Hegseth orders sweeping Army overhaul and consolidation aimed at countering China and Golden Dome capabilities
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday ordered a top-down transformation of the Army in a sweeping directive aimed at reorienting the service toward great power competition.
With a sharp focus on countering China, developing space and counter-space capabilities, and accelerating the Pentagon's new Golden Dome strategy, the aggressive modernization effort directs the Army to cut aging legacy systems, restructure headquarters commands and more rapidly field new technologies.
The memo ordered a merging of Army Futures Command, based in Austin, Texas, with Training and Doctrine Command, headquartered in Fort Eustis, Virginia, and merging Forces Command, U.S. Army North and U.S. Army South.
"To build a leaner, more lethal force, the Army must transform at an accelerated pace by divesting outdated, redundant, and inefficient programs, as well as restructuring headquarters and acquisition systems," Hegseth wrote.
New Army Secretary Praises Trump, Hegseth For Creating 'A Lane For Change' As He Zeroes In On Cutting Waste
"Simultaneously, the Army must prioritize investments in accordance with the Administration's strategy, ensuring existing resources are prioritized to improve long-range precision fires, air and missile defense including through the Golden Dome for America, cyber, electronic warfare, and counter-space capabilities."
Read On The Fox News App
Hegseth wants the Army to be able to field long-range missiles capable of striking moving land and sea targets and achieve electromagnetic and air-littoral dominance by 2027 as the potential for conflict looms in the Indo-Pacific theater.
The memo calls for reducing manned attack helicopter formations in favor of inexpensive drone swarms and the reduction of general officer positions to focus command structures on the warfighter.
Hegseth Sends Strong Message To Iran And Houthis: 'You Will Pay'
Hegseth ordered the Army to enable AI-driven command and control at theater, corps and division headquarters by 2027 and expand 3D printing for weapons.
The memo also calls for bulking up the Army's presence in the Indo-Pacific and more joint exercises with allies in the region.
The procurement of obsolete systems will be ended, per the memo, and "redundant or ineffective" programs will be canceled or scaled back, including manned aircraft and excess ground vehicles like the Humvee.
The Army will review and cancel inefficient contracts and work to shift from program-centric funding to capability-based funding, and add right to repair provisions in all contracts, as well as implement performance-based contracting to reduce waste.
The defense secretary also calls for reforms to hiring and firing systems, and reduced spending on climate initiatives, legacy sustainment initiatives and excess travel.Original article source: Hegseth orders sweeping Army overhaul and consolidation aimed at countering China and Golden Dome capabilities
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Commentary: Trump is suddenly waging two wars — one with trade partners and one with Iran
Life can get complicated awfully fast. President Trump hoped his first year in office would bring victories on tax cuts, trade realignment, and deregulation. Five months in, however, he has not just one war on his hands, but two. First is the trade war with dozens of nations, which many economists say is bound to end up as an unwinnable quagmire. And now, Trump has stepped into a risky Middle East war by green-lighting US attacks on three Iranian nuclear weapons sites, a step other presidents have considered and averted. Saturday's American attack on Iran may turn out to have been a risk worth taking. It came after a week of attacks on Iranian nuclear and military targets by Israel, which says Iran was days or weeks from having the capability to build a nuclear weapon. Iran's Islamic theocracy has long threatened Israel's destruction, and a nuke would give them the means to do it. Starting June 13, Israel mounted a brilliant campaign that neutered Iran's air-defense network, killed several military leaders, and damaged Iran's nuclear complex. But it needed American help to finish the job. Only American 'bunker buster' bombs had the heft to penetrate deeply buried facilities at the heart of Iran's nuclear program. Trump OK'd the raid, and American warplanes dropped at least a dozen of the giant bombs on June 21. Trump says Iran's nuclear program is gone. Maybe. It could take days or weeks to determine if the bombs destroyed everything on the target list. The Pentagon may never know for sure. Iran could have moved some nuclear material or other parts of the program to reconstitute later. Trump obviously hopes the weekend strikes are a one-and-done operation. That would allow him to refocus on a trade war that has key deadlines approaching and a huge tax bill that's bogging down in Congress. But Iran may not cooperate. 'Wars are easy to start, but difficult to end,' Byron Callan of Capital Alpha Partners wrote in an analysis on Sunday. 