'Army in chaos over Trump orders,' it was leaked to us
The recent spending freezes and executive orders issued by the new administration have led to significant confusion and disorder within the Pentagon.
TroibNews 
The Army attempted to swiftly comply with President Donald Trump’s executive orders this week, resulting in substantial confusion that led top officials to temporarily halt new contracts, only to later rescind that directive. This incident highlights the ongoing disorder stemming from a series of White House actions.
In misinterpreting Trump's order regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion, Army officials initially imposed a freeze on new weapon contracts. However, the Pentagon clarified on Tuesday that such a pause would not take place, disrupting the defense industry and revealing a greater uncertainty surrounding the president’s broad directives.
The situation underscores the difficulties inherent in Trump’s rapid decision-making style—seen in recent directives to freeze specific federal funding and foreign military assistance—that has left agencies in disarray. This tension is particularly pronounced at the Pentagon, where concerns over the implications of Trump’s orders could potentially halt high-value programs and destabilize the defense sector.
“What kind of signal does this send to the defense industrial base, which is already plagued with a number of challenges?” asked Becca Wasser, a former Army official and current senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security. “A lot of that stems from a very unclear demand signal from the U.S. government.”
Pentagon officials are preparing for additional orders from the new, untested Pentagon chief, who is keen to demonstrate his capabilities.
“We're going to hold people accountable,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated as he began his first day at the Pentagon. “The lawful orders of the president of the United States will be executed inside this Defense Department swiftly and without excuse.”
Nevertheless, this week’s tumult illustrates the inherent difficulties in executing rapid responses within the government’s largest federal agency.
“It was not communicated to us directly; it was leaked to us,” a defense industry executive, who spoke anonymously about sensitive matters, noted of the circumstances. “We are interpolating based on memos that are government-to-government and attempting to turn that into useful information.”
Breaking Defense has previously reported on the chaotic situation, which left executive officials striving to understand the extent of the impacts. The Army clarified on Tuesday that there was no comprehensive pause on contracts.
“Army contracting activities continue to move forward,” Army spokesperson Ellen Lovett conveyed. “As is customary, the Army is currently conducting a review of existing solicitations and awards of contracts to ensure that our programs are aligned with the incoming leadership’s policies and directives.”
An official involved in the circumstances attributed the Army’s reaction to apprehensions surrounding the breadth of Trump’s orders and concerns regarding significant personnel changes.
The Air Force also revised decisions this week, retracting a removal of training related to the Tuskegee Airmen, African American pilots who served in World War II. Some officials feared that actions explicitly referencing race might conflict with the White House’s denouncement of “woke” diversity initiatives.
The Air Force quickly reinstated the training when Hegseth indicated that the removal was unnecessary.
Several service members worry that Trump’s administration may target officers deemed insufficiently loyal. The President recently dismissed Adm. Linda Fagan, the commandant of the Coast Guard, with a Homeland Security official citing her firing as a result of program delays and an excessive emphasis on diversity and inclusion efforts.
The General Services Administration declared last week that it would immediately stop enforcing all diversity-related contract language, in alignment with Trump’s executive orders aimed at "restoring merit-based opportunity."
Following this, Lt. Gen. Laura Potter, the Army’s staff director, instructed the Army’s acquisition chief to “identify and recommend freezing or suspending” contract bid requests tied to diversity, equity, and inclusion. She also highlighted contracts related to “critical race theory," climate change, and policies on transgender and abortion for potential suspension.
These directives sent shockwaves throughout the Army bureaucracy, prompting officials to “put a hold on all of their contracts,” according to a congressional aide who spoke confidentially about private discussions.
With an annual budget nearing $186 billion, Army officials rushed to determine how a freeze on new contracts would affect their programs.
“We are working with leadership to get additional direction as to the timeframe and may come back to you for impacts to your mission,” an Army email obtained by PMG indicated.
Later, Pentagon acquisition officials clarified that no such freeze was in place, leading the Army to retract its earlier actions.
Army leaders informed the House Armed Services Committee that the mixed messages resulted from a misunderstanding—asserting that Army contracting would proceed normally.
“We learned over the weekend that a contracting review directed by our incoming leadership was being interpreted as everything up to and including a complete procurement freeze by people who were acting conservatively in a period of transition,” a message viewed by PMG stated.
By this point, defense industry executives had spent days deciphering the implications for their operations.
“At a time when China is publicly announcing the acquisition of a million low-cost drones, for us to be essentially kneecapping ourselves at that moment, goodness gracious,” the defense industry executive remarked.
A halt to Army contracts would significantly affect the defense sector, particularly smaller firms with narrower profit margins. In 2022, the Army’s contracting command executed $84.5 billion in contracts, including $3.5 billion to replenish stockpiles depleted in Ukraine.
