Janice R. Andrews
Washington, DC [US], January 29: U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has revoked the security clearance and personal security detail of retired General Mark Milley, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This move marks a significant action against a former top military leader.
Alongside this decision, Hegseth has instructed the Department of Defense’s acting inspector general to review Milley’s conduct and assess whether his retired rank should be downgraded. The investigation will determine if Milley’s actions during his tenure compromised the chain of command.
Milley’s relationship with former President Donald Trump deteriorated in the later years of Trump’s first term. Appointed by Trump in 2018, Milley later criticized him, reportedly calling him a “fascist” and emphasizing that the military pledges allegiance to the Constitution, not an individual. These statements led to deep tensions between the two.
One of the most contentious issues was Milley’s communication with his Chinese counterpart in 2020. Trump accused him of treason over these calls, claiming they were unauthorized and undermined his authority. Milley defended his actions, stating that the calls were coordinated with top defense officials and aimed at preventing conflicts.
Before leaving office, former President Joe Biden issued a blanket pardon for Milley, recognizing his 40 years of military service and deployments in conflict zones. The pardon shields Milley from criminal and military prosecution. However, the ongoing inspector general investigation could still impact his rank if misconduct is found.
Milley’s security revocation is part of a broader move by the Trump administration. Security details were also withdrawn from former National Security Advisor John Bolton and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. White House officials stated that Trump believes former officials should fund their own security rather than relying on taxpayer money.
The decision has sparked divided reactions. Supporters argue it reinforces the military chain of command, while critics see it as retaliation against a leader who prioritized constitutional principles over personal loyalty. As the inspector general’s probe continues, the implications for civil-military relations remain under scrutiny.
