Confusion and Chaos After Army Mishandles Trump’s Executive Order
The recent spending freezes and executive orders from the new administration have led to confusion and disarray within the Pentagon.
TroibNews 
The Army hastened to comply with President Donald Trump’s executive orders this week, leading to significant confusion that prompted top officials to temporarily halt new contracts before quickly reversing that decision. This incident reflects the ongoing chaotic responses to the White House's recent mandates.
Senior officials misinterpreted Trump's order regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion, mistakenly freezing agreements on new weapons. The Pentagon clarified on Tuesday that there would be no such pause, which disrupted the defense industry and underscored the uncertainty surrounding the president’s broad directives.
This situation highlighted the difficulties inherent in Trump’s rapid decision-making policy, particularly following recent orders to freeze specific federal funding and foreign military aid, which have caused agencies to scramble. The tension is especially pronounced at the Pentagon, where concerns about the implications of Trump’s executive actions risk delaying high-value programs and unsettling 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 further orders while working with an untested Pentagon chief eager to demonstrate his capabilities.
“We're going to hold people accountable,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated to reporters on Monday as he started 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.”
However, the confusion this week illustrates the complexities of swift actions within the government’s largest federal agency.
“It was not communicated to us directly; it was leaked to us,” remarked a defense industry executive, who spoke anonymously on a sensitive matter. “We are interpolating based on memos that are government-to-government and attempting to turn that into useful information.”
Earlier reports from Breaking Defense detailed the chaotic situation, which left executives scrambling to ascertain its ramifications. The Army clarified on Tuesday that there was no sweeping halt on contracts.
“Army contracting activities continue to move forward,” Army spokesperson Ellen Lovett stated. “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.”
A defense official with insight into the matter attributed the Army’s response to uncertainties about the breadth of Trump’s orders and discomfort regarding significant personnel changes.
The Air Force also revised its decisions this week, including the removal of training that referenced the Tuskegee Airmen, a group of Black pilots from World War II. Some officials expressed concerns that actions explicitly addressing race might contradict the White House’s stance against “woke” diversity initiatives.
The Air Force promptly reinstated the training after Hegseth remarked that its removal was unnecessary.
Concerns also emerged among service members that Trump’s administration might purge officers perceived as insufficiently loyal. Last week, the president dismissed Adm. Linda Fagan, the commandant of the Coast Guard, with a Homeland Security official attributing her firing to program delays and an “excessive focus” on diversity and inclusion efforts.
The General Services Administration announced last week that it would suspend enforcement of all diversity-related contract language in alignment with Trump’s executive orders aimed at "restoring merit-based opportunity."
The Army’s staff director, Lt. Gen. Laura Potter, subsequently instructed the Army’s acquisition chief to “identify and recommend freezing or suspending” contract bid requests involving diversity, equity, and inclusion. She also indicated potential suspensions for contracts related to “critical race theory," climate change, and policies dealing with transgender rights and abortion.
These directives reverberated throughout the Army bureaucracy, prompting officials to "put a hold on all of their contracts,” according to a congressional aide who spoke on background about internal discussions.
Within the Army, which operates on an annual budget of nearly $186 billion, personnel scrambled to assess how a freeze on new contracts could affect their operations.
“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 email from the Army, obtained by PMG, indicated.
Then, Pentagon acquisition officials clarified there was no such freeze, leading the Army to retract its earlier directive.
Army leaders informed the House Armed Services Committee that there had been a misunderstanding — underscoring that Army contracting would proceed as normal.
“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,” an excerpt of the message viewed by PMG explained.
By that time, defense industry executives were left trying to ascertain the effects on their businesses after days of uncertainty.
“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,” remarked the anonymous defense industry executive.
A pause on Army contracts would significantly affect the industry, particularly small businesses with narrower profit margins. The Army’s contracting command executed $84.5 billion in contracts in 2022, including $3.5 billion to replenish stockpiles depleted due to 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 said.
Paul McLeary and Connor O'Brien contributed to this report.
Sanya Singh for TROIB News
Senior officials misinterpreted Trump's order regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion, mistakenly freezing agreements on new weapons. The Pentagon clarified on Tuesday that there would be no such pause, which disrupted the defense industry and underscored the uncertainty surrounding the president’s broad directives.
This situation highlighted the difficulties inherent in Trump’s rapid decision-making policy, particularly following recent orders to freeze specific federal funding and foreign military aid, which have caused agencies to scramble. The tension is especially pronounced at the Pentagon, where concerns about the implications of Trump’s executive actions risk delaying high-value programs and unsettling 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 further orders while working with an untested Pentagon chief eager to demonstrate his capabilities.
“We're going to hold people accountable,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated to reporters on Monday as he started 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.”
However, the confusion this week illustrates the complexities of swift actions within the government’s largest federal agency.
“It was not communicated to us directly; it was leaked to us,” remarked a defense industry executive, who spoke anonymously on a sensitive matter. “We are interpolating based on memos that are government-to-government and attempting to turn that into useful information.”
Earlier reports from Breaking Defense detailed the chaotic situation, which left executives scrambling to ascertain its ramifications. The Army clarified on Tuesday that there was no sweeping halt on contracts.
“Army contracting activities continue to move forward,” Army spokesperson Ellen Lovett stated. “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.”
A defense official with insight into the matter attributed the Army’s response to uncertainties about the breadth of Trump’s orders and discomfort regarding significant personnel changes.
The Air Force also revised its decisions this week, including the removal of training that referenced the Tuskegee Airmen, a group of Black pilots from World War II. Some officials expressed concerns that actions explicitly addressing race might contradict the White House’s stance against “woke” diversity initiatives.
The Air Force promptly reinstated the training after Hegseth remarked that its removal was unnecessary.
Concerns also emerged among service members that Trump’s administration might purge officers perceived as insufficiently loyal. Last week, the president dismissed Adm. Linda Fagan, the commandant of the Coast Guard, with a Homeland Security official attributing her firing to program delays and an “excessive focus” on diversity and inclusion efforts.
The General Services Administration announced last week that it would suspend enforcement of all diversity-related contract language in alignment with Trump’s executive orders aimed at "restoring merit-based opportunity."
The Army’s staff director, Lt. Gen. Laura Potter, subsequently instructed the Army’s acquisition chief to “identify and recommend freezing or suspending” contract bid requests involving diversity, equity, and inclusion. She also indicated potential suspensions for contracts related to “critical race theory," climate change, and policies dealing with transgender rights and abortion.
These directives reverberated throughout the Army bureaucracy, prompting officials to "put a hold on all of their contracts,” according to a congressional aide who spoke on background about internal discussions.
Within the Army, which operates on an annual budget of nearly $186 billion, personnel scrambled to assess how a freeze on new contracts could affect their operations.
“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 email from the Army, obtained by PMG, indicated.
Then, Pentagon acquisition officials clarified there was no such freeze, leading the Army to retract its earlier directive.
Army leaders informed the House Armed Services Committee that there had been a misunderstanding — underscoring that Army contracting would proceed as normal.
“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,” an excerpt of the message viewed by PMG explained.
By that time, defense industry executives were left trying to ascertain the effects on their businesses after days of uncertainty.
“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,” remarked the anonymous defense industry executive.
A pause on Army contracts would significantly affect the industry, particularly small businesses with narrower profit margins. The Army’s contracting command executed $84.5 billion in contracts in 2022, including $3.5 billion to replenish stockpiles depleted due to 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 said.
Paul McLeary and Connor O'Brien contributed to this report.
Sanya Singh for TROIB News
