similar number of relatively ‘cheap’ Blackbeard hypersonic missiles. The new framework deals are part of a broader strategy to dramatically bolster America’s stockpiles of standoff strike munitions and prime the industrial base to sustain those inventories going forward. This is all seen as especially critical for supporting the demands of future high-end fights, such as one in the Pacific against China, and doing so in a cost-effective manner.

“The Department of War has reached new framework agreements with a slate of disruptive new entrants and commercial innovators to aggressively expand the United States military’s strike capabilities,” the Pentagon declared in a press release today. “Agreements with Anduril, CoAspire, Leidos, and Zone 5 will launch the Low-Cost Containerized Missles [sic; Missiles] (LCCM) program, while a parallel agreement with Castelion advances an initiative to scale low-cost hypersonic solutions.”

“The new frameworks for LCCM will drive a fast-paced experimentation and assessment campaign that will culminate in a Military Utility Assessment by the sponsoring Service Components. Designed to move at the speed of commercial industry, the agreements establish the terms for future firm-fixed-price production contracts,” the release adds. “This effort positions the Department to procure over 10,000 low-cost cruise missiles across these portfolios in just three years, starting in 2027. The Department is creating a pathway for rapid and repeatable production of high-volume, lethal strike capabilities. The agreements include firm fixed material-unit costs for production lots in 2027 through 2029.”

The Pentagon has not yet explicitly defined what it means by “containerized” in this context, or how exactly these munitions might be fielded. However, there is already a clear focus on designs that could be fired from containerized launchers on land or loaded on ships. As TWZ has reported on many occasions, containerized systems offer immense operational flexibility, as well as the ability to blend in with standard shipping containers, creating targeting challenges for opponents. The LCCM munitions could be adapted for air launch, if they are not expected to also be employable in that mode already. Common munitions that could be employed from launch platforms across domains would offer additional benefits in terms of logistics and production, as well as helping to keep costs down through economies of scale.

Anduril has already announced that its contribution will be the surface-launched version of its Barracuda-500M design, a weapon that can also be air-launched. The company says it plans to deliver a minimum of 1,000 of these weapons to the U.S. military each year for the next three years.

Leidos says it will supply an LCCM design that leverages existing work on its air-launched AGM-190A Small Cruise Missile (SCM), also known as Black Arrow, originally developed for U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM). The company plans to deliver 3,000 of these units under the new framework deal.

Leidos completes successful test launch of a Small Cruise Missile

“At approximately twice the size of the AGM-190A, the LCCM offers increased mission effectiveness and fuel capacity to maximize range. Building on the Leidos Small Cruise Missile’s heritage, the LCCM leverages key design features including a modular airframe and a common Weapon Open Systems Architecture (WOSA) to enable rapid integration, upgrades and mission adaptability,” Leidos’ press release adds. “The design also utilizes Leidos’ established supply chain and scalable production approach. While initially ground-launched, LCCM’s modular design could also support maritime platform integration and air-launched variants.”

At the time of writing, CoAspire and Zone 5, the latter of which was recently acquired by Norway’s Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace, do not appear to have issued press releases regarding the Pentagon’s LCCM announcement. However, both companies have already developed cruise missile designs under the U.S. Air Force’s Extended Range Attack Munition (ERAM) program, which was focused first on delivering new, lower-cost air-launched strike capabilities to Ukraine. CoAspire’s ERAM design is called the Rapidly Adaptable Affordable Cruise Missile (RAACM), while one from Zone 5 is named Rusty Dagger.

RAACM Cruise Missile Video Long Range Flights Summer 2025 Cleared for Public Release

ERAM is also now feeding into the Air Force’s Family of Affordable Mass Missiles (FAMM) program. That service’s proposed budget for the 2027 Fiscal Year had already laid out plans to buy nearly 28,000 FAMM munitions over the next five years.

CoAspire has talked in the past about surface-launched versions of its RAACM and its new longer-range RAACM-ER. Zone 5 could similarly look to adapt its existing Rusty Dagger missile to meet the specific LCCM requirements.

“Concurrently, once Castelion achieves testing and validation, the Department will award a two-year multi-year procurement contract for a minimum of 500 Blackbeard missiles annually, with options to extend for up to five years,” the Pentagon’s press release today also notes. “To further encourage Castelion’s self-funded facility expansion, the Department is actively seeking the necessary authorizations and appropriations to purchase over 12,000 Blackbeard missiles over five years.”

