The push follows this week’s NATO summit in Ankara, where allies pledged €70 billion ($80 billion) in military aid for Ukraine this year.

U.S. President Donald Trump also pledged to allow Ukraine a license to build its own Patriot interceptors, a long-awaited goal of Kyiv. “We’ll give them the right to make Patriots,” he said.

“This is a European model,” Zelenskyy said Thursday. “FREYA is our Ukrainian anti-ballistic system...an analogue in terms of intercepting ballistic targets, an analogue of Patriot, but a system for more mass production and a cheaper system.”

Long-range missile and drone strikes caused 45% of Ukraine’s civilian casualties in May, the worst monthly toll since April 2022, according to a U.N. report.

Ballistic missiles remain the one threat Ukraine still can’t intercept with a system it built itself. Freya could change that, potentially shifting Kyiv’s position on the battlefield and at the negotiating table.

Freya centers on the FP-7.X interceptor, produced by the Ukrainian company Fire Point, and is designed to hit a ballistic target at roughly 15 miles altitude.

Like Patriot interceptors, Freya is an entire system and will rely on allies for production support.

“A system needs not only a missile and a launcher. It needs radars, command and control, and many different elements,” he said.

“To create our anti-ballistic system very quickly, we need European partners who have production of those things that Ukraine does not yet have for its own anti-ballistic system.”

Fire Point has signed a memorandum with Germany’s Hensoldt for radar technology and is in talks with France’s Thales, Italy’s Leonardo and Norway’s Kongsberg to supply tracking and command-and-control systems.

Zelenskyy said the Freya coalition, which he described as comprising roughly eight partner nations, will speed up the production process and make a faster timeline possible.

“We can do it ourselves, but years will pass,” he said.

Fire Point is targeting a per-shot cost near $700,000, versus roughly $3.8 million for a Patriot PAC-3.

The missile was flight-tested in early June, the company said, and is aiming to mass-produce three a day starting in August and intercept its first ballistic missile by the end of 2027.

The upcoming meeting in France may yield the next updates as Zelenskyy said the current plan depends on partner nations, their manufacturers and their production capacity signing on.

“God willing, the partners will support it, and God willing, our manufacturers will succeed with all of this,” he said.

Brig. Gen. Matthew Ross, the director of the Joint Interagency Task Force 401, the Defense Department’s lead organization for countering drones, described the handbook as “not a technical manual or detailed set of rules” but rather “a common foundation to shape our collective approach to this challenge.”

Using conversational language, freehand sketches and relatable references, Small Drones, Big Problems: A First Principles Approach to Countering-UAS makes the information approachable.

Inside, the handbook introduces the concepts of drones and drone protections. It offers guidance such as “The Four Ps of Drone Threats” and “The Five Ds of Protecting Against Drones,” as well as simple definitions of technical concepts and procedures.

But more importantly, it offers a perspective.

In the opening chapter, the handbook shares a brief anecdote from 1939 about the “happy time” for Nazi Germany because Allied Forces did not yet know how to react to U-boat operations.

“But the ‘happy time’ didn’t last forever,” the handbook reads. “British and American ships learned to adapt to the threat by implementing a convoy system to protect shipping lines, using escort ships, and developing new technologies like sonar, radar, and depth charges.”

The handbook grounds the subject for drone threats, explaining that technology in warfare has always changed, but weapons and equipment don’t win wars alone.

“Learning militaries adapt and innovate, repurposing existing defenses and building new ones to address vulnerabilities exploited by drones,” the handbook reads. “They change how they think about drones and how they fight.”

While a majority of the 100 pages is dedicated to applying tips and techniques to prevent or avoid drone attacks, it also offers a perspective on artificial intelligence, or AI.

“There is a temptation to talk about AI as either a savior or a threat, either a magical solution that fixes everything or a frightening force that removes human control. Neither description is useful. In practice, AI is far more neutral than either of these extreme perspectives suggest,” the handbook reads.

The handbook describes AI as a tool meant for helping analyze data by recognizing patterns and making predictions to assist humans in decision making.

“It does not replace judgment and disciplined decision-making. It does not understand intent or consequences. It does not decide what matters. What it does well is sort, compare, correlate, and highlight signals that would otherwise be lost in the noise,” the handbook reads.

The handbook argues that AI tools can be used for “helping humans apply the principles of detection, denial, disruption, defeat, and discipline more effectively.”

“When protecting against drones, AI is not only useful in moments of crisis, when stress is high in a (Base Defense Operations Center) or when a patrol is already reacting. Its value extends across the entire protection challenge, long before a drone poses a threat,” the handbook reads.

Army Maj. Joe Amoroso, deputy chief of strategic initiatives for JIATF 401, said the handbook offers “vital first principles” to help in “countering the defining threat of our time.”

“It is crucial to build a common foundation for counter-drone efforts as we work with the entire government and interagency partners to respond to this growing threat,” he said.

The confirmation came a day after U.S. President Donald Trump at the NATO summit in Ankara pledged the U.S. would give Ukraine a license to build its own Patriot interceptors, a long-sought goal for Kyiv as a global shortage of the missiles and intensifying Russian strikes leave its cities exposed.

Zelenskyy stopped short of tying the license to the multibillion-dollar drone deal, presenting the two as separate tracks working towards the same general goals.

“There are some documents that have already been signed so that the American side can receive from Ukraine various types of systems in which the United States is interested for testing,” Zelenskyy said in response to a question by Military Times.

“And they are receiving these from us.”

Kyiv pitched the multibillion-dollar drone partnership to Washington more than a year ago and has waited for a sign-off that never came, with U.S. officials publicly cool on it as recently as last month.

Zelenskyy’s account that the testing is underway and going well is the first real movement on the deal in months.

He named “aerial drones, maritime drones and other technological items” as the systems already changing hands.

“That testing is now underway, and that we are receiving very positive feedback, is a fact,” he said. “After this, we will move to another, next stage, to the drone deal.”

The full drone deal, a partnership Zelenskyy has valued at $35 billion to $50 billion, would reportedly set up a 50-50 production venture with the U.S. drawing on up to 200 Ukrainian companies.

But that deal remains unsigned, held up for months awaiting Trump’s approval.

Zelenskyy pointed to Ukraine’s wartime standing, calling its defense industry “at NATO level, and already one of the best” and saying Kyiv is “ready to share our own development and technologies.”

Days before the summit, the cost of the shortage was written in the rubble of Kyiv after Russia fired 68 missiles and 351 drones at Ukraine overnight, according to Ukrainian Air Force officials.

The shortage that makes a Ukrainian Patriot line so appealing sharpened this spring, when the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran burned through American interceptor stocks.

Gulf defenses fired as many as 1,430 Patriot interceptors in 39 days, a CSIS analysis found, draining inventories Ukraine had counted on.

By late April, Ukrainian crews were rationing mid-attack, firing one interceptor at incoming ballistics instead of the standard two to four to stretch what remained.

Air Force spokesman Yurii Ihnat said the Patriot force was down to a “starvation ration,” according to Euromaidan.

Even while minimizing the use of interceptors, Ukrainian air defenses downed roughly 92% of the Shaheds Russia launched in May, according to the Air Force, and cheap interceptor drones now do more of that work.

Ukraine built 100,000 of those drones in 2025 and doubled the pace in the first four months of 2026.

By the time Zelenskyy proposed a formal “Drone Deal Initiative” at NATO’s Ankara summit on July 7, several countries had already signed bilateral drone agreements with Kyiv.

He also arrived with a NATO intelligence assessment endorsed by all 32 members that Russia could invade a member state by 2029.

Ukraine’s mission chief to NATO, Alyona Getmanchuk, told allies in Brussels on July 2 that Ukraine helps guide the alliance’s only joint center, red-teams its war games and has a record number of members backing its membership.

She cast Ukraine not as an aid recipient, but as the only NATO partner actually implementing the alliance’s Strategic Concept and backed by drone-export permits, testing deals and combat-proven systems.

The Patriot license and the drone testing deal are the first fruits of a budding relationship between equals, officials hope.

“Everyone respects our army, everyone respects the country, everyone respects our technology companies,” Zelensky noted. “We are ready to share our own development and technologies.”

House Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Rep. Mike Bost of Illinois and Rep. Jack Bergman of Michigan, wrote Collins July 1 saying the VFW’s use of the cartoon raised questions regarding the organization’s “fitness to represent claimants before the department.”

They asked Collins to review whether the VFW’s accreditation was consistent with serving as a veteran service organization, examine whether the VFW’s licensing of imagery to vendors for commercial sales was appropriate and look into commercial arrangements the VFW has made with businesses such as Grunt Style, which sells t-shirts emblazoned with the editorial cartoon.

The cartoon, which depicts suited “bureaucrats” — presumably the VA — and the “media” pointing rifles at two veterans with the subtext “punishing veterans,” “removing benefits” and “‘waste and fraud,’ was developed last year in response to a series of articles in the Washington Post on disability claims fraud but has resurfaced following the VFW’s opposition to legislation sponsored by Bost that would reduce future benefits for veterans afflicted with tinnitus and sleep apnea.

Bost has taken issue with what he said is the violent nature of the cartoon.

On Wednesday, he accused the VFW of inciting political violence with the imagery and called on VFW to remove the cartoon from social media, stop the sale of shirts and affirm its “commitment to fact-based advocacy.”

“Every organization has the right to advocate for or against pending legislation in Congress. That right, however, carries a corresponding responsibility to do so in a manner that promotes informed civic debate rather than imagery that can reasonably be interpreted as glorifying or normalizing political violence,” Bost and Bergman wrote.

The letter was first reported by Liz Hartman, a former Marine and veterans advocate, on her All Due Respect Substack column.

The VFW opposes a portion of the proposed Take Care of America’s Veterans Act that would increase benefits for thousands of veterans but cover its cost by instituting changes to the disability ratings requirements for sleep apnea and tinnitus for veterans moving forward.

