2026-09-02T09:00:29.685Z / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）
在美国陆军部长丹·德里斯科尔辞职后，多名消息人士告诉CNN，他们认为国防部长皮特·赫格斯瑟特正专注于文化战争以及打造自己“美国参战人员”的个人形象，同时排挤不认同其理念的领导层，这正在破坏陆军适应现代战场的努力。
一位知情人士透露，德里斯科尔在提交辞呈时曾提及“本届政府对陆军转型和战备工作的担忧，特别是赫格斯瑟特通过解雇负责相关工作的将军来阻挠这些举措”。
德里斯科尔于周二晚间宣布，周三将是他“担任该职务的最后完整工作日”。
多名消息人士认同德里斯科尔提出的担忧：赫格斯瑟特通过解雇或排挤那些牵头推进陆军现代化、适应21世纪战场环境（无人机战正变得日益重要）的领导层，正在破坏陆军的现代化改革努力。
“拥有懂得技术、有能力对接工业界并将其转化为部队战力的关键领导人至关重要，”一位前陆军高级官员表示。“如果你出于任意理由解雇这些人，就会造成混乱和空缺……陆军目前正处于动荡之中。”
美国高级军事官员私下承认，在赫格斯瑟特任职期间，他们面临着可被称为政治施压的情况——尤其是在他优先处理文化战争议题时，并对这位国防部长近期解雇或排挤现役和文职领导层的举动表示担忧。
一位欧洲防务官员告诉CNN，尽管赫格斯瑟特曾谈及技术改革，甚至此前发布过无人系统相关指南，但实际上他们看到这位国防部长和五角大楼领导层更关注文化议题而非现代化建设。
“这很矛盾，因为他确实发布了一份备忘录称此事很重要，但……他谈论的却是肌肉、‘穿裙子的男人’、睾酮，”该官员说道。“我们看不到那个层面的变革。”
五角大楼首席发言人肖恩·帕内尔称，“声称赫格斯瑟特部长不专注于现代化是完全的捏造”，并称“整个国防部都团结在他的愿景之下”。
“赫格斯瑟特部长一直是战争部的变革型领导人，在特朗普总统的指示下，他开启了‘以实力求和平’的新时代，”帕内尔说道。“标准和择优原则已经回归，我们的武库比以往任何时候都更强大，各军种的士气和征兵率都创下历史新高。赫格斯瑟特部长削减了官僚主义，激发了创新，全程为我们的参战人员提供了支持。”
德里斯科尔周二晚间在X平台上发帖称，能在唐纳德·特朗普总统和赫格斯瑟特手下任职是“一生的荣幸”，并表示陆军“如果没有赫格斯瑟特部长的支持，不可能取得我们如今的成就”。
陆军目前有5名现役四星上将，尽管赫格斯瑟特在任职初期曾表示，他将寻求削减四星上将和海军上将的数量——这一举措历史上也得到过其他人的支持——但消息人士和专家告诉CNN，这些解雇行动似乎并非出于任何更广泛的战略考量。
随着德里斯科尔的辞职，陆军很快将没有经过确认的参谋长和部长，这引发了人们对该军种未来的担忧，与此同时，与伊朗的战争仍在持续，且仍存在重大的现代化挑战。
布鲁金斯学会国防与战略领域菲利普·H·奈特席位持有者迈克·奥汉隆表示，他乐观地认为陆军拥有深厚的人才储备，五角大楼高层总体上也有人在认真推进军队现代化，但赫格斯瑟特正通过排挤备受尊敬且业绩出色的军官“扰乱进程”并“丧失动力”。
“他如此沉迷于这些虚假的仇怨和斗争，”奥汉隆说道。“如果说有什么不同的话，那就是他在转型方面其实相当不错，但因为他想要参与文化战争，从而分散了对真正优先事项的注意力。”
赫格斯瑟特的任期很大程度上以其在社会和所谓文化战争议题上的强硬立场为标志。他曾抨击他认为“觉醒”的军事人员和领导层；他担任国防部长后的首批举措包括倡导将国防部更名为战争部，以及将陆军基地的名称改回邦联时代的称谓，不过只是更换了同名的纪念人物。
去年10月，赫格斯瑟特召集美军最高将官和高级 enlisted 领导人，就体能标准、胡须以及美军变成“觉醒部门”、庆祝“身份认同月、多元化、公平与包容办公室、穿裙子的男人”等问题严厉批评他们。
此后他多次援引这些言论。今年8月，在巴拿马举行的美洲反卡特尔联盟活动上，赫格斯瑟特批评拜登政府“优先推进性别议题、妇女、和平与安全，或是气候变化和多元化——也就是穿裙子的男人”。
“不要再搞多元化、公平与包容，不要再有穿裙子的男人，不要再搞社会工程，”他今年1月在加利福尼亚州访问火箭实验室时说道。
上个月，赫格斯瑟特还前往艾奥瓦州博览会为众议员扎克·纳恩助选，告诉人群五角大楼正在“恢复战士精神”。