Castelion has already been developing a ground-launched version of Blackbeard for the U.S. Army. Last month, the company formally announced that it had received a separate contract from the U.S. Navy for an air-launched version to arm that service’s F/A-18E/F Super Hornets.

“The experimentation and assessment campaign for LCCM will be led by the Office of the Under Secretary of War for Research and Engineering, with the Army Program Acquisition Executive Fires serving as the transition partner and acquisition lead for procurement,” according to the Pentagon. “To kickstart this initiative, the Department will procure test missiles from all four LCCM companies starting in June 2026, laying the groundwork for the assessment phase of the program. These agreements were developed in close coordination with the United States Air Force Program Acquisition Executive Weapons, the Test Resource Management Center and multiple components across the War Department, including the Office of the Under Secretary of War for Acquisition and Sustainment.”

It should be stressed here that the problem set that LCCM and the tangential framework arrangement with Castelion are intended to address, that of a critical need for production of cost-effective strike munitions at scale, is not new. Expenditures of critical air-to-surface and surface-to-surface munitions, as well as anti-air interceptors, by the U.S. military, as well as its allies and partners, in conflicts in recent years have only underscored the vital need to bolster these inventories. Demand for stand-off munitions, in particular, would be far greater in any future high-end fight against a near-peer adversary like China. That is a scenario where American forces could easily find themselves tasked to prosecute tens of thousands, of targets, just in the opening phase.

Furthermore, existing munitions are often exquisite in design, and take months, or more often years, of lead time to produce. The Pentagon’s focus on “disruptive new entrants and commercial innovators,” rather than any of America’s long-established prime defense contractors, with its newly announced framework deals, is extremely significant in its own right. This is the latest example of a major shift away from awarding high-profile contracts to large legacy providers, helping to diversify the industrial base and promote competition. This also means moving away from companies accustomed to very long lead procurement and production arrangements.

The LCCM effort follows years of work in the pursuit of lower-cost stand-off munitions, especially by the U.S. Air Force. This is underscored by the fact that all of the companies named today already have relevant designs that they have been working on under contract to the U.S. military. This, in turn, has already led to an explosion in the market for munitions in this general category, many of which increasingly blur the line between long-range kamikaze drones, traditional cruise missiles, and decoys. It should also be noted that the new lower-cost munitions are not intended to replace existing exquisite designs, but instead to form a valuable high-low capability mix that offers a more cost-effective and flexible blend of options for striking targets.

The U.S. Army and U.S. Navy have also made significant investments already in containerized launchers capable of firing various types of longer-ranged missiles.

If the frameworks announced today produce the promised results, they could be instrumental in laying the foundation for the production of lower-cost strike munitions for years to come.

Update: 6:20 PM EST –

Zone 5 has now provided a statement regarding today’s announcement from the Pentagon.

“Zone 5 is proud to partner with the Department of War on the Low-Cost Containerized Missiles program to deliver affordable, scalable strike capacity to our warfighters needed to deter and defeat emerging threats,” Thomas Akers, CEO of Zone 5 Technologies, said. “This program reflects exactly where American defense innovation must go: faster development, on-demand production, and high-volume weapons that can be fielded at the pace of relevance. We are honored to be a part of this effort to expand the munitions industrial base and strengthen America’s arsenal.”

Contact the author: joe@twz.com

May 11 (UPI) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said his department will “review” comments made by Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., about the U.S. military’s weapons stockpiles.

Hegseth’s renewed criticism into Kelly came in response to the senator’s appearance Sunday on CBS’ Face the Nation. Kelly, a retired Navy captain and former astronaut, said he received Pentagon briefings and it was “shocking … how deep we have gone into these magazines.”

“We’ve expended a lot of munitions. And that means the American people are less safe. Whether it’s a conflict in the western Pacific with China or somewhere else in the world, the munitions are depleted,” Kelly said.

In a post on X on Sunday evening, Hegseth questioned whether Kelly violated his oath by discussion the matter publicly.

“Now he’s blabbing on TV (falsely & dumbly) about a *CLASSIFIED* Pentagon briefing he received,” Hegseth said in his post, promising to have the Pentagon’s legal counsel review the comments.

Kelly said the information he shared wasn’t classified because Hegseth spoke on the topic during a hearing of the Senate Committee on Armed Services last week.