The VA accredits numerous veterans service organizations such as the VFW, the American Legion, Paralyzed Veterans of America, Disabled American Veterans and Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America to help veterans file disability claims.

By law, only individuals and organizations accredited by the VA can file an initial benefits claim on a veteran’s behalf, and they are not allowed to charge them for work related to filing a claim. Once a claim is denied, veterans may hire attorneys or companies to appeal the decision.

The VFW employs thousands of veteran service officers to provide this service.

In the past decade, a number of private, for-profit companies have stepped in to assist veterans with the claims process, for a cost. The companies, which aren’t allowed to assist with claims filing, instead provide help gathering evidence to support initial claims and then help veterans on appeal.

But there is evidence that some of these companies have broken the law and are extracting fees from veterans with initial filings.

In May, a federal judge found the company Veterans Guardian operated as an unaccredited agent, engaging in deceptive business practices. In the class action suit, plaintiffs alleged the company collected more than $250 million in fees from veterans.

Bergman has introduced two bills that would allow firms such as Veterans Guardian assist legally with initial claims, capping fees at $12,500.

Both Bergman and Bost also have received political donations from political action committees affiliated with Veterans Guardian.

In response to questions from Military Times, VFW General Counsel John Muckelbauer said neither Bost nor Bergman reached out to the group before sending the letter. According to Muckelbauer, the VFW believes its advocacy campaign against a portion of the Take Care of America’s Veterans Act is consistent with its mission.

“We are confident that our advocacy is entirely consistent with our responsibilities as an accredited veterans service organization. Speaking forcefully on behalf of veterans is not separate from our mission. It is one of the principal reasons Congress chartered this organization more than 125 years ago,” Muckelbauer wrote in an email Thursday.

He added that the letter challenges that advocacy and nothing in it “identifies allegation[s] that the VFW or any of its accredited representatives violated VA accreditation requirements, acted unethically, failed to competently represent a single veteran, or otherwise failed to satisfy the standards applicable to accredited veterans service organizations.”

The Department of Veterans Affairs did not respond to a request for comment by publication.

The trip to Turkey for the NATO summit, the first international travel for the new plane, took place as hostilities escalated with Iran, a country that borders Turkey.

The unexpected plane switch followed months of scrutiny over the luxury gift intended to serve as a temporary replacement while Boeing struggled to deliver long-delayed next-generation Air Force One planes.

Critics questioned the cost, security and pace of the retrofit.

Trump said on Truth Social that he would use an older baby blue Air Force One plane “for old time’s sake” to fly from Ankara to RAF Mildenhall in Britain while the new plane stopped at the same base so U.S. service members stationed there could tour the aircraft.

Video late on Wednesday showed Trump boarding the new Air Force One gifted by Qatar at the British base as it prepared to fly to the U.S.

The new plane, with red, white, dark blue and gold livery chosen by Trump, is a Boeing 747 gifted to the United States by Qatar last year and refitted by defense contractor L3Harris Technologies.

Trump, asked in Ankara if a threat of assassination prompted his decision to change planes for his departure from Turkey, did not answer directly but acknowledged the potential threat.

“I’m number one on the kill list for Iran,” he told reporters at a news conference as the NATO summit concluded. “I don’t know. I can’t tell you that but I don’t really care.”

In a first, Trump will travel aboard Qatari-donated Air Force One

The upgrades to the jet from Qatar were completed so quickly that some experts expressed concern the plane may not be as secure as the existing Air Force One aircraft.

‘So the soldiers can see it’

Trump had said in Turkey the new Air Force One would travel to two or three big military bases in Europe before returning to the United States “so the soldiers can see it because it’s truly magnificent.” But it appeared the plane’s only stop was at the British base.

Trump wrote late on Wednesday on social media that he had landed at RAF Mildenhall “and met up with our new Air Force One.”

Service members at the base “were very excited, picture enclosed. It was on our way back to the States from Turkey, with virtually no deviation of flightpath,” he said.

The Qatari jet’s acceptance had drawn scrutiny. Retrofitting the luxury plane required security upgrades, communications improvements to prevent eavesdropping and missile defense capabilities, experts said.

Democratic lawmakers estimated the conversion cost more than $1 billion and raised concerns about its security.

A second aircraft that can operate as Air Force One is always on standby during presidential trips.

The Air Force’s fast-track effort to ready the jet skipped some planned modifications for the next-generation presidential aircraft in order to deliver an interim version sooner.

Officials have said the plane still meets presidential standards.

Boeing is working to deliver two purpose-built 747-8s under a $3.9 billion fixed-price contract signed in 2018.

That program is now four years behind schedule, with delivery not expected until mid-2028, meaning a new, U.S.-built plane may not be ready before Trump’s term ends in January 2029.

Costs on the Boeing program have grown to more than $5 billion, with the company booking billions of dollars in charges tied to the project.

Merz told lawmakers he had sealed the deal with the U.S. government on the sidelines of a NATO summit in Ankara, adding that the meetings on Tuesday and Wednesday had exceeded his expectations.

“We are closing a critical strategic gap in our defence, while simultaneously working to develop our own European systems and station them in Europe,” he said.

According to German government sources, Washington committed to granting approval in August for Germany to procure Tomahawk missiles and corresponding ground-based Typhon launchers in a letter of intent signed on Tuesday.

The number of missiles and launchers Germany plans to acquire has not been disclosed as it is classified information.

The planned purchase appears to fit with U.S. President Donald Trump’s push for European allies to pay for their own security, for example by buying U.S. weapons.

The fate of the Tomahawk supply had been unclear after Trump announced in May that he would reduce U.S. military presence in Germany.

German defense minister laments long-range strike ‘gap’ caused by planned US drawdown

That was seen as a cancellation of a plan under the previous administration to deploy a U.S. battalion equipped with long-range Tomahawk missiles to Germany.

It was intended as an interim solution that would serve as a powerful deterrent against Russia while Europeans developed their own version of such weapons.

Germany makes its own cruise missiles, the Taurus, but their range of around 311 miles is three to five times shorter than the Tomahawks’.

As Air Force Maj. Jason Watson ascended the Capitol steps last week wearing his military uniform and armed with one protest sign, he knew the risks and was prepared for the consequences, no matter how severe.

Watson, 40, a U.S. Air Force Academy graduate with 17 years on active duty, stood on the steps of the House of Representatives in roughly 100-degree weather on July 1, silently holding a sign that read “Impeach Convict Remove” to call for the impeachment of President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance.

After standing on the steps for approximately three minutes, Capitol Police arrested Watson under Washington, D.C., code 22-1307 Crowding, Obstructing and Incommoding because he was demonstrating on the steps without a member of Congress to accompany him.

“I think you can’t help but be struck by the contrast of someone who is upholding the highest level of commitment to their oath to call out a tyrannical and illegal administration being arrested, while so many of those actors continue in seats of power with impunity,” Jessica Denson, founder of the Removal Coalition, told Military Times.

The Removal Coalition is a political activist movement that organized the demonstration after Watson contacted Denson earlier this year, looking to become involved.

His arrest did not come as a surprise to those who assisted Watson in the protest’s conception or even to the major himself, Denson told Military Times.

After his arrest

Watson foresaw the possibility of arrest and was prepared for it, as seen through his calm demeanor and acceptance of the arrest in the video footage of the event.

After his arrest, Watson was transferred from Capitol Police custody to the Metropolitan Police Department and was held overnight in jail at Central Cell Block in Northwest D.C., Denson confirmed.

The following day, Watson was transferred to D.C. Superior Court and brought to Moultrie Courthouse, where a hopeful Denson awaited his release.

Denson was optimistic that after his arrest, Watson would be momentarily released from the courthouse, given that the D.C. attorney’s office dropped their charges against him. But that feeling was short-lived.

“He was never released from custody, he was whisked away from the courthouse directly into Air Force custody,” Denson said.

Air Force major arrested on Capitol steps during protest calling for Trump impeachment

The D.C. Office of Attorney General confirmed to Military Times that the city’s charges were dropped but did not specify when.

While she waited in the courthouse, Denson was not alone. Agents from the Air Force Office of Special Investigations were also there, telling Denson they were only present to assure there was a warm handoff, which refers to the transfer of a case between OSI and other military agencies.

“There was a sergeant there who basically represented to me that she was just there to make sure that he was well fed and clothed and had a hotel to go to, all those things,” Denson said.

Denson said that all the people she spoke to identified themselves with OSI. She questioned whether this was part of a court-martialing process, and they told her “absolutely not,” she said.

As they all sat in a U.S. Marshals’ office awaiting Watson, Denson was asked to leave because she was neither his attorney nor a family member. The OSI agents were allowed to remain, she said.

Before Watson’s continuing legal counsel was available, he was represented by another lawyer who also arrived at the courthouse. That lawyer did not get the opportunity to speak with Watson in person, because moments later, Watson was already in a van leaving with the OSI agents.

OSI officials referred Military Times to the Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs office, which denied to comment on the interaction.

Where is Watson now?

Watson is currently on leave from his commission post as a logistics readiness officer in Bydgoszcz, Poland.

From the D.C. courthouse, he was taken to Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling, located in Southwest Washington, D.C., a Level I confinement facility. Level I facilities are minimum security, short-term holdings and are meant to house inmates, both pre- and post-trial, serving sentences of one year or less.

His superior placed him under a gag order the afternoon of July 2, Denson said.

Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling officials referred Military Times to the Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs office.

An Air Force spokesperson confirmed that Watson is restricted to the base within “specified geographic limits while performing military duties.” The spokesperson did not elaborate on the measures of the limits.

Denson, who first spoke with Watson to set up the protest back in February, remained in the D.C. courthouse working to secure him legal counsel. Before the day ended, his lawyer, Chris Mutimer of Monument Legal, was able to meet him on base.

