Too Many Chiefs, Not Enough Indians – Hegseth Orders Massive Reduction of Top Military Brass

During World War II — arguably the most intricately plotted, carefully managed mass military operation in modern history — the United States had 12 million military troops and 17 four- and five-star generals, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth noted Monday.

Now, our Pentagon has 2.1 million troops … overseen by 44 four-star generals and admirals.

Those “bloated headquarters elements” need to go, Hegseth said — and that’s his latest move at the Pentagon, with an order he’s calling “Less Generals, More GIs.”

The official title is “General and Flag Officer Reductions,” according to The Washington Post, and it is what it sounds like: a minimum 20 percent reduction in four-star generals and admirals (now our military’s top rank) and another 10 percent of generals and admirals slashed across the armed forces.

This includes both those on active duty and in the National Guard.

“It was unclear whether Hegseth intends to gradually phase out the targeted positions, which his memo does not identify, or move quickly to force out the men and women who now fill those roles,” the Post reported.

“Officials on Hegseth’s staff did not respond to questions about how quickly they may adopt the cuts, in keeping with the Pentagon’s recent efforts to limit communication with the public via the news media “

However, Hegseth made clear his aims in a video posted to social media.

“More generals and admirals does not equal more success,” he said.

“This is not a slash-and-burn exercise meant to punish high-ranking officers. Nothing could be further from the truth,” he added.

“This has been a deliberative process working with the Joint Chiefs of Staff with one goal: maximizing strategic readiness and operational effectiveness by making prudent reductions in the general and flag officers ranks.”

Introducing the “Less Generals More GIs Policy.” pic.twitter.com/bQLRL2MqSC

— Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth (@SecDef) May 5, 2025

The memo stated that America needs to be “the most lethal fighting force in the world” and that it’ll get there through “greater efficiency, innovation, and preparedness for any challenge that lies ahead.”

Even the Washington Post — not given to Hegseth apologias — had to note that there’s a good rationale behind the move:

There are more than 800 generals and admirals across the U.S. military, according to a study released last year by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, which notes there is an enduring argument about how many the military should have. The number of four-star generals and admirals, in particular, has swelled significantly over the past few decades, the study found. Those in four-star positions typically have roles overseeing large organizations as well as extensive education. They also have broad military experience, often in combat.

Again, this is why Hegseth’s nomination was embraced by conservatives when he emerged as the most unlikely of Donald Trump’s cabinet picks. Say what you will about Signalgate — Jeffrey Goldberg certainly did, and will continue to for as long as he can dine out on it — the importance of bringing in a rank-and-file vet who wasn’t in the Pentagon hierarchy or the military-industrial complex blob was crucial to reforming all that has gone wrong with American military readiness.

Wokeness is the component most cited as problematic by Republicans, but it’s hardly the only problem: Other institutions in a decadent liberalist state may be able to function by bloating the number of elites in proportion to the regular riff-raff, but that is profoundly unsustainable with the military, the one institution which is necessary to defend a state’s very existence and requires both a certain egalitarian cohesion in the ranks and a hell of a large cohesive whole to deter and repel enemies.

Especially in an era of increased communication and technology, there’s no reason why we need exponentially more top generals to coordinate military action than we did during World War II, where the very existence of free and democratic life was jeopardized on not one but two fronts against enemies which started the conflict with a considerable advantage in strength over us.

There is an expedient reason for it — which is that in a bureaucratic aristocracy, the more bureaucratic aristocrats you have on the inside, the fewer questioning folks will debate the wisdom of the inner rings of power. You end up with too many chiefs and not enough Indians. This is why the chiefs raised no questions over the fact the former secretary of Defense came directly from the board of Raytheon — one of them, in other words — but raised hell over the fact the current one came from a veterans’ activist group and Fox News, where he covered the military, among other things.

That’s because, inter alia, they knew what was coming: “Less Generals, More GIs.” The fact they fought it so hard should tell you a great deal, too, about how much they really care about the defense of this country.

Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.