Defense Secretary Hegseth Polls Commanders on Civilian Protection Program

Shortly after taking office last year, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth polled the nation’s top commanders about cutting a program designed to protect civilians during U.S. military operations. Hegseth had anticipated that senior officers would support his view that focusing on civilian security was out of step with current military priorities, according to current and former defense officials who spoke to ProPublica. However, every commander opposed the idea. The poll from early 2025, which has not been previously reported, solidified military support for the Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response (CHMR) program, which was established to address the heavy civilian tolls in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other conflict zones. The program aimed to station personnel within major regional commands to improve decision-making on military strikes and minimize civilian harm. In the poll, Hegseth presented commanders with three options: cut 65% of staff while keeping the program operational, maintain a small centralized office in Washington, or eliminate the program entirely. Nine commanders opted for the first choice to preserve the program as much as possible, according to a memo reviewed by ProPublica. Leaders of two commands, one overseeing the nuclear arsenal and the other focused on cyber threats, declined all three options, requesting to maintain the full program. Leaders at U.S. Central Command, based in Tampa, Florida, advocated for keeping its full CHMR staff of 16. A memo indicated that reducing or eliminating the effort would lead to decreased efficiency in U.S. operations due to a higher risk of target misidentification and reduced situational awareness. Retired Army Gen. Erik Kurilla, who was then in charge of Central Command, and several senior officers involved in combat operations urged Hegseth to retain the program, emphasizing its value, but their appeals were not heeded. Hegseth significantly reduced the program, leaving only a few personnel to carry out its mission and stripping it of nearly all funding, even as the U.S. engaged in new military campaigns in Somalia, Yemen, and Iran. One official characterized Hegseth's approach as prioritizing aggressive military action. Hegseth indicated that the civilian harm program would not be part of his vision for the Department of War, stating there would be no more restrictive rules of engagement. Following U.S. missile strikes that resulted in civilian casualties in Iran and Yemen, which drew international criticism and congressional inquiries, there are indications that the program may be partially reinstated. This potential reversal would be notable in a department that has not tolerated dissent under Hegseth and President Donald Trump. Military memos from last year reveal a cautious pushback that may allow for the preservation of some aspects of the civilian security initiative. The Pentagon did not respond to requests for comment regarding the poll or the program's potential revival. The first major military operation during Hegseth's tenure, an air campaign in Yemen in the spring of 2025, resulted in the deaths of 153 civilians and injuries to 243 others, with the majority of fatalities occurring in just two strikes, making them among the deadliest acknowledged by the Pentagon in recent history, as reported by Airwars, a British organization monitoring civilian harm. Hegseth described the Yemen operation as a clear and decisive mission. By the time the U.S. began operations against Iran the following year, the civilian protection program had been reduced from nearly 200 personnel to around two dozen, with some working part-time. Central Command, which indicated it required at least nine of its 16 staffers to function effectively, was left with only one. On the first day of the U.S. and Israel's military actions against Iran, a U.S. airstrike struck a school in Minab, killing over 100 children and provoking global outrage. Hegseth and Adm. Brad Cooper, the commander overseeing the Iran operation, faced questioning from Congress regarding the strike. Hegseth stated that the U.S. does not target civilians and would conduct an investigation. Preliminary reports on that investigation, which have not been publicly released, suggest that outdated U.S. intelligence contributed to the attack on the school. Democratic senators and humanitarian organizations have raised concerns that the cuts to civilian protection personnel may have played a role in the school tragedy. In an April letter to Hegseth, 11 senators expressed that the school strike and other civilian casualties in Iran reflected a broader disregard for minimizing civilian harm, highlighting the dismantling of civilian harm reduction efforts. They raised concerns about whether the administration was adhering to international law and the laws of war. A Pentagon spokesperson previously declined to comment on the letter, stating it would respond directly to Congress. Some military leaders had expressed concerns prior to Hegseth's significant reduction of the program, with one exception being the Department of the Army, which supported the complete elimination of CHMR.