Mutimer, who is representing Watson alongside Maj. Heather Bruha of the Air Force Judge Advocate General Corps, told Military Times that as of Tuesday afternoon, no charges had been formally filed. But Watson is under investigation for several articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, including conspiracy, contempt toward officials, dereliction of duty, conduct unbecoming of an officer and conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.

The Air Force confirmed Thursday that no charges had been filed.

Under UCMJ, active-duty members are forbidden from participating in partisan political acts, especially while in uniform. Consequences can include criminal or administrative punishments, such as punitive discharges, courts-martial or imprisonment.

Mutimer said that Watson is restricted to the Air Force base but not in confinement. He said that his representation is in contact with his command about the terms of the restriction and whether it can be modified or lifted as the investigation continues.

He said the representation is focused on ensuring the process is fair and that any order or restriction is clear and lawful and that “investigation proceeds on the facts rather than the surrounding politics.”

“Maj. Watson is doing well. He understood what he was risking when he spoke out, and he’s prepared to face whatever comes of this, including the possibility of a court-martial. That hasn’t wavered,” Mutimer said.

‘Just A. Nobody’

Watson first reached out to Denson in February. He did not reveal his identity, but instead signed off on his emails as “Just A. Nobody,” a moniker that he has repeated time and time again, most recently during his speech last week before his protest on the Capitol steps.

“If just a nobody like me can take a stand for our Constitution and our democratic republic, then you can too. I hope you will join me in the defense of our republic,” he said in his speech.

Previously, Watson protested anonymously through a hunger strike on the Capitol for 22 days, but it did not garner much attention. He sat with his entire body covered in white clothing topped with sunglasses and a white hat.

Denson said Watson was building momentum for an identity reveal, but he needed a vehicle to do so. That’s where she came in.

Initially, Watson’s plan was for a large protest, but Denson believed it would not be enough to hold attention. Instead, she suggested a press conference and a solitary demonstration with a captive audience on Capitol Hill.

Those involved, including Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, and partner organizations, kept it under wraps and advertised it only as an “unprecedented act of civil disobedience” out of concern that Watson would be stopped before being able to protest.

Denson said Watson was “eager” and did not hesitate to don his uniform for the protest. In a pre-taped interview with Denson on her “Lights On” YouTube channel published the day of the protest, Watson chose to wear civilian attire because he didn’t want anyone to feel he was “co-opting the uniform.”

He chose to wear his uniform on the steps of the Capitol to showcase its symbolism and the oath of office it represents, Denson said.

On the day of Watson’s arrest, Secretary of the Air Force Troy Meink posted on social media, saying he expects every airmen and guardian to comply with all laws and policies that dictate personal conduct, political participation and the uniform’s wear.

“The Department takes allegations of misconduct seriously, including any that might undermine the nonpartisan nature of our military,” Meink wrote.

“Pursuant to a thorough investigation — which will proceed unimpeded — commanders will ensure appropriate disposition when holding service members accountable in accordance with military law and due process,” he concluded.

The search comes after dozens of MQ-9s were swatted out of the sky during the Iran war, according to a May 13 Congressional Research Service report.

With the Air Force currently possessing about 135 Reapers — which cost approximately $30 million apiece — such a loss rate is not sustainable, especially against a force like Iran, whose air defenses are less sophisticated than those of China or Russia.

“The Joint Force’s reliance on low-density, high-value ‘exquisite’ (>$30 million) manned and unmanned aircraft is unsustainable against adversaries utilizing layered defenses enabled by increasingly low-cost antiaircraft capabilities,” warned the Defense Innovation Unit solicitation for a new drone, which the Pentagon wants to “execute missions that the MQ-9A performs today.”

Rather than build a better Reaper, DIU is opting for an expendable replacement. The Massed Modular Aircraft, or MMA, project aims to develop a UAV designed to operate in such large numbers that it can absorb heavy losses and still overwhelm enemy defenses.

Particularly of interest is the size of the MMA. Drone swarms may be the next big thing in unmanned warfare, but generally those hordes are made up of small, inexpensive UAVs with limited range and payload.

But the DIU solicitation envisions a drone that has long range and a heavy payload — and is still inexpensive enough for mass production. The solicitation calls for a payload of at least 2,800 pounds, a bit less than the MQ-9’s 3,800-pound capacity.

The MMA should also have an unrefueled combat range of at least 2,300 nautical miles, according to the solicitation, and a one-way transfer range of at least 8,000 nautical miles. Additionally, the drone should reach speeds of at least 200 miles per hour and have the ability to operate from a 6,000-foot runway or improvised airstrips.

The DIU solicitation states that the drone should have “sufficient available size, weight, power (25kW), and cooling (5kW) to host a variety of internal and/or external payloads,” with a level of autonomous operations that would allow one operator to control several drones.

The solicitation does not specify the MMA’s dimensions, though the specifications suggest a drone comparable in size to the MQ-9. It also did not list a desired price point, though presumably it would be less than the $30 million price tag of an MQ-9.

The timeline for the MMA project, meanwhile, is ambitious. DIU is calling for “full-scale prototype flight testing within 21 months of award, with a targeted Initial Operating Capability (IOC) in FY2031. IOC for MMA is envisioned as 20 mission-ready aircraft delivered to an operational unit, able to be deployed.”

Pentagon solicitations continue to reflect a mindfulness of lessons from the Ukraine War, as well as the experiences during the Iran War. In both conflicts, the defender exhausted interceptors before the attacker ran out of drones.

“Keeping a constant airborne MMA presence to launch weapons, gather intelligence, perform electronic warfare missions, or relay communications will force an adversary to stay on the defensive,” DIU said. “This relentless pressure will exhaust the adversary, forcing them to burn through expensive anti-aircraft missiles and resources faster than they can be replaced.”

Lessons from Ukraine and growing concerns about potential conflict with China have intensified the Defense Department’s focus on what officials call “information and decision advantage” — the ability to make informed decisions quicker and more accurately than an adversary.

Through its Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control initiative, known as CJADC2, the Pentagon is dedicating billions of dollars in artificial intelligence, advanced battlefield networks, data integration and autonomous systems designed to accelerate commanders’ decision cycles.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has said the department’s goal is to “put the best systems in the hands of warfighters” so leaders have “the systems that support what you need for maximum lethality.”

Still, future battles are expected to be rife with degraded communications, disrupted networks and information overload. The war in Ukraine highlights those challenges.

Military analysts studying the conflict have documented instances in which Ukrainian units have been forced to adapt after Russia‘s electronic warfare disrupted communications and drones altered battlefield visibility. Rapidly changing conditions pushed small-unit leaders to make consequential decisions with incomplete information and limited guidance. In those moments, information was plentiful, but certainty was elusive.

As the U.S. military modernizes for large-scale combat against technologically sophisticated adversaries, experts are asking one fundamental question: Is the Pentagon investing as heavily in honing human instincts as it is in developing the technologies to support them?

No ‘perfect’ information

Retired Army officer John Spencer, executive director of the nonprofit Urban Warfare Institute, believes the U.S. military has significant advantages to address the challenge.

“I travel the world and observe militaries all around the world, and there is nothing like the American soldier and the American system,” Spencer said.

However, Spencer said, none of the U.S. military’s technological advances changes a basic truth: “When you strip away everything, it comes down to those base characters of selfless service, duty, honor to the country,” he said. “If you don’t have the character, you don’t have anything.”

Recent wars in Ukraine and elsewhere have reinforced another enduring lesson, Spencer said. Battlefield effectiveness depends on the unit of the teams making decisions, not simply the speed of at which those decisions are made.

Cohesion, Spencer said is the most important factor and “the glue that holds it all together.” Speed alone is not enough.

As the Pentagon pursues increasingly sophisticated tools to improve battlefield awareness, he cautioned against assuming leaders will ever possess perfect information.

“The all-seeing eye is a myth,” he said.

A screen can never give the whole battlefield picture, said Jon Macaskill, a retired Navy SEAL commander who saw two decades of war.

“The picture from above is never the whole picture,” Macaskill said, adding “the guy on the ground who actually understands the terrain and the people on it is worth more than any feed.”

Macaskill cautioned that as the post-9/11 generation retires from the military, it risks losing experience that cannot be fully captured in doctrine, after-action reports or lessons-learned databases.

That instinct includes understanding “how fast a situation can come apart, how communications degrade under stress, how the picture you think you have and the real picture can drift apart in minutes,” Macaskill said. “When the people with that kind of knowledge and experience hang it up and walk away, that judgment leaves with them.”

Learning under pressure

The question now is whether military institutions can intentionally develop those instincts before the next war demands them.

On that point, Macaskill is not sure.

He and other experts question whether institutional training alone can fully replicate the intuition forged through years of combat experience. Macaskill argues that some of the most important aspects of combat leadership resist codification.

“Doctrine can’t tell you how to keep a 19-year-old calm enough to do his job when the rounds are coming in,” he said. “It can’t tell you how to make a call with half the information you’d want, knowing people will live or die based on whether you got it right. A manual can teach you a procedure but it can’t teach you humility.”

For decades, military educators have attempted to build strong judgement through demanding training designed to stress leaders long before they encounter combat, a method with which Spencer agrees.

The Army veteran argues that sound decision-making cannot be meaningfully developed without placing leaders under pressure.

“If you want to test character and judgment, you have to put people under stress,” Spencer said. “The worst thing you ever want to hear is somebody to say, ‘This is the first time I’ve had to do this.’”

Stresses of future wars

Defense leaders and military strategists expect future conflicts against peer adversaries to involve long operations and sustained cognitive demands on leaders at every level.

Bailey Weis, a former Marine who completed Infantry Training Battalion and later participated in Marine Special Operations Command assessment, said demanding military environments reveal that effective decision-making depends less on motivation than on stability.

“Can you perform when you are uncomfortable for long periods, when no one is adjusting anything for you, and when feedback is minimal?” she asked.

Weis said one of the biggest misconceptions about high-performance military environments is that aptitude is revealed during a single event.