“在战争部，我们搞训练，不是搞‘跨性别者’，”赫格斯瑟特说道。
消息人士还指出，解雇或迫使陆军参谋长兰迪·乔治、前美国陆军欧洲和非洲司令部司令克里斯托弗·多纳休将军以及前美国陆军转型与训练司令部司令戴维·霍德纳将军离职，尤其令人担忧，因为这些人都专注于推动陆军未来转型。
在欧洲，多纳休正迅速向乌克兰人学习无人机作战经验，以及如何为美军配备廉价但致命的技术，以应对伊朗近几个月在中东发动的那种袭击。这位前三角洲部队指挥官被视为美军中最具潜力的将官之一。
霍德纳是一位广受尊敬的陆军游骑兵，在得克萨斯州奥斯汀领导陆军转型与训练司令部。今年3月，他告诉工业界和陆军领导人，该司令部将“以紧迫感开展创新”，以应对中国、俄罗斯和伊朗构成的威胁。
多纳休于上周举行了退役仪式，他在欧洲卸任指挥职务已有数月，但赫格斯瑟特并未为他安排新职务。霍德纳于今年4月与乔治一同被解雇，未给出公开解释。
“你正在移除一代中最有经验的三位作战领导人，他们处于独特的位置，可以清晰阐述战场需求，”那位前陆军高级官员说道。“所以我认为这些担忧非常真实。”
德里斯科尔与赫格斯瑟特“已有一段时间未交谈”
据另一位熟悉两人关系的消息人士透露，在德里斯科尔辞职之前，他和赫格斯瑟特“已有一段时间未交谈”。该消息人士补充道，赫格斯瑟特认为德里斯科尔和同样辞职的副手戴夫·菲茨杰拉德都不符合他对陆军乃至整个军队的优先事项理念。
“德里斯科尔和菲茨杰拉德关注的是现代化问题，而非社会议题，”该消息人士告诉CNN，暗指赫格斯瑟特有据可查的侧重点是打造军队的特定公众形象，而非长期战略优先事项。
CNN此前曾报道，鉴于赫格斯瑟特曾担任陆军国民警卫队军官的经历，他一直特别关注陆军。一位五角大楼官员此前告诉CNN，赫格斯瑟特“对陆军有着根深蒂固的不信任”，并且“从一开始就怀疑”德里斯科尔。
陆军和五角大楼内的许多人将此视为他将自己的高级军事助理克里斯托弗·拉内夫将军安排为陆军副参谋长的主要原因。赫格斯瑟特解雇了当时广受尊敬的副参谋长詹姆斯·明格斯将军，并用拉内夫取而代之。当赫格斯瑟特今年4月解雇乔治时，拉内夫已准备好接任代理参谋长一职。
拉内夫的提名尚未正式提交国会山确认，外界普遍认为拉内夫没有足够的票数获得陆军参谋长的确认。
当被要求为本报道置评时，拉内夫将军通过发言人拒绝了。陆军将本报道的相关问题提交给了拉内夫于8月发布的陆军方针文件。
尽管拉内夫在被任命为赫格斯瑟特的高级军事助理之前曾在五角大楼有过一些工作经历，但对其表现的评价褒贬不一。尽管如此，他还是迅速晋升为陆军副参谋长，如今又担任代理参谋长。
五角大楼内外的消息人士告诉CNN，拉内夫“孤立无援”、“力不从心”，且基本上未准备好担任陆军最高级将军的职务。这位防务官员表示，拉内夫已要求其部分工作人员签署保密协议，赫格斯瑟特也曾采取这一举措，但对于一名现役领导人要求其下属军人签署此类协议的情况极为罕见。
随着陆军推进现代化进程，消息人士称，目前尚不清楚拉内夫是否跟上了进度，以及是否像其前任一样致力于这些工作。这位防务官员称，他的“全部伎俩”就是“‘回归基本’的家伙”。
据这位防务官员和另一位熟悉他在第82空降师任职经历的消息人士透露，这一直是他的行事风格。与赫格斯瑟特一样，拉内夫对通常由下级军官和 enlisted 领导人执行的个人标准表现出过度的兴趣。今年8月，拉内夫发布了一份陆军方针文件，“勾勒出陆军的前进方向，确立陆军的核心关注点”，这一点更加凸显了这一点。
拉内夫写道，陆军必须“保卫边境”并秉持“战士心态”。陆军“积极寻求变革，为大规模作战行动做好准备”，拉内夫写道，并且“变革的工作仍在继续”。
“如今，我们强调士兵作战的基本原则，确保牢固掌握战士精神、士兵个人战备和小部队战术技能，”拉内夫说道。“随着陆军在全球开展行动，我们将重点转向作战战备，以完成我们的核心任务：时刻准备着为国家战斗并赢得战争。”
一位欧洲防务官员表示，这一信息以及拉内夫总体上“回归基本”的做法“完全”与多纳休、乔治、德里斯科尔等人在陆军现代化进程中努力取得的进展背道而驰。
“赫格斯瑟特上任时并非反对现代化，德里斯科尔的一些改革直接源自赫格斯瑟特早期的指示，”这位防务官员说道。“德里斯科尔一直试图改变陆军学习、试验和采购的速度。赫格斯瑟特却始终回到士兵的外貌、他们的行为方式以及谁来领导他们这些问题上。”
