US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has ordered a sweeping reduction in the number of senior generals and admirals across the US military. In a memo signed on Monday and obtained by media outlets, Hegseth directed the Pentagon to eliminate at least 20% of four-star positions and cut 10% of all general and flag officer roles throughout the military.
According to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, currently, there are around 900 generals and admirals with one-star rank or higher in the US military, including 37 four-star officers as of 2023. The memo also calls for a 20% cut in the number of generals in the National Guard.
Hegseth described the move as “critical” to removing unnecessary layers of leadership and making the armed forces more efficient and battle-ready. He emphasized the need to streamline what he sees as a bloated military bureaucracy. “More generals and admirals do not equal more success,” he said, adding that the initiative is meant to shift focus and resources back to rank-and-file service members — or “warriors,” as he called them.
“Less generals, more GIs,” Hegseth said in a video released on social media, summarizing the goal of the plan.
Cuts to Come in Two Phases
The plan will be rolled out in two phases.
- Phase One: Cuts to the number of four-star officers on active duty and general officers in the National Guard.
- Phase Two: Additional reductions in the overall number of generals and admirals across all branches of the military.
However, the memo does not specify which positions will be eliminated or how soon the changes will be implemented, and no detailed timeline has been released. Officials close to Hegseth refused to comment on it.
A Broader Reshaping of US Military Leadership
This move follows a wave of firings and leadership changes under President Donald Trump’s second administration. Several senior officers — including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Navy’s top officer, and the head of US Cyber Command — were removed earlier this year. Trump loyalists reportedly criticized them for focusing too much on diversity, climate change, and other social initiatives.
In past interviews, Hegseth has accused many top officers of politicizing the military. He claimed that at least a third of them are “actively complicit” in catering to what he called “ideologues in Washington.”
His comments and actions have sparked criticism from lawmakers and military experts.
Senator Jack Reed (D-RI), the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, warned that cutting positions without careful analysis could harm the military.
“Eliminating the positions of many of our most skilled and experienced officers without sound justification would not create ‘efficiency’ — it could cripple [the military],” Reed said in a statement.
Historical Comparison and Strategic Impact
In his memo and social media comments, Hegseth compared today’s leadership structure with that of World War II. Back then, the military had 12 million troops and only 17 four- and five-star generals. Today, the force is smaller — around 2.1 million — but includes 44 four-star officers.
The memo also mentions potential structural changes, such as consolidating major commands. One example is the possible merger of the US European Command and the US Africa Command. Other commands like Army Futures Command — established during Trump’s first term — may be downgraded and absorbed into larger commands.
Also Read: Ex-CIA Chief: US Armed Ukraine to Prolong War, Not to Win It
Political and Strategic Reactions
Some defence analysts see the plan as a continuation of efforts to reduce government size and reassert civilian control over the military. The changes require according to the need of the hour and the policy of eliminating unnecessary generals and commands also falls under it.
Promotion nominations for several key military roles are expected soon, including leaders for US Central Command and Strategic Command. These appointments could be affected by the new policy.
In the meantime, questions remain about how this downsizing will be carried out, whether it will save money, and what the long-term impact will be on the US military’s global operations.