“It is cumulative fatigue, load carriage, sleep deprivation, and repetition. That is where separation really happens,” she said.

Drones, artificial intelligence and advanced battlefield networks may transform the mechanics of war, but according to Spencer, Macaskill and Weis, future battlefields will still demand leaders capable of making sound decisions when communications fail, plans unravel and information is incomplete.

“You either meet the standard under load, under fatigue, over time, or you do not,” she said.

As the post-9/11 generation leaves the force, the military’s challenge will likely not be teaching leaders how to use new technologies, but rather ensuring they develop the instincts, character and judgment future wars will still require.

Despite rapid advances in technology, Spencer said one military advantage has endured across centuries of warfare: cohesive teams.

“History shows that small-group togetherness is our strength,” he said. “We still need groups of men and women who are cohesive and care about each other, and that’s not a given on the modern battlefield.”

“We’re going to give a license to you to make Patriots. That’s pretty cool. This way, you can’t complain that we’re not giving ‘em enough,” Trump said at a meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the NATO summit in Ankara.

“It’s a defensive weapon, which I like better than an offensive weapon,” Trump said.

The U.S. president’s comments were quickly picked up by Russian state media, which keeps a keen eye on all news coming out of the NATO summit in Ankara.

Initial reporting was factual and brief, relaying the American president’s decision verbatim. State-aligned media had previously panned the idea as reckless and amplified Western skeptical voices calling the move a risk to U.S. national security over concerns the technology could fall into Russian hands.

Russia’s foreign ministry has criticized the Trump administration for continuing to back Ukraine, with Moscow’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov saying that Washington was giving up its role as an “honest broker” and shifting back toward more decisively supporting Kyiv.

Reporting by the FT from late June indicated that this was causing disillusionment with Trump amongst Putin’s close associates.

Wednesday’s announcement comes just days after Kremlin spokesperson Dimitry Peskov dropped Russia’s longstanding euphemism of the “special military operation” in Ukraine. Instead, speaking to Russian media on Sunday, it had become a “real war” due to the involvement of Western nations, Peskov said.

While Trump was unambiguous in Ankara about the licensing offer, some specifics would remain to be worked out with the U.S. contractors involved. It was unclear, for example, which type of interceptor missile - the simpler PAC-2 or the more capable PAC-3 - Trump intends to allow Ukraine to build.

Zelenskyy has repeatedly pleaded for the U.S.-made interceptors — the only weapon in Ukraine’s arsenal that can shoot down ballistic projectiles, whose high velocity and steep flight path make them difficult to stop.

He was expected to raise the issue with Trump during their meeting.

Trump said pressure could be applied to companies to produce Patriot missiles. “We have great power over the companies, those companies that make the Patriot,” he said.

“We haven’t informed the company of that yet, but that’ll work out all right. I’m sure they will be thrilled,” he said.

Lockheed Martin is the prime contractor for the interceptor missiles that go in the Patriot system.

Russia fired ballistic missiles at Kyiv again overnight, officials said on Wednesday, a third attack on the Ukrainian capital in less than a week exploiting Ukraine’s critical shortage of U.S.-made air-defense interceptors.

While Ukraine’s air defenses intercepted 139 of the 169 drones during the overnight strikes on the country, they were again unable to down any of the five ballistic missiles used by Russia, air force data showed.

Trump said both sides in the war would like to see it end, but Russia’s Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have both been “difficult.”

“We’ve settled a lot of wars, and this one is the one that I thought maybe would be the easiest, but Putin is a difficult character, and this guy’s a difficult character,” Trump said, referring to Zelenskyy, who was sitting next to him.

Zelenskyy said he wanted to discuss “some very important details” with Trump.

“I’m sure you will do everything to stop this war,” he told Trump.

Moscow has stepped up its air war on Ukraine in recent months as its ground advances have largely stalled and Ukrainian attacks on its military logistics and oil industry triggered widespread fuel shortages.

Speaking in the Turkish capital Ankara, Trump called Madrid a “terrible partner” in NATO as he railed against allies for not supporting the war on Iran and ordered Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to halt all trade with Spain.

Trump’s remarks, also declaring the fragile ceasefire with Iran to be over, overshadowed a summit that European leaders had hoped would project unity and support for Ukraine and cap a series of rows that have threatened to tear the military alliance apart.

Trump spoke alongside NATO Secretary Mark Rutte, who has assiduously tried to assuage his concerns over defense spending, Iran and Greenland, while lavishing praise on the president for bringing such issues to the fore.

They also undercut the carefully crafted pre-summit messaging that European NATO countries had stepped up to the plate on military spending, which saw at least $50 billion in defense initiatives unveiled on Tuesday.

Eight NATO allies launch HALO satellite constellation initiative

Washington and Madrid have been at loggerheads, with Spain explicitly rejecting Trump’s demands for European countries to sharply increase military spending and pay for their own defense. Madrid’s Socialist leadership has also refused to let the U.S. use its airspace or bases on its territory for the Iran war.

“Spain is a wasted cause. We don’t want to do any trade business with Spain anymore,” Trump said. “By the way, I’d like to cut it off. Spain is a terrible partner in NATO. They don’t participate, they don’t pay. I don’t want anything to do with Spain. Cut off all trade with Spain, including visits.”

In response, the office of Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez said it was treating Trump’s statements as business as usual, adding that bilateral relations benefited both countries.

Spanish Health Minister Monica Garcia was more blunt.

“We are a sovereign, democratic country that defends multilateralism and peace,” she said on X. “What’s terrible is confusing diplomacy with bullying.”

Asked about Trump’s remarks, a NATO diplomat said: “The answer to every question POTUS raises is clear: build a more European NATO. That’s what we’re doing in Ankara.”

Trump calls Iran ‘sick people’

The U.S. has unleashed new military strikes on Iran and revoked a license allowing Iran to sell oil in response to attacks on three tankers. It was the latest blow to a fragile ceasefire agreement in a war that is deeply unpopular in Europe.

“It’s a very interesting question. To me, I think it’s over. I don’t want to deal with them,” Trump said when asked whether the interim accord with Iran that envisaged hammering out a long-term peace deal by mid-August was over. “They’re scum. They’re sick people. They’re led by sick people.”

“As far as I’m concerned, it’s just a waste of time dealing with them,” he said.

Rutte defended the new U.S. strikes and played down Trump’s disappointment with allies over the Iran war as “isolated cases.”

“I think what you did last night was absolutely necessary. It was a very strong response,” Rutte told Trump. “When you have a ceasefire and Iran is basically violating the ceasefire, I think it is totally crucial that the U.S. forcefully react.”

He also praised Trump for making European countries raise their game on defense spending.

“It’s really important when it comes to NATO, what you have achieved, and this is a huge win,” he said.

Trump has accused European nations of failing to let U.S. forces use their airspace and bases on their territories during the war.

European officials have said they largely honored their commitments to U.S. forces, despite not having been consulted about a conflict that roiled their economies.

Trump also demanded that his country control Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark, reviving an issue that has put severe strain on the alliance that has underpinned Western security since the start of the Cold War.

“Greenland is very important for the United States, but it’s not important for Denmark,” he said. “In fact, when Denmark was overrun by the Nazis in less than one day - Hitler beat them out in one day, took over - they asked us to take care of Greenland. In fact, we took Greenland, and then stupidly we gave it back.”

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen reiterated that Greenland was not up for grabs.

“We are ready to defend every inch of NATO, including our own territory,” she said.

Suddenly in June it was showcased for the first time in official Chinese media, as analysts tell it, and described as one of China’s top military assets as English-language subtitles extolled its battlefield capacities.

Experts say the broadcast answers Asia-Pacific military exercises by other countries and aims to warn the U.S. military that the missiles better known as DF-17s, for short, have what it takes to cause particular pain in any war with China.

“Video footage might be political signaling or mild deterrence, because the DF-17 is very hard to defend against, especially for large surface targets,” said Alexander Huang, chairman of the Council of Strategic and Wargaming Studies in Taipei. “It’s a big threat to carriers and other assault ships.”

The medium-range missiles are equipped with a hypersonic glide vehicle, which means they can fly at lower altitudes in unpredictable directions.

DF-17s have existed for at least 12 years and been available to the People’s Liberation Army since 2019, according to a paper by the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank in Washington.

The release of DF-17 into the Chinese media syncs up time-wise with the ongoing U.S.-led 2026 Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) maritime military exercises near Hawaii and the U.S.-Japan drills in late June.

“The other exercises were pretty tough and harsh, clearly targeting Chinese possible actions,” Huang said.

By showing the DF-17s after RIMPAC, China wants to suggest that the missiles can evade interception and make “saturation strikes” at the same time, said Chen Yi-fan, assistant professor in the Diplomacy and International Relations Department at Taiwan’s Tamkang University.

“This signaling is intended to underscore the PLA’s growing confidence in its capacity to overwhelm regional missile‑defense systems and complicate operational planning” by any military opponents, Chen said.

The missiles, as shown during a drill in an English-language YouTube video by the Chinese state-run media outlet CGTN, can make “ultra-precise” strikes and “penetrate advanced defense systems”, per the video.

CGTN said the missiles may be used without fixed launch sites and in any kind of weather.

“The coordinated salvo launches greatly improve strike efficiency and battlefield safety, demonstrating China’s advances in military technology,” CGTN said.

The U.S. think tank describes the DF-17 missiles as 11 meters (36 feet) long with a range of 1,800 to 2,500 kilometers (1,118 to 1,553 miles). It says they can carry conventional or nuclear payloads. China has 1,300 missiles and 300 launchers.

“As one of the PLA’s premier strategic assets, the DF‑17 is likely reserved for the most consequential scenarios, such as foreign military intervention perceived as supporting Taiwan independence,” Chen said.

American military bases in Hawaii, Guam and Japan are monitoring the uptick in People’s Liberation Army naval drills around Taiwan and Beijing’s tiffs with the Philippines in the South China Sea.