“Many of the companies in new and innovative spaces, on the bleeding edge, it's a huge gut punch to all of those,” the executive added.
Paul McLeary and Connor O'Brien contributed to this report.
Emily Johnson contributed to this report for TROIB News
In misinterpreting Trump's order regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion, Army officials initially imposed a freeze on new weapon contracts. However, the Pentagon clarified on Tuesday that such a pause would not take place, disrupting the defense industry and revealing a greater uncertainty surrounding the president’s broad directives.
The situation underscores the difficulties inherent in Trump’s rapid decision-making style—seen in recent directives to freeze specific federal funding and foreign military assistance—that has left agencies in disarray. This tension is particularly pronounced at the Pentagon, where concerns over the implications of Trump’s orders could potentially halt high-value programs and destabilize the defense sector.
“What kind of signal does this send to the defense industrial base, which is already plagued with a number of challenges?” asked Becca Wasser, a former Army official and current senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security. “A lot of that stems from a very unclear demand signal from the U.S. government.”
Pentagon officials are preparing for additional orders from the new, untested Pentagon chief, who is keen to demonstrate his capabilities.
“We're going to hold people accountable,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated as he began his first day at the Pentagon. “The lawful orders of the president of the United States will be executed inside this Defense Department swiftly and without excuse.”
Nevertheless, this week’s tumult illustrates the inherent difficulties in executing rapid responses within the government’s largest federal agency.
“It was not communicated to us directly; it was leaked to us,” a defense industry executive, who spoke anonymously about sensitive matters, noted of the circumstances. “We are interpolating based on memos that are government-to-government and attempting to turn that into useful information.”
Breaking Defense has previously reported on the chaotic situation, which left executive officials striving to understand the extent of the impacts. The Army clarified on Tuesday that there was no comprehensive pause on contracts.
“Army contracting activities continue to move forward,” Army spokesperson Ellen Lovett conveyed. “As is customary, the Army is currently conducting a review of existing solicitations and awards of contracts to ensure that our programs are aligned with the incoming leadership’s policies and directives.”
An official involved in the circumstances attributed the Army’s reaction to apprehensions surrounding the breadth of Trump’s orders and concerns regarding significant personnel changes.
The Air Force also revised decisions this week, retracting a removal of training related to the Tuskegee Airmen, African American pilots who served in World War II. Some officials feared that actions explicitly referencing race might conflict with the White House’s denouncement of “woke” diversity initiatives.
The Air Force quickly reinstated the training when Hegseth indicated that the removal was unnecessary.
Several service members worry that Trump’s administration may target officers deemed insufficiently loyal. The President recently dismissed Adm. Linda Fagan, the commandant of the Coast Guard, with a Homeland Security official citing her firing as a result of program delays and an excessive emphasis on diversity and inclusion efforts.
The General Services Administration declared last week that it would immediately stop enforcing all diversity-related contract language, in alignment with Trump’s executive orders aimed at "restoring merit-based opportunity."
Following this, Lt. Gen. Laura Potter, the Army’s staff director, instructed the Army’s acquisition chief to “identify and recommend freezing or suspending” contract bid requests tied to diversity, equity, and inclusion. She also highlighted contracts related to “critical race theory," climate change, and policies on transgender and abortion for potential suspension.
These directives sent shockwaves throughout the Army bureaucracy, prompting officials to “put a hold on all of their contracts,” according to a congressional aide who spoke confidentially about private discussions.
With an annual budget nearing $186 billion, Army officials rushed to determine how a freeze on new contracts would affect their programs.
“We are working with leadership to get additional direction as to the timeframe and may come back to you for impacts to your mission,” an Army email obtained by PMG indicated.
Later, Pentagon acquisition officials clarified that no such freeze was in place, leading the Army to retract its earlier actions.
Army leaders informed the House Armed Services Committee that the mixed messages resulted from a misunderstanding—asserting that Army contracting would proceed normally.
“We learned over the weekend that a contracting review directed by our incoming leadership was being interpreted as everything up to and including a complete procurement freeze by people who were acting conservatively in a period of transition,” a message viewed by PMG stated.
By this point, defense industry executives had spent days deciphering the implications for their operations.
“At a time when China is publicly announcing the acquisition of a million low-cost drones, for us to be essentially kneecapping ourselves at that moment, goodness gracious,” the defense industry executive remarked.
A halt to Army contracts would significantly affect the defense sector, particularly smaller firms with narrower profit margins. In 2022, the Army’s contracting command executed $84.5 billion in contracts, including $3.5 billion to replenish stockpiles depleted in Ukraine.
“Many of the companies in new and innovative spaces, on the bleeding edge, it's a huge gut punch to all of those,” the executive added.
Paul McLeary and Connor O'Brien contributed to this report.
Emily Johnson contributed to this report for TROIB News
