Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has fired or blocked the promotions of more than 80 admirals and generals since taking office in January 2025, according to a Defense One analysis that says the campaign is reshaping the military’s senior leadership along ideological and demographic lines.

The latest episode came in August, when Hegseth blocked the promotions of four Army officers. Army Secretary Dan Driscoll resigned on Aug. 31, leaving the service without a Senate-confirmed civilian leader six months into the war with Iran. The analysis says Driscoll’s departure was reportedly motivated in part by frustration with Hegseth, though it does not establish that as the sole reason for the resignation.

The analysis says Hegseth has referenced “woke” diversity efforts in explaining some of his decisions. In one case, an officer was blocked after writing a graduate-school paper about political polarization and military recruiting. In another, an officer was removed from a promotion list after officials incorrectly believed he had permitted a mentorship group for female paratroopers to operate in his unit.

More than half of the officers removed have been women or Black, the analysis says. That figure stands against an officer corps that is 79% male and 74% white. The analysis argues that the pattern appears to conflict with military rules intended to protect the officer promotion system from politicization and has weakened confidence in a process that is supposed to be based on merit.

The dispute extends to Hegseth’s claims about recruiting. The Army exceeded its fiscal 2025 goal of 60,500 new enlistees and has already reached its target for fiscal 2026. Every active-duty military service has met its recruiting goals for three consecutive years, according to the analysis.

Hegseth has attributed that performance to recruits’ confidence in civilian and military leadership. A Pentagon spokesperson likewise said Americans are prouder than ever to serve. But market research cited in the analysis identifies practical considerations as the leading recruiting motivators, including making money, paying for education, travel, work experience and medical benefits.

The analysis says these occupational incentives have historically helped attract women and people of color, groups that remain essential to meeting the armed forces’ personnel needs. Recruiting data, it argues, gives the administration limited control over the composition of the enlisted force even as senior-level policies change the experience of serving.

Those changes are most visible at the top. All five service chiefs and nine of 10 combatant commanders are white men, while the percentage of women nominated for general and admiral ranks this year is the lowest in 25 years. Women make up 17% of the enlisted force, and 34% of enlisted personnel identify with a racial minority group.

The analysis describes the resulting promotion barrier as a “brass ceiling” for women and Black service members. It argues that recent firings and blocked promotions are reinforcing a leadership structure that does not reflect the force it commands. Hegseth has also sought to restore tributes to Confederate soldiers and attacked military diversity, actions the analysis says further marginalize women and service members of color.

The military’s earlier diversity efforts emerged from combat pressures and racial unrest. During the Vietnam War, Black and Latino service members served and died in disproportionate numbers under a largely white officer corps. The Defense Race Relations Institute was created in 1971 to provide race-relations education throughout the armed forces amid racial violence and frequent “fragging” incidents. ROTC programs at historically Black colleges and universities also expanded to increase the number of Black officers.

The analysis reports that about half of the 18 service members killed in the Iran war between February and August were women or people of color. It says Hegseth’s blocking of promotions and apparent targeting of women and Black people have contributed to a senior leadership structure that does not reflect the enlisted force or the nation it represents.