The Department of Defense (DoD), one of the most critical pillars of U.S. national security, has been under immense pressure since Pete Hegseth, a former Fox News host with no prior experience in managing a sprawling bureaucracy, was appointed as the civilian leader of the military by President Donald Trump. Insiders, who have worked closely with Hegseth, are spilling new details on the disarray within the Pentagon under his leadership, suggesting that the department has been pushed to the brink of collapse.
A deepening crisis, scandals, leaks, and even startling dismissals have characterized Hegseth's short tenure as Secretary of Defense, with dire consequences for U.S. security.
While Hegseth was appointed to lead the military with hopes of reforming the DoD and improving military readiness, sources close to the Pentagon paint a very different picture. His lack of experience in managing such a massive and intricate institution, coupled with his controversial approach to leadership, has made him a lightning rod for internal dissent and external criticism.
Hegseth’s appointment has left a significant leadership vacuum within the Pentagon, according to more than a dozen insiders who spoke candidly about the internal chaos under his watch. These sources, some of whom have served in the Department for years, have stated that the Pentagon has been on the brink of a collapse due to the glaring gaps in leadership, especially at the highest levels.
One insider compared the situation to a sinking ship, saying that the department’s future seemed uncertain with a leader who was ill-prepared to handle the immense responsibilities of the role.
"Pete is playing secretary," one source told New York Magazine. "He’s not being secretary." This statement reflects the criticism of Hegseth's leadership style, which many describe as superficial and disconnected from the day-to-day needs of the Pentagon.
His immediate focus seemed to lie more in public relations – from posting workout photos with troops to advocating for controversial policies, such as purging the military of transgender service members – rather than addressing the Pentagon’s core operational needs.
The failure to act decisively in critical situations has exposed Hegseth’s lack of preparedness for handling complex national security issues. A prime example of this was the escalation of tensions in the Middle East, particularly the bombing of Iran by Israel, which took place hours before the New York Magazine report was published.
Sources claim that this situation underscored Hegseth’s unfitness for managing international crises of such magnitude.
“For any sustained operations, we’re screwed," one anonymous source said. "There’s nobody in the SecDef’s office at this point that has any... they’re not heavyweights. They don’t have the sophistication. They don’t have the experience.” This stark assessment speaks to the lack of experience and the absence of seasoned professionals within Hegseth's inner circle.
Many Pentagon veterans, who have seen multiple administrations and leadership transitions, are deeply concerned that the current leadership structure is ill-equipped to handle prolonged military engagements, which could have grave consequences for national security.
In addition to the specific crisis in the Middle East, insiders also described an environment of dysfunction within the Pentagon's leadership team. The department has faced increasing infighting, leaks, and tension among key staffers. These issues, according to several sources, are not just frustrating but dangerous, as they undermine morale and prevent the DoD from functioning at its highest capacity.
One long-serving Pentagon employee described the department as being in a state of collapse, saying, "The department is so f-----."
Another key criticism of Hegseth’s leadership style has been his fixation on leaks and perceived disloyalty. According to sources within the Pentagon, Hegseth’s paranoia about leaks within the department has only intensified during his tenure. The department became embroiled in a series of leak investigations that insiders believe were largely driven by Hegseth’s personal insecurities and need for control.
“The leaks seemed to come as fast as we had meetings in the building,” said one insider with direct knowledge of the situation. This atmosphere of distrust led to the appointment of Joe Kasper, a fellow veteran of Hegseth’s, as his chief of staff, with a particular focus on identifying and investigating leaks.
However, according to insiders, Kasper’s appointment caused more harm than good, as his approach rubbed many Pentagon staffers the wrong way. The decision to investigate the leaks also fueled a sense of paranoia, which worsened the already toxic environment at the Pentagon.
The situation reached a breaking point in April 2025, when Hegseth abruptly fired three top officials from his team, including Colin Carroll, Darin Selnick, and Dan Caldwell, after they were accused of leaking information. No concrete evidence of their involvement in the leaks ever surfaced, leading to significant backlash from those dismissed.
Colin Carroll, who had served as deputy chief of staff to Steve Feinberg, expressed his frustration with how Hegseth handled the firings. He criticized Hegseth for his inability to manage personnel properly and for making rash decisions that backfired. "I knew he was a moron within 30 seconds of meeting him," Carroll remarked about Kasper, Hegseth’s choice for chief of staff.
Carroll further emphasized that Hegseth’s failure to handle personnel matters correctly, including the firing of the three senior staffers, only added to the dysfunction within the Pentagon.
“If the secretary had said ‘things aren’t working out with Joe Kasper,’ they would have resigned,” Carroll said. "But he made the situation worse by unceremoniously dumping them and then reassigning Kasper days later.” This, according to Carroll, was the epitome of poor leadership and a failure to manage the department effectively.
The internal chaos, combined with Hegseth's questionable decisions and leadership missteps, has placed U.S. national security at risk. The Pentagon, a global symbol of military strength and stability, now finds itself in disarray, with leadership that is unable to act decisively or cohesively in the face of growing international threats.
Hegseth’s tenure, marked by a lack of experience, an obsession with purging the military, and an inability to handle crises, has left the Pentagon in a vulnerable position at a time when the U.S. needs its military leadership to be stronger than ever.
As the Pentagon continues to struggle under Pete Hegseth’s leadership, the future of U.S. national security remains uncertain. With internal conflict, a lack of preparedness for global crises, and an increasing distrust of leadership within the Department of Defense, it remains to be seen whether Hegseth can course-correct and restore the Pentagon to a position of strength and stability.
His critics are growing louder, but Hegseth’s supporters remain hopeful that he can learn from his mistakes and lead the military with the wisdom and gravitas required for the role.
In the meantime, the U.S. military faces a critical crossroads – with a leadership void that threatens to undermine its ability to defend the country effectively in an increasingly volatile world.