“We had this conversation in a public hearing a week ago and you said it would take ‘years’ to replenish some of these stockpiles. That’s not classified, it’s a quote from you.”

Kelly also shared a video of Hegseth’s comments from the hearing in his response on X.

The two leaders have been embroiled in a legal battle after Hegseth tried to censure and demote Kelly from his military rank over comments he made in November telling service members that they have the right and duty to ignore “unlawful orders” made by the Trump administration. Hegseth also sought to reduce Kelly’s retirement pay, calling his remarks “seditious.”

Footage released by the Pentagon shows US strikes on two Iranian oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz. The US military says the vessels were disabled following overnight exchanges of fire with Iranian forces, preventing them from reaching ports in the Gulf of Oman.

WASHINGTON — President Trump’s vow to shrink America’s military deployment in Germany has put a new spotlight on the U.S. role in Europe.

There are usually 80,000 to 100,000 troops on the continent, with more than 36,000 in Germany. The Pentagon announced Friday that it would remove 5,000 troops from Germany, and Trump said the next day that he would go “a lot further” than that.

The U.S. military presence is a legacy of World War II, when Americans helped stabilize and rebuild Europe, and the Cold War, when the troops served as a bulwark against Soviet expansion. More recently, the deployment has played a key role supporting operations in the Arctic, Africa and the Middle East including the current conflict with Iran.

But Trump has broken with years of bipartisan consensus, criticizing European allies in NATO and following through on threats to reduce the U.S. commitment to the continent’s security. The recent announcement comes after escalating tensions with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who last week said the U.S. was being “humiliated” by Iran and accused Washington of lacking a clear strategy.

Here’s a look at America’s current deployment in Europe and how it could change.

What to know about the U.S. defense posture in Europe

The U.S. European Command, created in 1947 and known as EUCOM, is one of 11 combat commands within the Defense Department, and covers some 50 countries and territories.

In addition to more than 36,000 troops in Germany, Italy hosts more than 12,000 and there’s another 10,000 in the United Kingdom, according to Pentagon numbers from December.

The Pentagon has offered few details about which troops or operations would be affected in the drawdown announced Friday.

The U.S. increased its European deployment after Russia launched its full-scale war on Ukraine four years ago. NATO allies like Germany have expected for over a year that these troops would be the first to leave.

European deployment has global role

Aside from its role as a deterrent to Russia, the U.S. military presence in Europe helps Washington project power across the globe.

U.S. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, who is the commander in Europe of both U.S. and NATO forces, reinforced the benefits of a strong footprint on the continent to the Senate Armed Services Committee in March.

“It is having capabilities in Europe, munitions in Europe that allow us to help U.S. Africa Command to target terrorists in Africa, or to help U.S. Central Command as they execute Operation Epic Fury,” he told lawmakers, referring to the Iran war. “The distances are shorter, it’s less expensive and it’s much easier to project power.”

Germany hosts the headquarters of the U.S. European and Africa commands, Ramstein Air Base and a medical center in Landstuhl, where casualties from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were treated. U.S. nuclear weapons are also stationed in the country.

The U.S. has approximately 100 nuclear bombs deployed to bases in Europe that would be delivered by aircraft, according to a March estimate from the Federation of American Scientists. The group’s report said the bombs are at bases in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey, while it’s possible they’re also at a base in the United Kingdom.

A call to move U.S. forces further east in Europe

Even before Trump’s comment Saturday to reporters, Republican leaders of both armed services committees in Congress expressed concern about the Pentagon plan, warning a premature drawdown in Europe would send “the wrong signal to Vladimir Putin” as the Russian president continues his war in Ukraine.

Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi and Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama said troops should be shifted to bases in Eastern Europe rather than withdrawn.

The lawmakers also said allies have made “substantial investments to host U.S. troops.”

Wicker and Rogers said the Pentagon, following its announcement Friday, has also decided to cancel the planned deployment to Germany of one of the U.S. Army’s long-range fires battalions, which operate ground-launched missile systems.

Trump’s vision: DIY defense in Europe

As part of its National Defense Strategy announced in January — a sweeping document laying out a vision on everything from deterring China to defending against cyberattacks to disrupting Iran’s nuclear ambitions — the administration said Europe must do more for its own defense.

While “we are and will remain engaged in Europe, we must — and will — prioritize defending the U.S. Homeland and deterring China,” it said.

