A chilling warning from the Pentagon has reignited concerns about extremism within the U.S. military after two deadly attacks on New Year’s Day. The incidents, involving a former Army serviceman and an active-duty Green Beret, have prompted renewed scrutiny of the military’s approach to identifying and mitigating extremist threats.
On January 1, Shamsud-Din Jabbar, a former Army serviceman, drove a pickup truck into a crowded street in New Orleans, killing 14 people. Authorities discovered that Jabbar had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State and was carrying an ISIS flag in his vehicle.
In a separate incident on the same day, Matthew Livelsberger, an active-duty Green Beret, detonated a Tesla Cybertruck outside the Trump Hotel in Las Vegas, injuring several people. Livelsberger’s motives remain unclear, but his actions have intensified concerns about the potential for violence among military personnel.
Both men had previously served at Fort Bragg and were deployed to Afghanistan at the same time, but investigators have not found any evidence linking the two attackers.
Bishop Garrison, author of the Pentagon’s 2021 report on military extremism, expressed frustration over the lack of action on his recommendations. Garrison, a former White House liaison to the Defense Department under Barack Obama, had outlined strategies to combat radicalization among service members.
“The events on New Year’s Day highlight the unresolved dangers posed by extremist influences within the military,” Garrison said. “As far as I know, there was never any implementation of our policies.”
The 2021 report aimed to address the risks of radical ideologies within the ranks, particularly among veterans, but critics have accused it of focusing too heavily on political affiliations rather than behaviors indicative of extremism.
The attacks have sparked fierce debate over how to tackle extremism in the military. President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, has criticized previous anti-extremism initiatives, including Garrison’s work, as politically biased and ineffective.
Hegseth accused Garrison of using the report to target Trump supporters, calling him “a hardcore social justice Democrat” and “a 1619 Project activist.” Hegseth added, “This isn’t about protecting the military; it’s about advancing a political agenda.”
Hegseth himself has faced accusations of extremism. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) alleged that he was removed from National Guard duty during President Joe Biden’s inauguration because of his Christian-themed tattoos, which she claimed could mark him as an insider threat.
Hegseth dismissed Warren’s accusations as “anti-Christian bigotry,” emphasizing that his tattoos symbolize his faith and have no connection to extremist ideologies.
The incidents have exposed deep divides over how to address extremism in the military. Some advocates call for stricter screening and training programs to identify radical influences, while others warn that such measures could unfairly target certain groups or alienate service members.
Critics of current anti-extremism efforts argue that focusing on political ideologies rather than behaviors undermines the integrity of the military’s approach. “This is not about politics; it’s about protecting our armed forces,” said a senior military official. “We need solutions that prioritize accountability and fairness.”
Garrison emphasized the need for systemic changes, including improved screening processes and greater oversight for veterans transitioning back into civilian life. “These tragedies underscore the urgency of action,” he said. “We owe it to our service members and the American people to ensure the safety and integrity of our military.”
The Pentagon faces a delicate balancing act: safeguarding national security while preserving the rights and freedoms of those who serve. The attacks in New Orleans and Las Vegas highlight the risks of unchecked extremism and the challenges of addressing insider threats.
Hegseth, while acknowledging the need for vigilance, insists that any new policies must avoid politicization. “Our military deserves better than a witch hunt,” he said. “We need solutions that unite, not divide, our armed forces.”
As the nation grapples with these issues, the Pentagon is under pressure to revisit its approach to extremism. The events of New Year’s Day serve as a stark reminder of the potential for violence within the ranks and the need for vigilance in protecting both the military and the public.
With a new administration taking the reins, the future of anti-extremism efforts remains uncertain. For now, the focus is on finding a balanced, effective strategy that addresses the threat without alienating the very people sworn to defend the nation.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login