China claims sovereignty over self-ruled Taiwan, a de-facto U.S. ally. China and the Philippines – a U.S. treaty ally – contest sovereignty over small islets in the sea between them.

The DF-17’s hypersonic glide vehicle would give the missiles an edge in battle, said M. Taylor Fravel, Security Studies Program Director at Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

“This maneuverability means that it is much harder to defeat than a ballistic missile without a hypersonic glide vehicle,” Fravel said. “It can more easily penetrate missile defenses.”

Earlier DF-series missiles flew the traditional path of a surface-to-surface missile, meaning they were easier to predict than the flight course of a DF-17, Huang said.

U.S. forces may need to expand their long-range radar technology to spot any DF-17s launchers and respond preemptively in the case of any conflict, analysts said.

The U.S. is already developing systems “similar” to the DF-17, Fravel said. He said those include the U.S. army’s Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon missile system as well as hardware that may defeat hypersonic glide vehicles.

A long-range hypersonic system is designed to strike well defended targets from thousands of miles away.

“Washington must accelerate the development and deployment of its own hypersonic weapons to establish credible mutual deterrence,” Chen said.

The move would be a massive gesture from Trump to Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan whom he considers a close ally and would remove a major long-standing irritant in bilateral ties.

Even as Washington and Ankara have enjoyed warmer ties under Trump, Turkey’s 2019 acquisition of the Russian S-400 system has long been a sore point for both sides.

In response to that purchase, Washington in 2020 imposed sanctions on a major Turkish defense company and removed Turkey from the F-35 stealth fighter jet program, where Ankara was also a production partner.

“We’re going to be taking the sanctions off,” Trump told reporters just before his meeting with Erdogan during a visit to Turkey for a NATO summit. He added that his secretary of state and Treasury secretary were working on the issue.

Trump was also upbeat about the possible sale of F-35 stealth fighter jets to Turkey even as he did not say how exactly such a transaction would take place given the legal hurdles.

“Turkey has been, in many ways, much more loyal than other countries that we think would be loyal. ... It’s a great plane, it’s the best, currently the best plane by far. And it’s certainly something we will consider,” Trump said.

Congress passed a law prohibiting any F-35 sales to ​Turkey as long ⁠as Ankara retained the S-400s, saying the Russian system posed a security risk to U.S.-made combat aircraft. Currently, the U.S. law does not permit Turkey to operate or possess the S-400 system if it wishes to rejoin the F-35 program.

Earlier, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters that Trump was expected to throw his support behind a potential F-35 sale to Turkey. One solution that has in recent weeks gained traction is to send the Russian system to a third country, although an agreement on this has yet to be sealed, according to the sources, who requested anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

It was unclear if such a move would be accepted by Russia, which requires end-user obligations in weapons sales.

Trump’s visit to Turkey is the first by a U.S. president in 11 years. He was welcomed by Erdogan with a lavish state ceremony and both leaders sang each other’s praises in their public remarks. Under Trump, Turkey’s deteriorating human rights track record has never been a topic of much concern for Washington.

The Veterans of Foreign Wars has used the cartoon to protest a portion of the Take Care of America’s Veterans bill that would pay for new benefits by altering requirements for sleep apnea and tinnitus disability ratings.

Although veterans who currently get compensation for the two conditions would not see a change to their ratings as a result of the legislation, the VFW has opposed the provision because it would reduce future benefits to pay for other veterans’ programs.

Last week, the organization posted an ad on its social media platform for t-shirts for its Honor the Contract campaign. The shirts, made by Grunt Style, feature a political cartoon created by the VFW last year that shows suited “bureaucrats” (presumably VA employees) and the “media” pointing rifles at two veterans with the subtext “punishing veterans,” “removing benefits” and “‘waste and fraud.’”

VFW officials said the illustration was created primarily in response to a series of articles by the Washington Post on fraud and abuse in veterans benefits and disability compensation as well as visits this year to Capitol Hill by VFW leadership.

But on Wednesday, House Veterans Affairs Chairman Mike Bost, R-Ill., said the VFW was inciting political violence with the imagery. He called on VFW to remove the cartoon from social media, stop the sale of shirts and affirm its “commitment to fact-based advocacy.”

“The recent inflammatory, fearmongering, and dangerous political rhetoric from the Veterans of Foreign Wars is inappropriate and must end immediately,” Bost said in a statement. “While I respect the First Amendment rights of every American, including those who work at VFW and have served in uniform, suggestions that VA’s dedicated workforce – or the media – or anyone else are actively shooting and punishing service members and veterans is unacceptable and creates a dangerous, politically charged environment that can put lives at risk.”

VFW officials said the organization has used some iteration of a firing squad cartoon dating to 1933.

“The VFW has never apologized for forcefully defending veterans and we are not about to start now,” VFW National Commander Carol Whitmore said in response to Bost’s statement.

“Political cartoons have long been part of American public discourse because they communicate difficult truths in memorable ways. When bureaucrats take aim at veterans’ earned disability benefits, we will continue to use every tool available to ensure veterans’ voices are heard,” Whitmore added.

The Take Care of America’s Veterans Act includes more than 60 bills that would improve compensation for medically retired combat veterans and the spouses of fallen troops who decide to get remarried before age 55, among other proposals.

The legislation is supported by at least 23 military, family and veterans organizations, including the American Legion, the Military Officers Association of America, the National Military Family Association, Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors, the Elizabeth Dole Foundation and more.

The coalition wrote a letter June 29 to the House and Senate Veterans Affairs Committees supporting the legislation but also asked for more details regarding the sleep apnea and tinnitus proposal, saying that “under ordinary circumstances it is not an approach we would support.”

“This comprehensive package reflects years of bipartisan and bicameral work to improve care, benefits, and services for the veteran community. Republicans and Democrats have authored elements of the bill, and we believe it represents one of the most thorough efforts to deliver non-partisan support and relief to both broad and narrow segments of the communities we serve,” the groups wrote.

Disabled American Veterans and Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America have joined the VFW in opposing the provision that addresses paying for the legislation, which could reduce disability compensation payments to veterans by $57 billion over the first 10 years.

“Veterans have earned their benefits through service and sacrifice,” Dr. Kyleanne Hunter, CEO of IAVA, said in a statement. “They should not be forced to pay for new initiatives through reductions to benefits they already rely upon, and we should never indicate to one set of veterans that their service is worth less than any other.”

To cover the cost of the legislation, which includes the widely supported Maj. Richard Star Act that would give medically retired combat veterans their full military retirement pay and Veterans Affairs disability compensation without an offset, the bill would implement a 2022 proposal to the VA’s ratings schedule for sleep apnea and tinnitus.

Under the legislation, veterans with asymptomatic sleep apnea or a mild case controlled by treatment would receive a 0% to 10% disability rating.

Similarly, tinnitus, which currently receives a 10% disability rating, would be treated as a symptom of another condition, such as hearing loss or a traumatic brain injury, and would no longer get a standalone rating.

Supporters argue that the legislation would not cut benefits and instead would protect them. Republican Sen. Jerry Moran of Kansas, Senate Veterans Affairs Committee chairman, told Military.com that the VA planned to implement the new sleep apnea and tinnitus regulations by the end of the year.

“If we don’t get out ahead of that business, the reduction in spending...will not be used for veterans,” ” Moran told the outlet.

Democrat lawmakers say the proposal does amount to cutting veterans benefits, saying the method for paying for the bill’s cost is a “shell game.”

“The Republican plan cuts existing veterans’ benefits to fund new ones — asking the next generation of veterans to pick up the tab for the last. That’s not progress; that’s a shell game that takes money out of veterans’ pockets. Caring for veterans is the cost of war. We cannot make compromises on the backs of veterans,” said Rep. Mark Takano of California, ranking Democrat on the House Veterans Affairs Committee.

The House was to consider the bill the week of June 22 but the planned vote was postponed. The House returns to session July 13.

The Senate has not scheduled a vote on the bill.

“DOD plans to invest over $2.4 trillion to develop and acquire its costliest weapon programs,” according to the Government Accountability Office’s 2026 annual report on major defense acquisition programs, or MDAP.

“Schedule delays persisted across MDAPs, signaling overly optimistic time frames,” according to the GAO report, which examined 104 of the Pentagon’s most expensive weapons programs. “The overall average time frame to deliver a capability increased this year to over 12 years. Further, several MDAPs have not set new delivery dates or are delaying critical interim milestones.

“By keeping delivery dates static, these programs raise questions about how realistic their estimates are. This means the 12-year average will likely increase in the future.”

If that sounds familiar, the 2025 annual report found that the DOD “continues to struggle with delivering innovative technologies quickly and within budget.”

However, the 2025 study seemed particularly concerned by rising costs of weapons due to inflation in the U.S. economy. In that regard, the 2026 analysis revealed a mixed price picture, with 46 of 72 programs reporting increases totaling $122 billion, and 16 reporting decreases totaling $47 billion.

GAO’s 2026 report seems more focused on program delays, especially in middle tier of acquisition, or MTA, projects that are intended to quickly jumpstart fielding of weapons within five years. The Pentagon is investing more than $49 billion across 23 of the most expensive MTA projects.

But GAO found that many systems are being slotted into the MTA despite the technology being too immature to be fast-tracked.

“For example, between 2018 and 2025, 18 out of 40 programs have entered the MTA pathway with immature technologies,” the report stated.

Many were lower than Technology Readiness Level 6 (prototype stage), and some were less than TRL 3 (proof of concept stage). Of eight current MTA projects, GAO deemed seven to be technologically immature, including the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile and the Next Generation Persistent Overhead Infrared sensor.

Thus, “programs are increasingly using the MTA pathway to mature technologies, when the intention of the pathway is to prototype and or field a residual capability within two to five years,” Shelby Oakley, GAO’s director for contracting and national security acquisitions, told Defense News.