Among other things, the document noted that Europe’s economic power, while shrinking in relative terms globally, remains significant, and said that Germany’s economy alone “dwarfs that of Russia.”

“Fortunately, our NATO allies are substantially more powerful than Russia — it is not even close,” it said, noting a recent commitment among NATO allies to raise national defense spending to 5% of GDP in total, a push led by Trump.

What Germany has been doing to beef up its forces

Germany has moved to modernize its long-neglected military, or Bundeswehr, since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. That year, it set up a $117 billion special fund to boost Bundeswehr, much of which has been committed to procuring new equipment.

Late last year, Merz’s government announced plans to raise the number of military personnel to 260,000, up from about 180,000. In 2001, when Germany still had conscription, the headcount was 300,000 — more than a third of them conscripts.

Berlin says it will also need around 200,000 reservists, more than double the current figure.

Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, in comments to German news agency dpa after the Pentagon’s drawdown plan was announced Friday, acknowledged that Europe must take more responsibility for its own security — and said the Bundeswehr is growing, military equipment is being procured more quickly, and infrastructure is being developed.

Keaten and Finley write for the Associated Press. Keaten reported from Geneva.

April 28 (UPI) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said he shared a ride in a U.S. Army helicopter with Kid Rock weeks after the military came under fire for carrying out an Apache flyby of the musician’s home in Nashville.

Hegseth posted photos of himself and Kid Rock with members of the military on Monday.

“Joined my friend @KidRock — and some of our great @USArmy Apache pilots — for a ride this morning. (More to come on that!)” Hegseth wrote.

“Kid Rock is a patriot and huge supporter of our troops. The War Department is wasting no time celebrating America’s 250th — home of the free because of the brave.”

Sean Parnell, a spokesman for the Pentagon, said Monday’s helicopter ride for Kid Rock was part of the government’s plans to celebrate the country’s 250th birthday, The New York Times reported. CNN reported that Parnell said Kid Rock filmed videos to mark Memorial Day, the 250th birthday and his own Freedom 250 concert tour.

“The visit today provided an opportunity for Kid Rock to thank service members, highlight the professionalism of the men and women supporting the mission, and recognize their continued sacrifice in honor of our nation. The department is grateful for Kid Rock’s long-time support of our troops.”

In late March, the U.S. Army said it was conducting an administrative review after Apache helicopters performed a flyby of Kid Rock’s home. Days later, Hegseth shut down the investigation.

“@USArmy pilots suspension LIFTED,” he wrote in a post on X.

“No punishment. No investigation. Carry on, patriots.”

On March 28, Kid Rock posted two videos showing two Apache helicopters flying by and hovering near his home, which he has dubbed “The Southern White House.” In one of the videos, the musician can be seem saluting one of the helicopters before raising his fist in the air.

The performer has made several appearances in support of President Donald Trump during his second term in office.

Maj. Jonathon Bless, a spokesman for the 101st Airborne Division, said the Army’s probe would verify the helicopters were in compliance with safety and airspace regulations.

“Army aviators must adhere to strict safety standards, professionalism and established flight regulations,” he said.

April 28 (UPI) — The Department of Defense may require reporters to be escorted inside the Pentagon, a federal appeals court has ruled, handing the Trump administration a rare win in litigation challenging its press restrictions.

A divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted the Trump administration’s emergency request for a stay pending appeal, but only concerning its Pentagon escort requirement.

The 2-1 ruling stays part of U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman‘s April 9 order that had found an interim Pentagon policy was in violation of his earlier order that blocked the Department of Defense’s initial policy requiring journalists to sign a form acknowledging that they could have their credentials revoked for gathering unauthorized information.

The Trump administration argued that the escort requirement of the interim policy was a new rule not affected by the initial order and was put in place to prevent the disclosure of sensitive or classified information.

The appeals court agreed that the administration was likely to win on the merits of its narrow argument.

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said Monday that the Department of Defense “welcomes” the court’s decision.

“The department looks forward to presenting its full case to the D.C. Circuit on the merits,” he said in a social media statement.

The Trump administration has repeatedly taken actions critics see as attempting to influence media coverage, including a Defense Department policy announced in October that threatened the credentials of reporters who gather sensitive information.

Most credentialed journalists refused to sign, and The New York Times and one of its reporters sued.

Friedman blocked the rule. The Pentagon then attempted to enact an interim policy that was again blocked on April 9 by Friedman, who ruled that the Trump administration “cannot simply reinstate an unlawful policy under the guise of taking ‘new’ action and expect the court to look the other way.”

