N※N

Pentagon Shakeup: Army Spokesperson Fired Amidst Influence Claims

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. -spokesperson-fired-amidst-influence-claims.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Tuesday, February 17th 2026 at 17:52 GMT by New York Post
      Locales:

Washington D.C. - February 17, 2026 - Brigadier General Anthony Potts, the Army's chief of public affairs, has been relieved of his duties, marking the latest in a series of personnel changes rocking the Pentagon. The move, confirmed by multiple officials Monday, is reportedly connected to the rising influence of conservative commentator and former Green Beret, John Hegseth, raising questions about the politicization of military messaging.

Potts, who assumed the role in 2024 after previously serving as a spokesperson for U.S. Army Europe and Africa, was quietly dismissed. Sources indicate the departure was not voluntary and that Hegseth's involvement was a key factor in the decision. While the Pentagon has framed these changes as part of an effort by the Biden administration to "reshape military messaging," the central role of a vocal critic of the administration's policies has ignited a firestorm of debate.

The extent of Hegseth's role remains unclear, but sources within the Pentagon describe him as an increasingly influential advisor to senior officials on public affairs strategy. This is despite holding no official position within the Department of Defense. Hegseth, a frequent guest on Fox News, has consistently and publicly criticized the Biden administration's defense policies, particularly regarding areas like force readiness, modernization programs, and strategic prioritization. His outspoken views often contrast sharply with the traditionally apolitical stance expected of military spokespersons.

This isn't an isolated incident. The removal of Potts follows a pattern of personnel adjustments within the Pentagon's communications apparatus. While administration officials maintain these changes are aimed at improving the effectiveness of military messaging, the timing and connection to Hegseth's influence are raising concerns about potential political interference.

The Rise of Hegseth and the Question of Outside Influence

John Hegseth's trajectory from Special Forces operative to prominent conservative media personality is well documented. His military background lends him credibility with some, but critics argue that his overtly political commentary compromises the objectivity required of someone advising on military public affairs. The fact that he continues to maintain a platform on a partisan news network while simultaneously wielding influence within the Pentagon is particularly troubling to many observers.

"The principle of civilian control of the military is fundamental to our democracy," says Dr. Eleanor Vance, a professor of political science specializing in military-civil relations at Georgetown University. "But that control must be exercised with impartiality and respect for the apolitical nature of the armed forces. Allowing someone with a clear ideological agenda to shape the Pentagon's messaging, even indirectly, risks eroding public trust and potentially compromising national security."

Implications for Military Messaging

The Biden administration initially signaled a commitment to transparency and open communication regarding defense policy. However, these recent personnel moves suggest a potential shift towards a more controlled narrative, potentially influenced by Hegseth's conservative viewpoint. This raises several questions:

• Will the Pentagon's messaging become more partisan? The risk is that public statements will be framed to support the administration's political goals, rather than accurately reflecting the realities on the ground.
• Will dissenting voices within the military be silenced? If individuals feel pressured to conform to a predetermined narrative, it could stifle open debate and critical thinking.
• How will these changes affect international perceptions of U.S. military credibility? Allies and adversaries alike may question the objectivity of information coming from the Pentagon.

The Department of Defense has yet to offer a detailed explanation for Potts' removal or clarify Hegseth's role. This lack of transparency is fueling speculation and exacerbating concerns. While administrative changes are commonplace in any administration, the circumstances surrounding Potts' departure, coupled with Hegseth's rising influence, point to a potentially significant shift in the Pentagon's approach to public affairs. The situation demands greater scrutiny to ensure that military messaging remains independent, objective, and serves the best interests of national security.

The unfolding situation raises broader questions about the blurring lines between political commentary, military service, and the crucial task of informing the public about matters of national defense. Congressional oversight committees are expected to hold hearings in the coming weeks to investigate the matter further.