“This is why we are not seeing capabilities fielded any faster,” Oakley said.

Among specific program issues, the Navy’s MQ-25 Stingray carrier-based unmanned aircraft has a 2.5-year delay to “initial operational capability and a 26-month delay to the end of initial operational testing,” GAO found. Changes to the design based on testing could push deployment out even longer.

For the DDG(X) destroyer, the Navy has yet to offer an acquisition strategy that details the assumptions behind the project.

“As such, the Navy’s business case for the DDG(X) program is not apparent,” GAO said. The DDG(X) is also likely to be affected by shipyard delays in building the Arleigh Burke-class Flight III series, which are up to 55 months behind schedule.

The Air Force’s B-52 radar modernization program, meanwhile, is beset by “cost increases and schedule delays.” The Air Force is opting to enter production with “very little development flight testing completed.”

The Army’s Mid-Range Capability program, which uses mounts Navy missiles and vertical launch tubes in Army vehicles, has “identified three additional critical technologies, all of which are immature.”

There are questions on “whether the return on investment is worthwhile for the four batteries planned for production by the Army,” the GAO stated.

In a joint statement, the Defense Department said the War Force campaign aims to attract “exceptional software engineers to support the nation’s most critical national security missions.”

Emil Michael, the Defense Department’s chief technology officer, described the effort as “a call to action for patriotic forward-deployed engineers.”

He explained that the new hires will support the Defense Department’s AI Acceleration Strategy and “enterprise” projects “to ensure American military technological dominance for generations to come.”

Despite the long-term goals, the job posting for Forward Deployed Engineer says the position will “not to exceed more than two years.”

According to the job posting, those hired as Forward Deployed Engineers will start at the GS-14 pay grade, with salaries beginning at $125,776 annually.

The campaign comes as the Defense Department has experienced a significant decline in its civilian workforce.

According to a recent report by the Government Accountability Office, the department’s workforce dropped from 778,188 employees in December 2024 to 695,248 in January 2026.

Overall, the GAO found the federal government lost 377,722 employees during that period, most of whom left voluntarily.

GAO data also shows the Defense Department lost 24,366 technical employees by the end of fiscal 2025, followed by another 2,787 during the first quarter of fiscal 2026.

Although OPM has a broad definition for the technical occupational group, the Defense Department reportedly lost some 7,600 employees who worked in IT.

In March 2025, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a memo outlining plans to rebuild the department to meet the military’s current and future demands. He said the plan aimed to eliminate redundant and bureaucratic steps through automation and technological solutions.

“The net effect will be a reduction in the number of civilian full-time equivalent positions and increased resources in the areas where we need them most,” Hegseth wrote.

The War Force campaign is part of a broader federal initiative known as US Tech Force, a fellowship program designed to help agencies implement artificial intelligence tools and modernize their technical infrastructure.

Through the program, the federal government has also partnered with private-sector companies to build a pipeline of candidates interested in temporary government service. The initiative aims to hire more than 1,000 people across the federal government.

Applications for the Forward Deployed Engineer positions close at midnight on July 17. The Defense Department expects to begin interviewing candidates later that month and into August.

In May, U.S. and Nigerian forces conducted military operations in northeastern Nigeria that killed Abu-Bilal al-Minuki, the second-in-command of ISIS globally.

That followed a U.S. strike on Christmas Day against the militants ordered by President Donald Trump, who said they had been targeting Christians in the African country.

Addressing a conference of African defense chiefs in Angola on Thursday, AFRICOM Commander Gen. Dagvin Anderson described May’s joint U.S.-Nigerian as a model for future security cooperation in Africa.

“We have withdrawn much of our forces that were just there for that operation, but are continuing the partnership that Nigeria has asked for to help continue with the intelligence sharing,” Anderson told journalists during a U.S. State Department-hosted briefing after the conference.

Anderson said the operation, in Nigeria’s Lake Chad Basin region, demonstrated Washington’s approach of providing specialized capabilities while allowing African partners to lead security operations.

He said cooperation with Nigeria had helped significantly degrade Islamic State’s leadership, adding that the impact had extended beyond West Africa because of the militant group’s international network.

The operation disrupted not only local commanders but also broader Islamic State communications and operations, he added.

“Nigeria has been very active since that operation in May,” Anderson said. “They continue to prosecute targets themselves.”

He added that Nigerian military pressure, combined with efforts to publicize the operation, had encouraged additional defections and surrenders among ISIS fighters in northeastern Nigeria.

The three-day conference in Angola’s capital, Luanda, was attended by military leaders from 35 African countries, alongside representatives from the U.S. and Brazil.

“In a matter of weeks, European allies have largely filled the gaps left by U.S. reductions to the NATO Force Model,” NATO’s top commander, U.S. Air Force General Alexus Grynkewich, said in information provided to Reuters when asked for comment on the topic.

“And in those few areas where they haven’t, where they do not currently have a like capability to replace, we are looking at alternate capabilities with matching effect.”

The U.S. told its allies in May that it had decided to shrink the pool of military capabilities committed to the transatlantic alliance in a crisis, raising urgent questions as leaders prepare for a NATO summit in Ankara on July 7-8.

The move is meant to gradually end an “unhealthy co-dependence” on U.S. forces as Washington faces the potential of simultaneous conflicts in multiple theaters, according to Grynkewich.

In mid-June, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said other allies were increasing their contributions and would fill “a lot” of the gaps but did not give any details.

Citing a NATO source, Reuters reported on Wednesday that NATO would announce at next week’s Ankara summit that its European member have filled almost all the gaps left by the United States in the alliance’s defense plans.

The main gap NATO is still struggling to plug is in strategic bombers, where the U.S. has said it will make only one aircraft available instead of two, said the source, speaking on condition of anonymity.

CUTS FROM FIGHTER JETS TO DRONES

The U.S. did not publicly disclose details of its reductions, but they range from refueling aircraft to fighter jets, drones and ships, according to figures provided to Reuters by a military source.

The number of U.S. F-15 and F-15E fighter jets available to NATO will fall by a third to 99 and the number of MQ-4 and MQ-9 Reaper drones by half to 12, according to the source.

The number of KC-135 and KC-46 refueling aircraft falls to 63 from 79, while only one strategic bomber and aircraft carrier would be allocated, rather than two.

The number of maritime patrol aircraft goes down to 15 from 26, the number of destroyers falls to nine from 17, and the only submarine carrying cruise missiles is also cut from the commitments.

The NATO alliance is under unprecedented strain, with some European countries concerned that Washington may fulfill repeated threats by U.S. President Donald Trump to withdraw.

The United States, Taiwan’s most important international backer and arms supplier despite the lack of formal diplomatic ties, has strongly backed the government’s military modernization plan and increased defense spending.

Taiwan says it needs to bolster its defenses in the face of a stepped-up threat from China, which claims the island as its own territory.

Speaking at a forum on drones in the central city of Taichung, Raymond Greene, director of the American Institute in Taiwan and the de facto U.S. ambassador, said drones represented a “game-changing opportunity” to enhance Taiwan’s security and reinforce peace in the broader region.

The U.S. and Taiwan can anchor “democratic” drone production and strengthen the collective deterrence posture of the free world, Greene said.

“Fortunately for Taiwan, drones have significantly boosted defenders, even when facing overwhelming odds,” he added, referring to the war in Ukraine.

“Nothing will deter conflict more effectively than turning Taiwan into a hornet’s nest of air, surface, and subsurface drones.”

DRONE SPENDING

While Taiwan’s government has prioritized drones and other asymmetric systems, in May the opposition-dominated parliament passed only two-thirds of the T$1.25 trillion ($40 billion) in extra defense spending President Lai Ching-te had asked for, earmarking funds only for U.S. arms.

The government has now proposed a new, T$210 billion ($6.59 billion) package for surveillance, coastal attack and small unmanned surface drones to the end of 2031.

The Kuomintang (KMT), Taiwan’s main opposition party, this week proposed its own drone legislation, with a spending cap set at T$240 billion over six years, and annual spending capped at T$40 billion. Its plan would fund drones from the main budget rather than a special budget, which is what the government wants.

Speaking at the same forum as Greene, Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen, a senior member of the KMT, said parliament should “work together” on promoting the development of the drone industry.

“From Ukraine to Iran, the nature of international warfare has changed because of drones and unmanned vehicles,” said Lu, widely seen in political circles as a future presidential candidate.

Taichung is one of the centers of Taiwan’s drone industry, home to companies like Thunder Tiger and major government defense contractor Aerospace Industrial Development Corp (AIDC).

On Wednesday, President Lai Ching-te said the need for drones was pressing.

“Facing changes in the geopolitical situation and the evolution of modern warfare, building asymmetric combat capabilities is a national defense project that is a race against time,” he told a meeting of his Democratic Progressive Party.

Lai rejects Beijing’s sovereignty claims, saying only the island’s people can decide their future.

Word broke June 23 that the four-star general had submitted his retirement papers after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth personally requested that he resign, according to multiple reports. The Army has yet to provide a definitive reason for the change.

Donahue’s predecessor, Gen. Darryl Williams, held the post for nearly two and a half years. Maj. Gen. Christopher Norrie, Donahue’s deputy, took over in an acting capacity Thursday after a farewell ceremony at the Clay Kaserne headquarters in Wiesbaden, Germany.

Within days of the news, Gen. Oleksandr Syrskyi, Ukraine’s commander-in-chief, held a phone call with Donahue and published a farewell on his personal social media accounts, thanking the outgoing official for creating a partnership that he said delivered long-range systems, strengthened Ukraine’s air defenses and saved thousands of Ukrainian lives.

The two military leaders have worked together since the first days of Russia’s full-scale invasion, when Syrskyi, then chief of Ukraine’s Ground Forces, directed the defense of Kyiv and Donahue led the 82nd Airborne Division into southeastern Poland. Their partnership has only strengthened over the years, Syrskyi said.

