Hegseth's Decadeslong Quest to Rewrite the Rules of Engagement

(snip)

The controversy was a long time coming. In books and on television, Hegseth argued for years that U.S. military leaders should relax rules for American forces, allowing them to fight unburdened by concerns of future courts-martial. More freedom to operate, he insisted, and less regulation by military lawyers would make troops more lethal and effective, and could be justified under the laws of war.

It was a worldview shaped by his deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan as a soldier in the National Guard, where he told his platoon to ignore legal advice on rules of engagement he considered “nonsense.” He persuaded Trump in his first term to pardon Army First Lt. Clint Lorance and Maj. Mathew Golsteyn, both implicated in the death of unarmed Afghans, and to reverse the demotion of Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher, who was accused of killing a wounded ISIS prisoner and ultimately was convicted only of posing for photos with the corpse.

(snip)

A senior administration official said in the September attack, the U.S. struck the boat twice in the initial attack, and twice more in the second. While lawmakers and experts debate whether the boat strikes are legal, the death of the two survivors clinging to the boat’s wreckage raises special concern because the Defense Department Law of War Manual makes clear that the deliberate killing of a shipwrecked crew would be unlawful.

(snip)

While Hegseth says he is bringing a long-needed “warrior ethos” to a Pentagon that he says elevated diversity over hard-nosed military capability, his critics say his decision in February to fire top Judge Advocates General for the military services and his arguments against strict constraints on the use of force have created an atmosphere in which abuses can occur.

More..

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/pete-hegseth-military-commentary-career-56727e2e?st=KybUNE&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

free