Hegseth’s culture war fixation disrupting Army progress, sources say
2026-09-02T09:00:29.685Z / CNN
In the aftermath of the resignation of Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, multiple sources told CNN they believe Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is damaging the Army’s efforts to adapt to the modern battlefield as he focuses on culture wars and prioritizing his own image of the “American warfighter,” and pushes out leaders who don’t align with his vision.
In submitting his resignation, a source familiar said Driscoll brought up “concerns with the administration surrounding Army transformation and readiness and Hegseth’s blocking those efforts specifically by firing the generals who were responsible.”
Driscoll announced Tuesday evening that Wednesday would be his “last full day in the role.”
Multiple sources agreed with the concerns Driscoll raised: that Hegseth is damaging the Army’s efforts to modernize and adapt to the 21st century battlefield environment – where drone warfare is becoming increasingly important – by firing or pushing out leaders who were spearheading those efforts.
“It’s critical that you have key leaders that understand technology and have the temperament to deal with industry and turn that into the formation,” a former senior Army official said. “When you fire these guys for arbitrary reasons, it creates confusion and a void … the Army is enduring turbulence right now.”
Senior US military officials have privately acknowledged they have come under what could be characterized as political pressure during Hegseth’s tenure — particularly when he has prioritized culture war issues — and voiced concerns about the secretary’s recent efforts to fire or push out uniformed and civilian leaders.