“In the most challenging moments of our war for freedom and independence, Chris Donahue has proven himself not only as a military leader but also as a man of his word and honor,” Syrskyi wrote on Telegram.

“Ukrainian warriors will always hold General Donahue in the highest esteem.”

The farewell, meanwhile, lands at a fraught moment in U.S.-Ukraine relations. The Trump administration has questioned the value of Kyiv’s fight in the past, even as the U.S. military incorporates more Ukrainian battlefield know-how amid its war with Iran.

Now, the American general who built the Army’s support machinery for Ukraine is out, and Syrskyi’s public tribute shows Kyiv knows what it stands to lose.

According to two U.S. officials cited by CBS News, Donahue “had earned the ire” of Hegseth, and the two men met in person only once, in February 2025.

Asked about accusations that Hegseth forced the general out over a personal grudge, chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell provided no explanation.

“General officers and flag officers serve at the pleasure of the president and the secretary of war,” Parnell told the Daily Beast on Sunday. “They always have and always will.”

The departure extends a shake-up that has removed or replaced at least a dozen senior military leaders since Hegseth took office, with many of the moves made without public explanation.

U.S. President Donald Trump praised Donahue in January, when Fox News host Brian Kilmeade visited the general’s Wiesbaden headquarters and put Donahue on the phone with the president as his soldiers gathered around, according to Stars and Stripes.

“You’re doing a fantastic job,” Trump said. “Your reputation is great.”

Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine is among those seeking a presidential waiver so Donahue can retire at four stars, a rank he has held for fewer than the three years federal law requires to retire at that grade, two sources told CBS News.

The Wiesbaden headquarters itself is officially being downgraded to a three-star command, part of Hegseth’s push to cut the number of four-star billets, Stars and Stripes reported. U.S. Air Forces in Europe lost its fourth star in a similar move last year.

Donahue has said nothing publicly about the circumstances of his exit, and the subject went unmentioned at Thursday’s ceremony. He thanked his troops in his farewell remarks, instead.

“I love this team — it has been the honor of a lifetime to be a part of it. I’m proud of what we built and I have absolute confidence in what you will build next,” Donahue said, according to an Army release.

Donahue was promoted to four stars in December 2024, when he took over U.S. Army Europe and Africa and, with it, command of NATO’s Allied Land Command in Izmir, Turkey. The combined headquarters developed the Eastern Flank Deterrence Initiative, a warfighting concept that integrates allied land forces, drones and data under NATO’s defense plans for its eastern flank, according to the Army.

Donahue “saw the need to change, developed a plan, inspired others and built the processes to ensure it endures well beyond his tenure — and allies have bought in,” Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, NATO’s supreme allied commander Europe, said at the ceremony, according to the Army release.

Donahue was also the last American soldier to leave Afghanistan, photographed in night vision boarding the final C-17 out of Kabul in August 2021.

Brett McGurk, who served as special presidential envoy to the coalition against the Islamic State, told CBS News that Donahue is “among the most consequential commanders of his generation,” and retired Gen. Tony Thomas, a former head of U.S. Special Operations Command, called him a “generational leader.”

The ouster has drawn criticism from retired military leaders and lawmakers across the aisle.

The “decision to force [Donahue] out says far more about Hegseth than it does about General Donahue,” Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., wrote in a post on X last week, calling the move “yet another unforced error from a Secretary leading the Pentagon with bro-culture bravado rather than restraint, humility and careful stewardship of the finest fighting force in the world.”

Retired Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, a former commander of U.S. Army Europe, called Donahue the “best soldier in the Army today” in his own post. “Kremlin and terrorist organizations will be relieved to know that he will soon be gone.”

European officials fear the exit foreshadows a U.S. drawdown from the roughly 80,000 American troops on the continent, Newsweek reported.

The news came out just days after Hegseth criticized European allies over low defense spending and announced a six-month review of U.S. forces in Europe.

Retired Adm. William McRaven, who oversaw the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, wrote in The Atlantic that the dismissals “raise a real risk that senior officers will be overly cautious about providing their best advice and, therefore, that the chance of military miscalculation will grow dramatically.”

Lt. Gen. Kevin Admiral, who leads the Army’s III Armored Corps, is the frontrunner to permanently replace Donahue in Wiesbaden, a U.S. military official told Newsweek, though no final decision has been made and the nomination would require Senate confirmation.

Donahue will formally hand the NATO post to its deputy, British Lt. Gen. Jez Bennett, at a July 9 ceremony in Izmir, Turkey. Bennett will serve as acting commander until another American officer is assigned, Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe spokesman Col. Martin O’Donnell told CBS News.

Donahue closed his farewell remarks with a question.

“When people ask me, ‘Hey CD, what was it like to be a part of United States Army Europe and Africa?’ I only have to tell them how proud and unbelievably grateful I am to have been a part of the United States Army’s premier warfighting headquarters.”

Maj. Jason Watson was arrested by Capitol Police officers at approximately 1:15 p.m. local time for demonstrating on the House steps without a sitting member of Congress, Capitol Police told Military Times. Watson, an active-duty service member with a military career dating over 20 years, walked halfway up the steps of the House to its chained railing to hold a sign that read “Impeach Convict Remove.”

Watson was first escorted to the bottom of the steps by Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, who then left the area, causing the officers to arrest Watson under 22-1307 Crowding, Obstructing and Incommoding.

“When the Member of Congress left the area, our officers gave the man lawful orders to stop the illegal demonstration, or he would be arrested,” the spokesperson said. “The man refused our lawful orders.”

The spokesperson highlighted that there are other areas on the Capitol where demonstrating is allowed.

Watson stoically stood wearing his uniform on the steps for roughly one minute before officers first approached him. Another minute later, he was again approached by an officer, who spoke to him briefly and was nodded at by Watson, as shown in video footage posted by Removal Coalition founder Jessica Denson, who organized the demonstration.

Over a minute later, Watson was approached for a third time. But this time, he quietly and peacefully placed his sign down and was arrested by Capitol Police before being escorted off the steps by multiple officers as protesters chants of “Who do you serve? Who do you protect?” rang clear.

Prior to the protest, Watson held a press conference alongside Greene, Denson, constitutional lawyer Bruce Fein, Defenders of Our Republic and About Face Veterans, calling on Trump’s and Vice President JD Vance’s impeachment and removal from office.

Denson, who introduced Watson for his speech, said that Watson is currently on leave from his commission post as a logistics readiness officer in Poland. She said that he approached the Removal Coalition in February and asked them to create this event for him so that it would not be in “vain.”

“The question of whether or not his sacrifice, his risk of prosecution, his potential forfeiture of the benefits of an entire [over 20] year career in the military is worth it is whether you follow through with the pressure that is needed on Congress to impeach, convict and remove,” Denson said, calling on the audience and fellow protestors.

Active-duty service members are strictly prohibited from engaging in partisan political activities, especially while in uniform, per the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Those who do can face criminal or administrative punishment, such as imprisonment, loss of pay, dishonorable discharge and more.

“Service members must comply with all laws, regulations and policies governing conduct and the wear of the uniform,” an Air Force spokesperson told Military Times. “As commanders verify inappropriate actions, they are responsible for taking the necessary administrative and disciplinary actions to hold service members accountable.”

The Air Force confirmed that Watson’s title is staff officer with the current duty station of Bydgoszcz, Poland. He entered active duty in late May 2009.

In his speech before taking to the steps, Watson said he entered basic cadet training in the U.S. Air Force Academy in late June 2005 when he first spoke the oath of office, calling it foundational to the system of government and pertinent to ensure all officials owe allegiance to the Constitution instead of to a political party.

He said that the greatest threat to the country’s democratic republic was not a foreign one but domestic. “We the people” have played a part in getting the country into the “mess we are all in,” he said.

“For the past 18 months, we the people have allowed the highest levels of the executive branch of the federal government to violate our Constitution and their oaths to it with impunity,” Watson stated.

“When the President of the United States orders military action against foreign countries absent an emergency scenario where American interests are under imminent dire threat, as was done with Venezuela, Cuba and Iran, that’s an unconstitutional usurpation of Congress’s authority and a violation of the War Powers Clause,” he continued.

Watson said that the violations caused the death of 13 service members and injuries of hundreds more, and for that, Trump and Vance should be impeached, convicted and removed from office.

The major also pointed to other “violations,” such as Elon Musk being allowed to shut down large portions of the federal government and granted access to government databases as well as Trump directing the Department of Homeland Security to deny due process before illegally detaining people and sending them to CECOT, a foreign prison in El Salvador notorious for human rights abuses.

In Watson’s view, Trump “sponsors violence” on the American people engaged in their right to peacefully assemble and protest as protected by the First Amendment as a reason for the pair’s removal.

Watson said there are “innumerable more impeachable offenses” that he could list, including denying congressional oversight of immigrant detention centers, suing media, law firms and educational institutions, weaponizing the Department of Justice and attempting to reverse birthright citizenship.

Although Green did not speak at the conference, he was addressed by Watson who referred to himself as not a Democrat. A spokesperson for Green denied to comment on if the representative was aware that Watson would be arrested for not being escorted atop the House steps.

Green was the only member of Congress who voted to impeach Trump during his second term. The resolution was dismissed, with the House voting 237-140 to table the measure.

“I am calling on average Americans everywhere to peacefully exercise your First Amendment rights en masse every day until this administration is removed and our democratic republic is restored,” Watson stated.

“If just a nobody like me can take a stand for our Constitution and our democratic republic, then you can too. I hope you will join me in the defense of our republic,” he concluded.

Capitol Police said he is not being held.

A Spot Fund that was created to gather donations for Watson’s defense has garnered nearly $70,000 as of Thursday afternoon.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Watson is the first-ever active-duty commissioned officer in the military to publicly protest for the impeachment, conviction and removal of Trump and Vance.