'We are highly skeptical that Iran 'surrenders.'' Iran is in a weak position, yet it may influence the outcome of Trump's economic agenda, not to mention other Trump priorities: These include immigration enforcement and anything else that depends on Trump holding a reasonable level of popular support at home. Wars can boost a president's popularity and political capital if they go well (and quickly), but they can also drag down a presidency if they bog down or go off the rails. President Lyndon Johnson, most famously, dropped his 1968 reelection bid as opposition to the Vietnam War biggest market concern, for now, is whether Iran will try to close the Strait of Hormuz, the waterway at the eastern end of the Persian Gulf that's a transit point for 20% of the world's oil. Iran could mine the strait, attack oil tankers, or conduct sabotage that could easily send oil prices, which were around $75 per barrel before the US attacks, over $100 and possibly higher. But closing the strait could be self-defeating for Iran. First, it would block its own oil from flowing into markets, depriving the government of badly needed cash. It would also trigger a prompt US response and possibly end with the destruction of much of Iran's navy, making Iran even weaker. 'The next move is up to the Iranians,' economist Ed Yardeni of Yardeni Research wrote in a June 22 analysis. "Our bet is that they will sue for peace. While the Mullahs and their generals may be fanatics, they aren't crazy. If that's the case, then the price of oil should fall and stock markets around the world should resume their ascents.' Iran has other moves, however. Instead of targeting the Strait of Hormuz, it could attack US ships and bases in the region with drones and missiles. There are several ways to go about that. One might be a symbolic fireworks show that lets Iran say it retaliated, without doing much harm. That may let both sides say they've done what they needed to do and are wrapping things up. But Iran has killed Americans before, and it could do so again, which might leave Trump feeling he has no choice but to escalate further. In an escalation scenario, Iran would still have the option to go after the strait, which would keep oil prices elevated. Iran could also sit back for a while and plot something more cunning. Affiliated terrorist groups could plot overt or covert attacks on American assets in the Middle East or elsewhere. Iran backed the 1983 bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon, the 1996 bombing of an Air Force housing complex in Saudi Arabia, and numerous attacks against US troops in Iraq from 2003 to 2011, among other crimes. They'd relish a few more notches on the bloody belt. As the first US president to approve a direct attack on Iran, Trump risks an open-ended entanglement involving dead Americans, damaged American prestige, and a disapproving electorate. There are already signs that Iran salvaged some of the enriched uranium needed for nuclear bombs. If so, that would raise the question of whether the United States should attack again and whether it could even destroy all of Iran's uranium if it wanted to. It may be more likely following the US attacks that Iran decides to fully end all cooperation with international inspectors and nonproliferation regimes and sprint toward a nuclear weapon, even a crude one. 'It is possible an Iranian regime could pick up the pieces and get to a bomb in a couple of years,' Ilan Goldenberg, a former Defense Department Middle East analyst, wrote in Foreign Affairs. 'The best and most durable option for the United States all along was to pursue a diplomatic deal that verifiably restrained Iran's nuclear program. That option is much less likely.' Trump has entered the Middle East cauldron just as his trade war is approaching a climactic moment. Trump set a July 9 deadline for dozens of countries to negotiate trade deals favorable to the United States or face punitive 'reciprocal' tariffs. But the whole world has seen that Trump backs down on tariff threats when markets slide, and the Iran standoff will make markets much twitchier than they'd otherwise be. That could force Trump to postpone the July 9 deadline. Markets would cheer, since tariffs damage corporate profitability, and any delay is a reprieve. But another delay would also prolong the uncertainty that's suppressing the US stock market and possibly weakening the economy. Read more: What Trump's tariffs mean for the economy and your wallet Trump also can't afford a sudden spike in oil and energy prices, which would create significant inflationary pressure if it lasted. Economists already think Trump's tariffs could add a percentage point to inflation, or more, and that's with relatively low energy prices. An energy spike would make tariff inflation more painful. It's not all downside for Trump. Iran's theocratic government might lose its nerve and decide its quest for the bomb isn't worth the trouble. If Trump did manage to rid the world of an Iranian nuclear menace, without much cost, it could stabilize the Middle East, a little, and solve one very dangerous problem. Any kudos for that, however, will only come after weeks, months, or even years of tension. Rick Newman is a senior columnist for Yahoo Finance. Follow him on Bluesky and X: @rickjnewman. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices.
