Pete Hegseth’s confirmation hearing at the Senate Armed Services Committee was notable for the maelstrom of unfounded criticism from women Members aimed at his previous remarks about women in the military services. But among the slew of viral clips, it’s a quieter exchange with Senator Jeanne Shaheen that went overlooked, but could prove to be extremely significant. As the new Secretary sets his agenda, it could be a pivotal moment for the future of U.S. military and defense policy, and in particular, the way we implement the 2017 Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) Act.
The WPS Act of 2017 directed the Pentagon to promote “meaningful participation of women in mediation and negotiation processes seeking to prevent, mitigate, or resolve violent conflict.” In response to Senator Shaheen’s query, Hegseth indicated a familiarity with WPS, and later said he supported one of its key initiatives, Female Engagement Teams. Those units provided crucial support to warfighters in counterinsurgency operations by gaining access to, trust with, and sometimes intelligence from women in nations where the US military operates.
When asked if he would support WPS and bolster its funding, Hegseth committed to reviewing the program to ensure that it “aligns with America First national security priorities, meritocracy, lethality, and readiness.” He said he would advance WPS “if it advances American interests.” No doubt he will also review its utility for the warfighter, both male and female.
The exchange with Shaheen may be a turning point for WPS and an opportunity to regain bipartisan support and oversight, the lack of which has hampered WPS funding and focus. When President Trump signed the WPS Act of 2017 into law, his administration continued the work of predecessors and laid the groundwork for a targeted WPS approach aligned with national interests. This included extending vital support for women and girls in conflict zones, advancing programs to prevent sexual harassment, assault, and violence within the military, and pushing for similar reforms among U.S. partners abroad.
However, the Biden administration’s WPS strategy and eleventh-hour update to the Defense WPS implementation plan show how the agenda has veered away from its original purpose. These documents reveal a shift in focus to an expansive and ideological view of gender identity and equity. For example, the Biden DoD plan mandates an “intersectional” approach, a combination of critical race theory and critical gender theory. It argues that social issues such as racism and gender inequality are embedded in systems of power, including military institutions. To the radical left, such systems must be dismantled from within.
Simply put, the Biden administration’s direction detracts from readiness by inserting divisive mandates rather than keeping the focus entirely on targeted, achievable outcomes for the warfighter and the nation. What’s more, the Biden plan calls for using these critical theories to hire advisors, train the US force, analyze military plans and programs, and promote the ideas in other nations’ militaries through US security cooperation.
Hegseth faces two choices over Biden’s misguided WPS agenda. The Biden administration lamentably subsumed WPS under its controversial national gender strategy. Understandably, Hegseth’s team will be tempted to eviscerate WPS as so much “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” DEI, which Trump has pledged to root out of the agencies.
But there is another way.
Hegseth should direct his team to scrutinize the content of the various WPS engagements, training programs, advisory roles, workforce structures, and gender analyses that have been promoted by the Biden administration. They must then ensure that WPS strengthens military partnerships and avoids missteps such as advancing social policies out of step with the 2017 WPS Act and the agreed UN Security Council WPS agenda, now in its 25th year.
Politically, this is an outstanding opportunity for Trump, Hegseth, and Congressional Republicans. Now that he’s confirmed, reviving WPS will help refute Hegseth’s detractors and show his support for the military women and men he leads. By reviewing WPS with dispatch and aligning it with the Trump administration’s priorities of lethality, meritocracy, and readiness, the incoming DOD leadership can give WPS what Biden could not: bipartisan support and adequate funding. A focused WPS effort that brings women and girls back to the center of the agenda would advance Trump’s vision for the U.S. military and its role in the world.
For their part, WPS advocates in Congress, the military, civil society, and academia can help by de-politicizing the issue as the Pentagon conducts and implements its review and revisions. In his quiet exchange with Senator Shaheen, Hegseth voiced commitment to re-evaluating the WPS agenda. This offers hope that the focus of WPS will return to the core mission of securing American interests and preserving peace through strength.
Susan Yoshihara is founder and president of the American Council on Women Peace and Security, adjunct professor at the Institute of World Politics and editor of the forthcoming book Women Peace and Security (WPS) in U.S. Security Cooperation.