The Direct Reporting Portfolio Manager for Unmanned Systems, or DRPM-UxS, will become “the single joint integrator for all unmanned and autonomous system programs” in the department, according to a June 29 memo the Pentagon made public Wednesday. Its director, yet to be named, will answer to Deputy Secretary of Defense Stephen Feinberg and oversee how the military develops, buys, fields and sustains unmanned systems in the air, on the ground and at sea.

The office’s reach is wide, including small drones in unmanned aircraft groups 1 through 3, unmanned boats, ground robots and counter-drone systems. It also covers the artificial intelligence and swarming software that guides them. Unmanned underwater vehicles will be handled jointly with the Pentagon’s submarine portfolio manager.

The office’s authority stops short of the Pentagon’s major defense acquisition programs, the big-ticket programs that already follow a separate approval process set in law. That means large airframes like the Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft and the Navy’s MQ-25 Stingray and MQ-4C Triton stay with the services, as does the Navy’s medium unmanned surface vessel.

Two existing organizations are now moving under the new office. Joint Interagency Task Force 401, which has led the fight against small aerial drones, will expand to countering unmanned threats in every domain. The Defense Autonomous Warfare Group, the Pentagon’s effort to mass-produce cheap drones, becomes a subordinate element. Neither will see its staff or positions relocated, the memo notes.

The new office inherits one of the largest spending increases in the Pentagon’s budget. The department’s latest budget request set aside $53.6 billion for autonomous drone platforms, part of what Pentagon officials called an unprecedented commitment to drones and counter-drone systems.

Separately, the memo names the Defense Innovation Unit, the Pentagon’s link to commercial tech firms, as the single point of contact for the new portfolio.

The office holds significant power. It will act as the milestone decision authority for its programs, the official who decides whether a weapon advances through development, and it will take precedence on drone acquisition matters behind only Hegseth and Feinberg.

The office can act as the top buying official on its contracts, order the services to shift money between programs through the Pentagon comptroller, and stop any system from reaching the field.

The move also centralizes congressional engagement through the DRPM-UxS, requiring every part of the department to clear its drone-related plans with the office before contacting lawmakers.

The memo says the office’s programs, jobs and people are exempt from the department’s hiring freezes, personnel reductions and reductions in force, and gives its chief the power to hire directly. The memo also lays out a staffing timeline. Once a director is named, hiring is to begin within 30 days, an organizational plan is due within 60 and a full list of the programs moving over is due within 90.

The reorganization is the latest step in Hegseth’s push to field weapons faster, a broader “speed to delivery” initiative that has already drawn warnings from the government’s top auditor.

A Government Accountability Office report released Tuesday found the Pentagon’s independent testing office, which Hegseth cut from 126 civilian jobs to 30 last year, now watches just 15 of about 110 active programs on one fast-track buying pathway, Defense News reported.

It is the latest of several direct reporting portfolio managers Hegseth’s team has stood up to pull the department’s top priorities under Feinberg, and the widest in scope. What this all means for the drone programs already underway inside the services is not spelled out in the memo.

The Army has not given a reason for the leadership change. Maj. Gen. Christopher Norrie will serve as acting commander until Donahue’s successor is nominated by the Senate and confirmed by the president, according to the Army.

“I love this team — it has been the honor of a lifetime to be a part of it. I’m proud of what we built and I have absolute confidence in what you will build next,” Donahue said. “So, when people ask me, ‘Hey CD, what was it like to be a part of United States Army Europe and Africa?’ I only have to tell them how proud and unbelievably grateful I am to have been a part of the United States Army’s premier warfighting headquarters.”

The West Point graduate previously lead the XVIII Airborne Corps and the 82nd Airborne Division. In 2021, he oversaw the U.S.’s withdrawal from Afghanistan.

A night vision photo of the general stepping onto the final C-17 out of Kabul became an emblematic image of the decades-long war.

Donahue’s departure comes amid sweeping leadership changes at the Pentagon. Since assuming office, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has removed or replaced at least a dozen senior leaders.

Vietnam Veterans of America, a national veterans service organization, argued Thursday that the flag “cannot serve as a positive symbol” for veterans who fought against communism. The flag shows a gold star on a red background — imagery reminiscent of multiple communist movements, VVA said in a public statement.

“For Vietnam veterans especially, the striking resemblance to the flag flown by the Democratic Republic of Vietnam during the Vietnam War, and seen in all the images of North Vietnamese tanks invading Saigon on April 30, 1975, is impossible to ignore,” the group wrote.

A congressional effort is underway to designate the Honor and Remember flag as a national symbol of remembrance for service members and veterans who died as a result of their military service. VVA said the proposal was recently attached to the fiscal 2027 National Defense Authorization Act, an annual, must-pass defense policy and budget bill.

The proposal was originally introduced by Reps. Don Davis, D-N.C., Jen Kiggans, R-Va., and Glenn Thompson, R-Pa. The bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus endorsed the measure in February.

The amendment mandates that the flag be displayed at federal sites, including the U.S. Capitol, White House and national cemeteries on Memorial Day, Veterans Day, Independence Day and other holidays.

“The brave men and women who laid down their lives in service to our nation deserve our deepest gratitude and lasting remembrance,” Kiggans said in a February statement. “While we can never fully repay the debt we owe them, we must always ensure their legacy is honored.”

The flag was created by George Lutz after the death of his son, Army Cpl. George “Tony” Lutz, who was killed by an enemy sniper in Fallujah, Iraq, in 2005. Since its creation, 29 states have adopted the Honor and Remember flag as an official symbol.

VVA National President Tom Burke argued the idea was not adequately discussed before being proposed for a national designation. The American flag already represents the sacrifices of Americans who have died in defense of the nation, he contended.

“Rather than creating confusion and strife regarding official national symbols by introducing new federally recognized commemorative flags, VVA encourages Congress to direct its efforts towards policies that directly benefit Gold Star families, survivors, wounded veterans, and those currently serving,” Burke said.

The U.S. Army is moving ahead to meet the Defense Department’s direction to cut the number of military moves.

Army officials announced they’re cutting more than 12,000 relocations in fiscal 2026 and more than 13,600 in fiscal 2027, in an effort to provide more stability to soldiers and their families.

The Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force haven’t established specific numbers of military moves targeted for reduction in 2026 or 2027, service officials told Military Times. All noted that their reviews are ongoing, and key milestones for the Navy and Marine Corps are tied to implementation in 2027.

Pentagon officials ordered the military service branches in May 2025 to cut by half the amount of money spent on Permanent Change of Station, or PCS, moves by fiscal 2030. DOD spends about $5 billion every year on these moves, which include the physical moves of household goods, as well as allowances and other entitlements related to moving.

It’s not just DoD that spends money on PCS moves.

Many service members face financial burdens every time they move, and they’re generally uprooted every two to three years. A recently released Military Family Advisory Network survey conducted in late 2025 found that 60% of active duty families who had made a PCS move in the previous two years paid more than $1,000 out of pocket, above what they were reimbursed. That was an increase over the survey conducted in 2023, when 45% reported paying that much out of pocket.

Half of those reported the extra cost was attributed to re-purchasing consumable supplies that couldn’t be shipped. They also cited utility deposits, rental deposits, hotel stays, rental cars and new vehicle purchases.

Pre-move costs like house hunting and preparing their home for a move added to the burden, said Gabby L’Esperance, vice president of research and evaluation for the Military Family Advisory Network.

The financial burden is just one consequence of being uprooted, with moves contributing to spousal unemployment and difficulty finding child care, in addition to other challenges.

‘Much-needed predictability’

Defense officials outlined that the services will target “discretionary moves,” such as PCS moves within the United States, overseas and individual service member travel. The services are directed to reduce these discretionary move budgets by 10% in fiscal year 2027, 30% in fiscal 2028, 40% in fiscal 2029 and 50% by fiscal 2030. The reductions will be based on the fiscal 2026 budget, adjusted for inflation.

DoD specified the percentage of reductions in the budget, not the number of moves.

Do military families really need to move so much?

In announcing the relocation reductions on June 15, Army personnel officials said various efforts are underway, such as incentives for stabilization to reduce unnecessary moves. Some pilot programs, like the Armor Crewman MOS (19K) stabilization at Fort Riley, Kansas, and Fort Bliss, Texas, offer bonuses for certain soldiers to remain at their current locations.

Among other things, Army officials are undertaking a broad review of professional military education to find ways to reduce PCS requirements. Their effort emphasizes expanding distance learning options and using options to allow soldiers to complete courses without having to relocate.

Their PCS reduction efforts are part of their larger Human Resource Continuous Transformation initiatives. The shift will keep warfighting formations intact longer, officials said, and will help them build “more lethal, cohesive teams, boost overall readiness, and provide much-needed predictability for soldiers and their families.”

The Army’s long-standing High School Stabilization program, which allows families to stay at one duty station through a child’s senior year, benefited about 4,000 soldiers in the past year, officials said. Another program, the Stabilization Retention Option, allowed about 6,200 soldiers to stay at their duty station in fiscal 2025.

The Navy recognizes the importance of reducing PCS costs while maintaining sailor well-being and operational readiness, said Navy spokesman Lt. Cmdr. Stuart Phillips. Officials are “reviewing policies, procedures, and efficiencies to maintain lethality, readiness and overall effectiveness” in line with the DoD’s direction to reduce the amount of money spent on PCS moves, he said.

The Marine Corps’ ability to reduce moves “is constrained by the need to ensure the right Marines are in the right billets at the right time,” said Marine Corps spokesman Maj. Jacoby Getty.

“Every PCS move is tied to a validated operational requirement, including unit readiness, force distribution, professional military development, and global mission demands,” Getty said. “The Marine Corps operates with a highly specialized force structure and limited personnel inventory, which requires deliberate movement of talent across the force to meet operational requirements worldwide.”

Air Force officials said they are reviewing their internal assignment policies to identify efficiencies. They added that their objective is to “optimize resources without compromising our global power-project, space operations and mission-generation capabilities.”