Pete Hegseth Should Not Be the Person Advising Trump on Whether to Use Nukes

This week, Pete Hegseth will face questions from Congress as President-elect Trump’s nominee for secretary of defense. If he is confirmed, he would become the civilian authority over the U.S. military, second only to the president. The job of secretary of defense is as difficult as it is critical. Pete Hegseth, a television presenter and author who formerly served in the National Guard, does not have the qualifications to perform this role. Worse, his values and beliefs make him a downright dangerous candidate.

Requirements of the Job

The Department of Defense is the largest federal agency, with a budget of more than $850 billion, almost 900,000 civilian employees, and oversight of 2.5 million service members. Pete Hegseth is not qualified to manage this sprawling bureaucracy—he has not served in a senior role in the military, served in the government, made national security policy, nor led any large organization, in stark contrast to the last 10 confirmed secretaries, who all had either decades of senior military service, ran large organizations, or served in governmental or policymaking roles. Hegseth headed two small nonprofit veterans advocacy organizations, though was reportedly removed from those positions due to financial mismanagement and personal and sexual misconduct.

The secretary of defense also shapes strategic decisions, advises the president on sensitive issues of national security, and engages with counterpart defense ministers in both allied and adversarial countries. The next secretary will have to perform the job during a challenging time, when existing arms control structures are collapsing, ongoing wars in Ukraine and the Middle East are threatening to pull more countries into these conflicts, and tensions in East Asia are rising. In the event of a crisis, especially a worst-case scenario involving nuclear weapons, the secretary of defense may be one of the only people the president consults. That’s why it’s extremely important the job be filled by someone with experience, a steady hand, and a proven record of seeking the best information before making decisions. In each case, Pete Hegseth falls short.

The Secretary of Defense’s Role in U.S. Nuclear Weapons

In terms of the most consequential decision anyone could face—and with little time to make it—there is no scenario worse than if U.S. early warning systems detected an incoming nuclear attack. The president would only have minutes to assess whether the warning was false or real and whether to retaliate with U.S. ICBMs. An emergency conference would be convened for the president with the secretary of defense, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other military leaders. While the secretary of defense is not officially in the nuclear chain of command—the president has the authority to use nuclear weapons without the agreement of anyone else—the president would look to the secretary for advice.

Through his writing, candidacy for public office, and time as a Fox News contributor, we know some things about Hegseth’s personal views, and many of them are dangerous. For example, he has expressed hostility and contempt for international humanitarian law, blaming rules that protect human life for hindering the operations of the U.S. military. Hegseth has argued repeatedly that U.S. forces should ignore international humanitarian laws governing the conduct of war. The United States has a legal and moral obligation to follow these rules, and has devoted significant resources to operationalizing that commitment. International law not only protects civilians and soldiers in war, but helps recruit allies and undergirds support at home.

Hegseth’s disregard for international humanitarian law and the rules of armed conflict is consistent with his alarmingly cavalier attitude towards the use of nuclear weapons. In his book The War on Warriors, discussing the United States’ use of nuclear weapons in World War II, Hegseth writes, “They won. Who cares.” Meanwhile, the few remaining Japanese survivors of nuclear weapons are trying desperately to get the world to understand the horror of nuclear weapons and eliminate them before they can be used again.

Nuclear risks are rising globally. Arms control is on life support. The military is pursuing an unnecessary trillion-dollar project to replace every weapon in the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Given serious concerns about his qualifications, dangerous beliefs and values, and lack of meaningful track record, Hegseth is a poor choice for the consequential position of secretary of defense. The members of the Senate Armed Services Committee should ask hard questions in this week’s hearing. Given the enormity of the challenges facing the next secretary, the United States deserves someone with the experience, expertise, and judgment to deal with them wisely.