Lawmakers in Washington on Wednesday pressed Gen. Christopher LaNeve, the acting Army Chief of Staff, for more details on why his predecessor was abruptly sacked earlier this month by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
During a hearing before the House Armed Services’ readiness subcommittee, Rep. Austin Scott, Georgia Republican, warned that the April 2 ouster of Gen. Randy George could have a chilling effect on the force.
“I’ve read all the news reports about why he was dismissed. But I would like to hear it from you,” Mr. Scott said.
“That’s a question for Secretary Hegseth. I’ve been the Vice [Chief of Staff] for a couple of months now,” Gen. LaNeve said. “We honored the service of Gen. George and his wife.”
Gen. LaNeve was serving as the Army Vice Chief of Staff before the firing. He is widely considered the leading candidate to get the job permanently. He is noted for having a close professional relationship with Mr. Hegseth, having previously served as his senior military assistant.
Mr. Scott said senior military leaders are supposed to provide truthful and honest advice rather than simply being “yes men” to the current leadership.
“If our top general officers are removed without justification from their positions for providing honest, objective advice – which is something I always knew Gen. George to do – then I fear it’s going to have a trickle-down effect. It’s going to be devastating.”
The firing of Gen. George comes at a high-stakes moment with the U.S. military actively engaged in combat operations in the Middle East.
The criticism from lawmakers was bipartisan, with Rep. Marilyn Strickland, Washington Democrat, saying she worked with him as mayor of Tacoma when he was the I Corps commander at Joint Base Lewis-McChord.
“He and his wife have dedicated their lives to serving our country,” Ms. Strickland said.
The Pentagon officially framed his departure as a retirement and thanked him for his decades of service. But the move was widely seen as part of a broader overhaul of military leadership from the Trump administration.
According to reports, Mr. Hegseth sought leadership that would more aggressively implement the administration’s specific vision for the Army.
Mr. Scott also wanted to know why Mr. Hegseth reportedly intervened in the military promotion process, pulling several high-ranking officers from a list of those slated for promotion to brigadier general.
“Did he pull four names from the list, as has been reported?” Mr. Scott asked.
“Sir, you’d have to ask Secretary Hegseth that,” Gen. LaNeve said.
“If I could get anybody over there to respond, I would,” Mr. Scott said. “I would like to know why they were removed from the [promotion list]. There may be a legitimate reason.”
Ms. Strickland said Mr. Hegseth should not be removing senior officers from the promotion list after they’ve already been vetted by the individual services secretaries.
“These people are qualified for the jobs,” she said. “We look forward to hearing an explanation from Secretary Hegseth when he meets with the full House Armed Services Committee.”