D.C. Circuit Judge J. Michelle Childs said in dissent that though the escort policy on its face appeared different from the policy blocked by the March order, its practical effect was the same: denying reporters meaningful access to the Pentagon.

“The point of the injunction, as the district court interpreted it, ‘was to restore The Times journalists’ access to the Pentagon, not merely to ensure that they have possession of a physical credential,” she said.

“Reporters can hardly verify sources, gather information, or speak candidly with department personnel with an escort looming over their shoulders.”

NICOSIA, Cyprus — Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez on Friday refused to be drawn into a dispute with the United States over reports that the Pentagon is weighing whether to punish members of NATO that fail to support American operations in the Iran war.

Among those in the firing line is Spain, which has refused to allow U.S. forces involved in the war to use bases on its territory or airspace. Spain says that U.S.-Israeli actions in the Iran war contravenes international law.

France and the U.K. also refuse to give U.S. forces free rein to use their territory for the bombing campaign.

The Pentagon is reported to be mulling whether to suspend Spain from NATO, according to an unidentified U.S. official referring to a U.S. Defense Department email, and quoted by the Reuters news agency. The Associated Press hasn’t seen the email or had confirmation of its content. It has asked the Pentagon for comment, but received no immediate response.

“Well, we do not work with emails,” Sánchez told reporters at a European Union summit in Cyprus. “We work with official documents and positions taken, in this case, by the government of the United States.”

“The position of the government of Spain is clear: absolute collaboration with the allies, but always within the framework of international legality,” he said.

The Trump administration has routinely floated plans or ideas that are neither acted upon nor become policy.

The email also suggested reassessing U.S. support for the United Kingdom’s claim to the Falkland Islands, near Argentina, which are also known as Islas Malvinas.

Dave Pares, a spokesman for Prime Minister Keir Starmer, said the U.K. position on the islands is “longstanding and it’s unchanged: Sovereignty rests with the U.K., and the islanders’ right to self-determination is paramount.”

Pares noted “the Falkland Islands have previously voted overwhelmingly in favor of remaining a U.K. overseas territory.”

NATO staying out of the war

NATO operates by consensus, and all 32 member countries must agree for it to act.

The trans-Atlantic alliance’s founding treaty has no mechanism for suspending or ejecting any of the members, although nations may leave of their own accord one year after notifying the other allies. As an organization, NATO has no direct role in the Iran war except to defend its own territory.

Asked for comment, NATO headquarters said: “NATO’s Founding Treaty does not foresee any provision for suspension of NATO membership, or expulsion.”

President Trump has been angered by what he sees as the failure of some NATO members to back American actions in the Iran war and to help police the Strait of Hormuz, a major trade route. He has questioned the purpose of U.S. membership in the military organization.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas appeared perplexed by the U.S. criticism, given that the United Kingdom and France are leading an effort to help secure trade in the strait once the war is over.

“When we have had contacts with the American counterparts, then actually their asks for us have been exactly what we are able to offer after the cessation of hostilities,” she said. “Demining, escorting of ships, all of this that we have been discussing.”

But the United States has “long-standing arrangements and agreements with European allies on overflight, on basing” that should be respected, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has said, in implicit criticism of some allies like Spain, but also France.

While Spain restricted U.S. military activity related to the Iran war, U.S. warplanes have flown over other NATO allies’ airspace and used U.S. bases in other NATO countries for war-related operations.

Trump has even threatened to cut trade with Spain over its refusal to allow the use of its bases and airspace. More broadly, Spain has also disappointed its allies by failing to commit to spend as much as they plan to do on defense.

Security without the U.S.

As the reality sinks in that the U.S. commitment to NATO and Europe’s security under Trump has waned, the EU leaders debated how best to use European laws to come to each other’s aid should one of them come under attack.

Cypriot President Nikos Christodoulides, whose country holds the bloc’s presidency until July, said that the leaders had tasked the European Commission to “prepare a blueprint on how we respond” should a member seek help under Article 42.7 of the EU treaties.

It’s only ever been used once, by France after the Paris terror attacks in 2015.

EU envoys and ministers are set next month to conduct “table-top exercises” to game out how the treaty article might be used, drawing on the bloc’s military capacities, but also other assets not available to NATO, like trade, border and visa policies.

