Nominees for Cabinet positions communicate the values and intentions of an incoming administration and the way the president-elect conceives of each agency or department within the government. What does Donald Trump’s choice of Pete Hegseth, whose confirmation hearing for defense secretary will take place Tuesday, tell us about Trump’s ideal of military leadership and his vision for the country’s armed forces?
To begin with, like all authoritarian leaders, Trump values personal loyalty above experience and competence. Yes, Hegseth is a decorated Army National Guard veteran who served overseas in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. But his time as a Fox News host, his staunch defense of Trump’s falsehoods, such as Trump’s claim that he won the 2020 election, and his personal profile as a seeming rule breaker and rogue personality most likely counted more in Trump’s judgment.
The red flags aren’t limited to his résumé.
In a normal democratic system, Hegseth would never be considered for the post of defense secretary. He has no experience leading any large organization, let alone one as large as the Pentagon. He advocated for several former service members who were convicted on war crimes charges. He stepped down from roles at veterans organizations after accusations of financial mismanagement and inappropriate behavior arose, which Hegseth denies. And he has faced allegations of excessive drinking and sexual assault (he reached a settlement with the accuser but maintained his innocence and wasn’t charged).
The red flags aren’t limited to his résumé. Hegseth believes women shouldn’t be allowed in combat situations, a belief that female combat veterans have denounced as reactionary and insulting. It is also a counterproductive one given that the military is struggling to meet its recruiting goals, particularly among men. In 2024, according to internal service data obtained by Military.com, women accounted for a surge of enlistments — an 18% jump versus only 8% for men.
Then there is his tattoo traditionally associated with white supremacists and Christian nationalists. And he was one of a dozen National Guard members removed from a security deployment to the 2021 inauguration because, in Hegseth’s own words, “I was deemed an ‘extremist.’” This is particularly concerning for a potential defense secretary, given that the military is supposed to be a strictly nonpartisan institution and serves the country and the Constitution rather than a party or an ideology.
All of this would seem disqualifying if this Cabinet appointment were guided by democratic values of good governance and accountability. Seen from an authoritarian optic, though, things look different. If the goal is to politicize the military and weaken the military codes of duty and honor that bind it to obey the Constitution rather than become a personal tool of the commander in chief, Hegseth might just be an ideal choice.
Even before Trump started shouting about claiming Greenland, Canada and the Panama Canal for America, he indicated his desire to break with tradition by deploying the military for domestic operations. He has proposed using the military to assist with mass deportations of undocumented immigrants and involving the military in openly political actions (subjecting former Rep. Liz Cheney to a military tribunal or using the military or the National Guard against Democratic politicians, critics and protesters, whom Trump has called “the enemy from within”). The position of defense secretary requires the highest level of performance in situations of great pressure. Trump’s choice of Hegseth vindicates the judgment of high-ranking civilian and retired military officials, like former Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley, who labeled Trump a “fascist to the core” — an assessment seconded by Trump’s former chief of staff John Kelly, who recounted that Trump complained to him that U.S. generals weren’t as loyal to him as “Hitler’s generals.” (A Trump campaign spokesman denied Kelly’s account.) Evidently, Trump seeks a defense secretary who shares those generals’ (supposed) total and unquestioning obedience. And Hegseth’s lack of qualifications would also most likely help create an autocrat’s dream: the functionary who blindly obeys the leader’s orders, no matter how wrongheaded they are, and doesn’t trouble the waters by giving objective and expert counsel that contrasts with the desires of the leader and his inner circle. The position of defense secretary requires the highest level of performance in situations of great pressure. It demands a staunch commitment to serve the country and uphold the bedrock military values of competence, duty, honor and integrity. In 2025, the next defense secretary may also preside over a potential radical change in the military’s role in American society, one that could corrode the integrity of the institution if its members are required to commit acts of violence against civilians. It’s no wonder, then, that to sell this authoritarian vision of the military to the American people, Trump has chosen a smooth-talking weekend host of a network that is trusted by his base.
Ruth Ben-Ghiat
Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a historian and commentator on authoritarianism and propaganda. She is a professor of history and Italian studies at New York University, the recipient of Guggenheim, Fulbright and other fellowships and an adviser to Protect Democracy. She is a regular contributor to MSNBC, CNN and other media outlets. She publishes Lucid, a newsletter about threats to democracy. Her latest book, "Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present" (2020), looks at how illiberal leaders use propaganda, corruption, violence and machismo and how they can be defeated. 