A defense official in Europe told CNN that even though Hegseth has spoken about technology reform and even previously released guidance on unmanned systems, in practice they see a secretary and Pentagon leadership more focused on cultural issues than modernization.
“It’s conflicting because yeah he put out a memo saying this is important, but … he’s talking about muscles, dudes in dresses, testosterone,” the official said. “We don’t see a change at that level.”
Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell called it a “total fabrication to claim that Secretary Hegseth is not focused on modernization” and that the “entire Department is unified” behind his vision.
“Secretary Hegseth has been a transformative leader for the Department of War and, at President Trump’s Direction, has ushered in a new era of Peace Through Strength,” Parnell said. “Standards and merit are back, our arsenal is stronger than ever before, and morale and recruitment across every service are at all time highs. Secretary Hegseth has slashed bureaucracy, unleashed innovation, and delivered for our warfighters every step of the way.”
Driscoll said Tuesday evening in a post on X that it was the “honor of a lifetime” to serve under President Donald Trump and Hegseth, and that the Army “could not have made the progress we did without the support of Secretary Hegseth.”
The Army currently has five active-duty four-star general officers, and while Hegseth said early on in his tenure he would seek to reduce the number of four-star generals and admirals — something others have supported historically — sources and experts told CNN the firings don’t seem to be driven by any broader strategy.
With the resignation of Driscoll, the Army will soon be left without a confirmed chief of staff or secretary, raising concerns about the service’s future as the war with Iran continues and with significant modernizing challenges remaining.
Mike O’Hanlon, the Philip H. Knight Chair in Defense and Strategy at the Brookings Institution, voiced optimism that the Army has a deep bench of talent and the senior levels of the Pentagon broadly have people working seriously towards modernizing the military, but that Hegseth is “disrupting” and “losing momentum” by pushing out highly respected and successful officers.
“He’s so obsessed with these false vendettas and battles,” O’Hanlon said. “If anything I think he’s pretty good on transformation, but because he wants to engage on culture wars he distracts from the real priorities.”
Hegseth’s tenure has largely been marked by his aggressive stance on social and so-called culture war issues. He has gone after military personnel and leaders he perceives to be “woke;” some of the first steps he took as secretary included advocating for renaming the Defense Department the Department of War, and changing the names of Army bases back to Confederate-era titles, though naming them after different individuals with the same names.
Last October, Hegseth gathered the military’s top general officers and senior enlisted leaders and lambasted them over physical fitness standards, beards, and becoming “the woke department” who celebrated “identity months, DEI offices, dudes in dresses.”
He has repeatedly leaned on those same remarks since then. In August, while speaking to the Americas Counter Cartel Coalition in Panama, Hegseth criticized the Biden administration for “promoting priorites like gender issues, women, peace and security, or climate change and diversity — dudes in dresses.”
“No more DEI, no more dudes in dresses, no more social engineering,” he said in January during an official visit to the Rocket Lab in California.
Last month, Hegseth also went to campaign for Rep. Zach Nunn at the Iowa State Fair, telling the crowd the Pentagon is “restoring the warrior ethos.”
“At the Department of War, we do training not trannies,” Hegseth said.
Sources also pointed to the firings or forced exits of Army Chief of Staff, Randy George, former head of US Army Europe and Africa Gen. Christopher Donahue, and former commander of US Army Transformation and Training Command Gen. David Hodne as particularly concerning given their focus on adapting the Army for the future.
In Europe, Donahue was working quickly to learn from the Ukrainians on drone warfare and how best to equip American troops with cheap but lethal technology to defeat the kind of attacks launched by Iran in the Middle East over the last several months. The former Delta Force commander was seen as one of the most promising Army general officers in uniform.
Hodne, a widely respected Army Ranger, led the Army Transformation and Training Command in Austin, Texas. In March, he told industry and Army leaders alike that the command would “innovate with urgency” to take on threats like China, Russia, and Iran.
