Pentagon Chief Slams The Atlantic Over Leaked War Plans Controversy

A major controversy has erupted in the United States after The Atlantic published a leaked chat transcript revealing details of planned military strikes on Iran-backed Houthi rebels. The leak, which emerged from a chat group of senior US officials on the messaging app Signal, has triggered a political storm, with Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth at the center of the debate. While the White House insists that no classified information was disclosed, the revelation has sparked intense criticism, with calls from Democrats for Hegseth to resign.

The leaked messages reportedly contained information about the timing of airstrikes, the type of aircraft involved, and the specific missiles and drones used in the operation. While these details were not classified, their premature disclosure has led to accusations of recklessness and poor operational security. The Atlantic’s decision to publish the chat transcript, despite initially withholding details, has drawn sharp criticism from the Pentagon.

Pentagon Chief Fires Back at The Atlantic

Pete Hegseth, the US Secretary of Defense, did not hold back in his response to The Atlantic and its editor, Jeffrey Goldberg. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Hegseth dismissed the controversy, arguing that the so-called "war plan" revealed in the chat contained no sensitive military details.

"No names. No targets. No locations. No units. No routes. No sources. No methods. And no classified information," Hegseth wrote. He accused The Atlantic of distorting facts and misleading the public, calling the controversy yet another example of media sensationalism.

Hegseth went further, personally attacking Jeffrey Goldberg, saying that he had "never seen a war plan in his life." The Pentagon chief doubled down on his position, insisting that the military would continue to focus on its job while the media indulged in "peddling hoaxes."

Trump Dismisses the Scandal as a "Witch Hunt"

US President Donald Trump also weighed in on the issue, fiercely defending Hegseth and brushing off the scandal as another media-driven attack on his administration. Speaking from the Oval Office, Trump dismissed calls for Hegseth’s resignation, stating, "Hegseth is doing a great job, he had nothing to do with this."

Trump was quick to shift the blame, questioning why Hegseth was being dragged into the controversy. "Look, look, it's all a witch hunt," he told reporters, repeating a phrase he has often used to counter political attacks. The president also took the opportunity to highlight his latest policy move—announcing new tariffs on foreign-made cars—while downplaying the impact of the leaks.

National Security Advisor Takes Responsibility

While Trump remained defiant, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz admitted that the leak was a serious error. Waltz, who plays a crucial role in overseeing military operations, took full responsibility for the incident. His acknowledgment of the mistake contrasted with the responses from other senior officials, who were more focused on damage control than admitting fault.

US Vice President JD Vance also downplayed the situation, calling The Atlantic’s reporting an exaggeration. "They overplayed what happened," Vance said while visiting a Marine Corps base near Washington. He was seen firing a rifle at a shooting range during the visit, perhaps a symbolic gesture meant to reinforce the administration’s commitment to national security.

Meanwhile, Secretary of State Marco Rubio was the only high-ranking official to openly acknowledge that a mistake had been made. "Yes, it was a big mistake," Rubio admitted, though he was careful to highlight his own limited role in the situation.

Media Ethics and National Security Concerns

The controversy surrounding the leaked chat has reignited debates about media ethics and national security. While The Atlantic insists that it acted in the public interest, critics argue that publishing details of military operations—even if they are not classified—can put US forces at risk.

The timing of the leaks is particularly sensitive, given the escalating tensions in the Middle East. The US has been conducting strikes against Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen, who have targeted shipping routes in the Red Sea. Any disclosure of operational details, even unintentional, could compromise military effectiveness and endanger troops on the ground.

The issue also raises questions about the security of government communications. The fact that senior officials were discussing military plans on Signal—a commercially available messaging app—has led to concerns about potential vulnerabilities. While Signal is known for its encryption, the leak suggests that even secure platforms are not immune to human error.

Political Fallout and What Comes Next

The fallout from the leak is far from over. With Democrats demanding accountability and Republicans rallying behind Hegseth and Trump, the issue has quickly become a partisan battleground. While it is unlikely that Hegseth will step down, the controversy could have lasting implications for his tenure as Secretary of Defense.

The incident also underscores the ongoing tensions between the Trump administration and the media. Trump has consistently attacked the press, accusing major outlets of spreading false narratives. This latest dispute with The Atlantic is yet another chapter in the broader struggle over control of public discourse.

As the dust settles, one thing is clear: the intersection of media, politics, and national security remains as contentious as ever. Whether this scandal fades away or leads to deeper investigations will depend on how both the administration and the media handle the fallout in the coming weeks.