Congress’s simmering discontent with the Pentagon’s recent decision-making and lack of transparency with its lawfully-mandated oversight body boiled over during a routine nomination hearing Tuesday, one of the few venues lawmakers have had to get answers from defense officials since the second Trump administration began in January.
Austin Dahmer was ostensibly before the committee to answer questions about how he would tackle the job of assistant secretary for strategy, plans, and forces—a job whose title and responsibilities have changed in ways that the committee was only told about on Sunday night, Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., the committee chairman, said during the hearing.
But because Dahmer has already been performing the duties of another high-level Pentagon official—and because Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has restricted communication between the department and Congress, requiring every interaction be cleared through legislative affairs—a bipartisan group of senators took the opportunity to grill him on a host of recent department moves, some of which they contend are in direct opposition to President Trump’s stated foreign-policy positions.
Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark, listed several: the pause in Ukrainian security assistance, the uncoordinated review of the AUKUS agreement, opposition to deploying more U.S. troops to the Middle East during the Iran-Israel war in June, the cancellation of a meeting among top Japanese and U.S. officials, and the recent cancellation of a rotational Army brigade deployment to Romania.
“I understand that media reports can be wrong, believe me, but it just seems like there’s this pigpen-like mess coming out of the policy shop that you don’t see from, say, intel and security and acquisition and sustainment,” Cotton said.
Asked why the policy undersecretary’s office, led by Elbridge Colby, has been at the center of so many controversies, Dahmer blamed “fake news” and “inaccurate reporting” while claiming ignorance of details.
“This decision did not appear to reflect the policy mandate of President Trump,” Wicker said of the withdrawal of troops from Romania. “Just two weeks ago, the president had said that troops would not be withdrawn from Europe. It is unclear to me how the move fits with the commander-in-chief’s direction.”
Asked why the decision hadn’t been coordinated with Congress, Dahmer claimed the committee had received three briefings on the move. During the hearing, Wicker confirmed with committee staff that no such briefings had occurred.
“Are we confusing ‘notifications’ with ‘briefing’? Check on that; will you do that?” he told Dahmer.
Dahmer claimed that both Romanian and NATO officials had been briefed on the decision, but couldn’t name any of the officials or when the discussions took place.
Wicker said there has been a distinct lack of coordination between the Pentagon and Congress, in contrast with the first Trump administration.
“Members and staff of this committee have struggled to receive information from the policy office and have not been able to consult in a meaningful way with the shop, either on the National Defense Strategy or the Global Posture Review,” he said.
The policy office is “the worst in the administration,” Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, said, in that it is harder to get in contact with than Hegseth or the president himself.
“Man, I can’t even get a response,” Sullivan said.” And we’re on your team!”
Sullivan admonished Dahmer and his office for not coordinating with the committee on the National Defense Strategy, a document that only exists because Congress mandated it in law.
“Where do you think the requirement from the NDS comes from? Yeah, it comes from us,” he said. “Don’t you think it would be smart to maybe preview it?”
And in some cases, Wicker pointed out, it appears the policy shop hasn’t coordinated with the White House, as shown by President Trump’s surprise upon learning that the administration had paused security assistance to Ukraine in July.
Dahmer claimed that there had been no such pause, despite a Pentagon spokesman confirming one on July 2.
“My impression today is you cloaked your testimony in a veil of ignorance. You don’t know what’s happened in many different cases, when in fact, you were basically the stand-in and the surrogate for Secretary Colby,” Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., the committee’s ranking member, told Dahmer. “Again, as the No. 2 in policy, what were you doing?”
Reed also asked about the change to Dahmer’s own prospective job title. The job has long been called assistant secretary for “Strategy, Plans and Capabilities”; that’s what the department’s website still says, and it’s how the nominee was introduced at his confirmation hearing. But Dahmer responded to pre-hearing questions using the title of assistant secretary for “Strategy, Plans and Forces,” reflecting an Oct. 8 OSD memo ordering up that change and others.
Reed said the change was described to him as “cosmetic,” even though it directs a reorganization that moves three deputy assistant secretaries under Dahmer’s prospective office.
“Normally, when the department conducts such a reorganization, it will send to the committee a summary of those changes for our review and consideration before the committee proceeds with the nomination,” Reed said. “This is important because the Senate has a constitutional duty to advise and consent on all Senate conferred nominees. As such, having a basic understanding of a nominee’s duties is imperative to our oversight role. Unfortunately, that did not happen in this case.”
Dahmer said he took responsibility for the late notification and lack of consultation with the committee. He said the Pentagon’s office of legislative affairs should have reached out, and it was his responsibility as the policy deputy to make sure that happened.
Lawmakers have stopped short of levying any threats against the department, though as Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., pointed out, they have made clear the unseriousness with which they regard the current chain of command in one regard: neither the House nor the Senate version of the draft National Defense Authorization acts include a statutory change of the Defense Department’s name to the War Department, despite the administration’s insistence on using what amounts to an official nickname without congressional approval.
“As far as I’m concerned, there’s no effort for Congress to make the name change. The president did this by executive order, but acknowledged it would take a congressional authorization, and it was an alternate name,” Kaine said. “I view it as a form of political cosplay. Cosplay isn’t my thing, but to each his own.”
It’s not clear whether the senators’ ire for the Pentagon’s policy shop will upend Dahmer’s chances at confirmation. A spokesman for Wicker did not respond to a query from Defense One about whether the senator intended to vote in the affirmative.
“Mr. Dahmer, you’re clearly avoiding answers to questions that you should have been acutely aware of in your position,” Reed said. “That does not bode very well for your future role in the Department of Defense, since it’s essential that this committee has accurate and specific knowledge, and I think you’ve essentially indicated to us that you won’t cooperate with us.”
If he doesn’t get the votes, he would be the only the second of several controversial Trump defense nominees to face real opposition to confirmation, after Hegseth’s vote required a tie-breaker from Vice President JD Vance.
The post Pentagon’s policy shop is ‘a pigpen-like’ mess: Sen. Cotton appeared first on Defense One.