Donahue held a retirement ceremony last week, a couple of months after he left command in Europe with no new role assigned to him by Hegseth. Hodne was fired in April alongside George, with no public explanation.
“You’re taking away three of the most seasoned combat leaders of a generation who are in a unique position to articulate battlefield requirements,” the former senior Army official said. “So, I think that the concerns are very real.”
Driscoll and Hegseth hadn’t spoken ‘for some time’
Prior to Driscoll’s resignation, he and Hegseth had not spoken “for some time,” according to another source familiar with their relationship. Hegseth perceived both Driscoll and his deputy who also resigned, Dave Fitzgerald, as not being aligned with his priorities for the Army and the military more broadly, the source added.
“Driscoll and Fitzgerald were focused on the modernization issues and less the social,” the source told CNN, referring to Hegseth’s well-documented emphasis on the military presenting a particular public image rather than longer-term strategic priorities.
CNN has previously reported that Hegseth has been particularly focused on the Army as defense secretary, given his experience as an Army National Guard officer. A Pentagon official previously told CNN that Hegseth “has this deep-seeded distrust of the Army,” and was suspicious of Driscoll “from the very beginning.”
Many within the Army and the Pentagon saw that as a primary reason for his maneuvering his senior military assistant, Gen. Christopher LaNeve, to be the vice chief of staff of the Army. Hegseth removed the widely respected vice chief at the time, Gen. James Mingus, and replaced him with LaNeve. And when Hegseth fired George in April, LaNeve was positioned to step into the role in an acting capacity.
LaNeve’s nomination has not been officially sent to Capitol Hill for confirmation, and it is widely believed that LaNeve does not have the votes to be confirmed as the chief of staff of the Army.
When asked for comment for this story, General LaNeve declined through a spokesperson. The Army referred questions about this story to Leneve’s Army azimuth, that was released in August.
While LaNeve had some experience in the Pentagon before being brought in as Hegseth’s senior military assistant, reviews on his performance were mixed. Still, he rapidly rose to the Army vice chief of staff and now, the acting chief.
Sources in and out of the Pentagon described LaNeve to CNN as “isolated,” “in over his head,” and largely unprepared for the role of the Army’s most senior general officer. The defense official said LaNeve has requested some of his staff sign nondisclosure agreements, a step Hegseth has also taken but something highly unusual for a uniformed leader to require of their subordinate service members.
And with the Army’s push to modernize, sources said it hasn’t been clear LaNeve is up to speed and as intent on those efforts as his predecessor. His “whole shtick,” the defense official said, “is that he’s a ‘back to basics’ guy.”
That has long been his approach, according to the defense official and another source familiar with his time at the 82nd Airborne Division. Like Hegseth, LaNeve has shown an outsized interest in individual standards that are typically delegated to more junior officers and enlisted leaders to enforce. That was put into focus more when in August, LaNeve released an Army azimuth, “outlining the way forward for the Army and establishing the Army’s focus.
LaNeve wrote that the Army must “secure the borders” and embrace “a warrior mindset.” The Army has “aggressively pursued change to prepare for large scale combat operations,” LaNeve writes, and the “work of change continues.”
“Today, we emphasize the fundamentals of soldiering, ensuring a strong grounding in warrior ethos, individual soldier readiness, and small unit tactical skills,” LaNeve said. “As the Army campaigns around the world, we turn our focus to operational readiness to achieve our central task: To be ready to fight and win the battles and wars of the Nation.”
The message and LaNeve’s general “back to basics” approach is “absolutely” antithetical to the progress Donahue, George, Driscoll, and others were striving to make in modernizing the Army, a defense official in Europe said.
“Hegseth did not come into office opposed to modernization, some of Driscoll’s reforms grew directly from Hegseth’s early direction,” the defense official said. “Driscoll kept trying to change how quickly the Army could learn, experiment, and buy. Hegseth kept returning to what soldiers look like, how they behave and who gets to lead them.”