Hadjicostis and Cook write for the Associated Press. Cook reported from Brussels. Jill Lawless in London contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon announced Wednesday that the Navy’s top civilian official, Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, is leaving his job.

In a statement posted to social media, Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said Phelan was “departing the administration, effective immediately.”

Navy Undersecretary Hung Cao will become acting secretary of the Navy, Parnell said.

The sudden departure comes just a day after Phelan addressed a large crowd of sailors and industry professionals at the Navy’s annual conference in Washington, and spoke with reporters about his agenda.

Phelan’s departure also comes just weeks after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired the Army’s top officer, Gen. Randy George, as well as two other top generals in the Army.

Phelan had not served in the military or had a civilian leadership role in the service before President Trump nominated him for secretary in late 2024.

Phelan was a major donor to Trump’s campaign and founded the private investment firm Rugger Management LLC. According to his biography, Phelan’s primary exposure to the military came from an advisory position he held on the Spirit of America, a nonprofit that supported the defense of Ukraine and the defense of Taiwan.

Toropin and Finley write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, leading a Pentagon prayer meeting, quoted a fictional bible verse taken from a violent monologue in Quentin Tarantino’s 1994 film “Pulp Fiction,” originally delivered by actor Samuel L. Jackson just before his character shoots a helpless man to death.

The secretary used the prayer to frame the war in Iran as an act of divine justice, the same justification Jackson’s character cites in the film before pulling the trigger.

Hegseth told the audience at a monthly Pentagon worship service held Wednesday that he learned the prayer from the lead mission planner of a team called “Sandy 1,” which recently rescued downed Air Force crew members in Iran.

Hegseth said the verse is frequently spoken by combat search-and-rescue crews, who call the prayer “CSAR 25:17, which I think is meant to reflect Ezekiel 25:17” from the Bible.

“And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to capture and destroy my brother,” Hegseth recited. “And you will know my call sign is Sandy 1, when I lay my vengeance upon thee.”

The infamous Ezekiel 25:17 speech from “Pulp Fiction” is almost entirely a screenwriter’s creation; only the final refrain is loosely inspired by the actual biblical verse. The majority of the monologue in Tarantino’s film is adapted from the opening of the 1976 Japanese martial arts film “The Bodyguard,” with action star Sonny Chiba.

Hegseth’s minute-long prayer closely followed those scripts, with only the last two lines resembling language from the Bible. In Hegseth’s version, he replaced “and they shall know that I am the Lord,” from the book of Ezekiel with the call sign for a U.S. A-10 Warthog aircraft.

Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell said some outlets accused Hegseth of mistaking Jackson’s Golden Globe-winning performance with actual scripture, and called that narrative “fake news.”

“Secretary Hegseth on Wednesday shared a custom prayer, referenced as the CSAR prayer, used by the brave warfighters of Sandy-1 who led the daylight rescue mission of Dude 44 Alpha out of Iran, which was obviously inspired by dialogue in Pulp Fiction,” Parnell wrote on X. “However, both the CSAR prayer and the dialogue in Pulp Fiction were reflections of the verse Ezekiel 25:17, as Secretary Hegseth clearly said in his remarks at the prayer service. Anyone saying the Secretary misquoted Ezekiel 25:17 is peddling fake news and ignorant of reality.”

Hegseth has frequently used his prayer sessions to call for violence in the ongoing Iran war. In last month’s sermon, he asked God to “grant this task force clear and righteous targets for violence.”

The services are not mandatory, a senior defense analyst with knowledge of Pentagon operations told The Times, but some who work closely with Hegseth’s office feel an “implied pressure” to attend and “fill seats.”

The effect — some feel — is less attention on the Pentagon’s wartime efforts, and more on supporting political stunts, according to the source, who is not authorized to speak to the media and requested anonymity.

“We have managers and leaders that are missing mission critical work to go listen to ‘Pulp Fiction’ quotes,” the source said. “It delays our ability to make operational, mission related war-fighting decisions.”

The prayer came amid an ongoing clash between the Trump administration and Pope Leo XIV, who has spoken out in recent weeks against the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran. Statements from the Vatican were met with a series of reprisals from President Trump, who said he doesn’t “want a pope” who criticizes the president of the United States.

On Thursday, the pope released a statement against military leaders who conflate war with divinity.

“Woe to those who manipulate religion and the very name of God for their own military, economic, and political gain, dragging that which is sacred into darkness and filth,” he said.