The generals are lined up; a war is ahead
The generals are lined up; a war is ahead
In an unprecedented and controversial move, Pete Hagst, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, has summoned hundreds of American generals and admirals to an urgent meeting in Quantico. This gathering, despite the Pentagon’s official silence on its agenda, has fueled speculation about structural changes, a loyalty test for commanders, and a return to the War Department doctrine. This analytical report was prepared by Saeed Aghanji, editor-in-chief of the Irangate News Agency.
The rare summoning of senior U.S. military commanders marks the beginning of a new era in the military structure of the United States.
In an unprecedented move, Pete Hagst, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, has called hundreds of army generals and admirals to an urgent gathering at the Marine Corps University in Quantico.
This meeting, held suddenly and without an official agenda announcement, has sparked widespread speculation in political, military, and media circles.
According to informed sources, the official topic of this meeting has been announced as military standards and warrior spirit, but many within the Pentagon see this gathering as more than just a training session or motivational speech.
Analysts believe this meeting could precede structural reforms, administrative punishments, dismissal of commanders, or even a realignment of power at the top of the military command hierarchy.
The attendance protocol is a sign of the seriousness of the matter.
The announced protocols for attending this meeting are also unusual and stringent. All officers with the rank of one-star general or above are required to be present in Quantico on Tuesday, September 30. Exemption from attendance is only possible in rare circumstances and with approval from the highest military authorities.
This call includes commanders stationed at international bases, which has seriously engaged command headquarters in sensitive global regions in urgent coordination and personnel transfer.
Inside the Pentagon, the key question is, if the goal is merely a speech or cultural message transfer, why bear the heavy operational and security costs to gather hundreds of commanders from around the world?
Heavy costs draw criticism from defense auditors.
Some former auditing officials in the Department of Defense have told the media that the cost of this meeting reaches millions of dollars, an amount that could have been spent on critical missions.
In addition to last-minute and expensive tickets, the use of military flights has also put additional pressure on the transportation fleet and significantly increased costs. Security considerations have also kept the travel routes of commanders confidential.
The timing of this meeting with the end of the fiscal year in the U.S. has raised more sensitivities. In the event of a potential government shutdown due to budget disputes, there is a possibility of disruption in the return of commanders from Virginia, which has also elicited a reaction from Congress.
Democrats say a letter is being drafted to request explanations from the Secretary of Defense regarding costs and security risks, while Republicans have so far remained silent.
Concern over operational disruption in several fronts.
Critics have also warned about operational disruption due to the simultaneous absence of commanders on several active fronts.
The U.S. military is involved in cases such as the Ukraine war, NATO support, the Gaza crisis, threats from Iran-affiliated groups in the Middle East, and operations against drug cartels in the Caribbean. The fundamental question is whether such a broad operational risk can be accepted for a short speech.
Three scenarios from cultural rebuilding to power realignment.
Despite the Pentagon’s official silence, three main hypotheses about the real purpose of this meeting have been put forward.
1. Direct dialogue for rebuilding warrior spirit.
Sources close to the Department of Defense have announced that Hagst’s main goal is to establish face-to-face communication with commanders and directly convey messages about behavioral standards, physical readiness, and a unified military culture.
According to Politico, there is also the possibility of recording and publicly broadcasting this speech.
2. Implementing structural reforms and downsizing the command top.
Some sources have reported a plan to reduce the number of generals by about 20% and merge commands. A worrying sign was also seen in recent days; in an internal list, the rank of two four-star generals in the Pacific region was temporarily recorded as three-star. Although the army called it a technical error, in the current atmosphere of distrust, such instances are perceived as signs of imminent changes.
3. Loyalty test and strategic framework setting.
According to the unannounced program, the Quantico meeting will be the first part of a trilogy of strategic speeches by the Secretary of Defense. The subsequent speeches will address defense industry and deterrence topics.
Critics see this process as an attempt to test commanders’ loyalty and concentrate power at the top of the Department of Defense, especially given the recent history of dismissals without official reasons.
The War Department and political implications of a change in discourse.
This meeting is taking place in an atmosphere where the Trump administration has recently authorized the use of the title ‘War Department’ as a secondary name for the Department of Defense. This action is considered part of the government’s symbolic approach to rebuilding a warlike spirit in the military.
Simultaneously, policies such as removing transgender personnel, superficial strictness, and dealing with the media are also evaluated within this framework.
Hagst’s supporters see these actions as necessary for rebuilding a strong, disciplined, and war-ready military, while critics view them as signs of extreme centralization and the weakening of the tradition of military commanders’ independence.
International implications of rank reduction in the Pacific or Europe.
If the rank reduction or command mergers are implemented, U.S. allies in Europe and Asia may perceive these developments as signs of Washington’s reduced commitment.
In the strategic competition with China and Russia, such perceptions could have consequences beyond the military structure.
On the other hand, the simultaneous presence of hundreds of senior commanders in one place raises questions about the continuity of the command chain in a crisis situation.
A test for the government-military relationship.
Ultimately, this call is not only a test for military commanders but also a turning point for the relationship between the government and the U.S. military.
If the Secretary of Defense succeeds in using this meeting to establish his desired order, it could mark the beginning of a new phase in U.S. defense policy—a phase that is seen as necessary by supporters and dangerous by critics.