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Opinion: Offshore balancing – The proper solution to Trump's whims with Europe
Over the past few months, Trump has repeatedly threatened to withdraw the United States from NATO, citing concerns about a lack of European defense investment. Later on, at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, Secretary Hegseth confirmed Trump's sentiments, stating that they were 'pushing our allies in Europe to own more of their own security — to invest in their defense, things that are long overdue' so 'we can increase our focus on the Indo-Pacific, our priority theater.' This is the perfect time to begin planning a new grand strategy, one that replaces our long history of firm interventionism in favor of a restrained approach that preserves US national security, reduces costs, and empowers allies. The most promising option appears to be offshore balancing. What is Offshore Balancing? Offshore balancing is a selective, interventionist approach. It advocates for withdrawal of US forces from regions without a great power or a firm national security interest. Instead, the United States would equip and strengthen local forces – with arms, training, and intelligence – as a counterweight to regional powers. But, if regional allies are ineffective in deterrence or a local country grows too powerful, the United States would intervene into the region to protect its and its allies' security. Europe is a perfect place for the United States to exercise restraint. Due to large equipment and personnel losses, Russia is weak and unable to pursue attacks against other nations. This presents a unique window of opportunity for the US to shift the burden of defense onto Europe. Why Offshore Balancing? Currently, the United States faces threats in three, main global theaters: the Persian Gulf, South China Sea, and Europe. For years, this 'three-war standard' has significantly strained the US military and industrial base. In fact, signs of trouble have already started to show. The number of defense contractors in the US has dwindled to less than 10 due to consolidation, thus hurting product quality, while the United States is struggling to 'to maintain robust munitions levels' and supply our allies adequately. At the same time, our allies are particularly under-equipped. Europe is overly dependent on the United States for its technological capabilities, has limited interoperability across weapon systems, and invests a limited amount of money into its own defense. Overall, this situation is dangerous as it provides our adversaries – China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran – an opportunity to mount a challenge against the liberal international order the United States has worked so tirelessly to create. Under current geopolitical situations, Washington would be unable to defend all regions simultaneously, forcing a tradeoff between abandoning hegemony or quickly ramping resources (at a great financial cost) to defend regional allies. By employing a grand strategy of offshore balancing in Europe, the United States can find a balance between credible deterrence and military overstretch. First, by significantly withdrawing from Europe, the US military would free up resources (weapon systems, personnel, money) that they can instead commit against China, the biggest threat to US national security. While Russia does pose considerable risks to the US, its status quo engagement in Ukraine limits its overall influence and strong regional allies can counterbalance against them. Additionally, in Europe, the United States would shift some of the defense burden to its allies, forcing them to act as a unified front (something lacking right now) and work together for collective security. If successful, in the advent of a conflict, Europe can support the US military by leveraging its own capabilities (weapons production, technology sharing, etc) and taking control of a majority of the fighting in Eastern Europe, thus maintaining US hegemony. Concerns? At first glance, this proposal may seem as if we are abandoning NATO and endangering our alliances globally. However, the baseline for comparison shouldn't be the status quo, rather the future. Due to military overstretch, the ability for the United States to maintain military presence in Europe is rapidly decreasing, negatively affecting our ability to protect our alliances in the long-term. Offshore balancing, if designed right, can not only address the aforementioned long-term threats to our alliances, but can also cushion any international fallout the US might face. By gradually withdrawing US forces, our European allies can be given plenty of time to ramp up their own defense production and military capabilities. By maintaining our nuclear deterrent and a limited ground presence in the