Pentagon clarifies Hegseth’s ‘putting hands on recruits’ statement

The Defense Department has added more context to provocative comments Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth made about aggressive and even physical troop training in his address to the military’s general officers and admirals in late September.

In a letter responding to queries from a coalition of lawmakers, Anthony Tata, the Pentagon’s undersecretary for personnel and readiness said that “hazing and bullying have no place in the U.S. military,” despite comments from Hegseth that appeared to blur the lines on acceptable training.

“The definition of toxic has been turned upside down, and we’re correcting that. That’s why today, at my direction we’re undertaking a full review of the department’s definitions of so-called toxic leadership, bullying and hazing, to empower leaders to enforce standards without fear of retribution or second guessing,” Hegseth said in his remarks.

“Of course, you can’t do, like, nasty bullying and hazing. We’re talking about words like bullying and hazing and toxic. They’ve been weaponized and bastardized inside our formations, undercutting commanders and NCOs. No more. Setting, achieving and maintaining high standards is what you all do. And if that makes me toxic, then so be it.”

Drill instructors, Hegseth said, would be empowered “to instill healthy fear in new recruits.”

“Yes, they can shark attack, they can toss bunks, they can swear, and yes, they can put their hands on recruits,” he said. “This does not mean they can be reckless or violate the law, but they can use tried and true methods to motivate new recruits, to make them the warriors they need to be.”

In his response letter, Tata put guardrails around the use of physical contact with military recruits, saying it would be used to ensure the safety of personnel.

“Drill instructors have the difficult task of shaping civilians into soldiers, sailors, airmen, guardians, and Marines,” he wrote. “Basic training involves real world scenarios and weapons. When the safety of the recruit or others is jeopardized, drill instructors may take appropriate actions to ensure the safety of the recruits.”

The response letter did not define the scope of “appropriate actions” or what would determine whether a drill instructor’s physical response to a recruit was justified. But Tata did stress that Hegseth’s effort to reevaluate definitions of terms including “bullying” and “hazing” would, he said, make it easier to identify and respond to truly objectionable behavior.

“What the department is trying to get after is the unduly burdensome complaints system in the military that undermines leaders’ effectiveness,” he wrote. “By providing definitions that focus on the egregious misconduct described in your letter, leaders will be empowered to more easily address inappropriate conduct that does not constitute hazing or bullying while focusing resources on preventing and addressing incidents of hazing and bullying.”

Rep. Judy Chu, the California congresswoman who led the group of 28 Democratic lawmakers in requesting responses from Hegseth regarding his plans to change recruit training and hazing definitions, has a personal connection to the issue: Her nephew, Lance Cpl. Harry Lew, died by suicide in Afghanistan in 2011 after a night of physical hazing and abuse by fellow Marines in punishment for falling asleep on post.

“We want a strong military where people feel that they’re unified in their desire to protect this country,” Chu told Military Times in a November interview. “Not where they are torturing one another to the point where certain people feel like they have to kill themselves.”

The most recently compiled report on military hazing, from 2024, shows that about one in five hazing and bullying complaints is substantiated, and that reporting numbers, while on a recent upswing, are relatively low, with 138 hazing complaints for that year. The Marine Corps has accounted for a disproportionately high share of hazing allegations since congressionally mandated reporting began in 2020.

Tata maintained in the letter that a “clearer definition” of hazing and bullying following the Hegseth-ordered review of definitions would increase the percentage of substantiated complaints. He also cited a new database under development by the Pentagon, thanks to funding provided in 2025 to collect and compile hazing complaints more effectively.

“Historically, these data were collected manually, and some details of the complaints were not reported to the department,” he wrote.

Pentagon officials did not officially have an update on the definitions review, which was initially expected to take 30 days, but was affected by the October government shutdown.

In a statement to Military Times following the Pentagon’s response letter, Chu was cautious.

“I am pleased that the Department of Defense has responded to our letter but remain concerned about its decision to change the definition of hazing and processes to handle hazing, bullying and harassment complaints,” she said. ”I will continue to lead my congressional colleagues in ensuring the dignity and safety of all service members and recruits and that the department accurately fulfills its annual reporting requirements to Congress. No one should have to endure abuse and hazing while honorably serving our country.”