region, the United States can firmly demonstrate commitment to its allies. Absent offshore balancing however, European allies have no i55ncentive to share the defense burden: despite agreeing in 2006 to spend 2% of the GDP on defense, most NATO member states only reached that target now, after Trump's threats. At the same time, harsh rhetoric on Europe should be avoided. Earlier, Trump had stated he would not protect and instead encourage Russia to attack non-paying NATO member states. This language distances our allies and weakens our ability to form a regional bloc to counter a rising and revisionist Russia. The Future As new global threats gain traction, the United States will need to calibrate its military grand strategy accordingly. Offshore balancing is a realistic solution that simultaneously empowers allies and bolsters US defense capabilities. For Europe, there is a limited window of opportunity for it to build its defense up. Maj. Gen. Davis (rtd.) estimates that only 3 to 5 years after Ukraine, Russia will have the capabilities to mount another challenge against a European state.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Skyline Corporate Communications Group, LLC Announces Sponsorship and Attendance at the ORY APAC-US Conference, July 8th – 9th in Singapore, Co-Hosted by Nasdaq
NEW YORK, June 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Skyline Corporate Communications Group, LLC, a provider of strategic investor relations and corporate communications advisory services to publicly traded and pre-IPO companies globally, today announced that it will attend and be an Event Sponsor at the Third Annual ORY APAC-US Conference at the Capella Singapore Hotel, July 8th - 9th, 2025 on Sentosa Island in Singapore. ORY APAC-US 2025, co-hosted by NASDAQ and New York-based law firm Ortoli Rosenstadt LLP, is a venue for financial market professionals, investors and companies across the globe dedicated to fostering growth in the APAC region. This year's event will feature discussions and presentations focusing on: How AI is reshaping capital markets, investment strategies, and business operations; Fresh insights into U.S. capital markets, Asia's evolving business environment, and the growing impact of AI on both; New pathways being built for cross-border partnerships and multi-market engagement; Fostering collaboration across borders — with a strong emphasis on AI integration and cross-market synergy; Input from Nasdaq-listed companies on leveraging public status — and emerging technologies like AI — to unlock new business opportunities across Southeast Asia, Greater China, and the wider region; and Nasdaq representative updates on the latest shifts in the regulatory landscape — including AI-related governance — and what these developments mean for market participants globally. 'With APAC and Singapore continuing to experience remarkable growth across multiple sectors, the ORY APAC-US Conference has become an exciting forum for business and technological collaboration between East and West,' said Skyline Corporate Communications Group, LLC's President Scott Powell. 'We are pleased to be a Sponsor of this notable, Nasdaq co-hosted event and look forward to meeting many innovative and high-growth companies at the conference and in Singapore.' For more information and registration details on the ORY APAC-US conference, please visit: About ORY APAC-USThe Conference's mission is to foster growth, encourage social interaction, and facilitate the exchange of ideas related to the U.S. capital markets. ORY APAC-US is owned and managed by New York-based law firm Ortoli Rosenstadt LLP and its Singapore affiliate Ortoli Rosenstadt Ye Ptd. Ltd., which serves as the firm's flagship office in Asia. Ortoli Rosenstadt Ye Ptd. Ltd.'s strategic location in Singapore allows it to assist emerging growth companies throughout Asia in their worldwide cross-border activities, and its specialized legal expertise allows it to act as a bridge between East and West. About Skyline Corporate Communications Group, LLCSkyline Corporate Communications Group, LLC provides strategic investor relations and corporate communications advisory services to publicly traded and pre-IPO companies throughout the globe. Our team has worked with hundreds of U.S. listed public companies from around the globe across diverse industries and various market caps. We have experience with shareholder activism and crisis communications and also work with late-stage private companies to help prepare them to enter the public marketplace. To learn more about Skyline Corporate Communications Group, LLC, visit: Contact:Skyline Corporate Communications Group, LLC Scott Powell, President 1177 Avenue of the Americas, 5th Floor New York, New York 10036 Office: (646) 893-5835 x2 Email: info@ Website: in to access your portfolio
