There was no classified information: Gabbard on Yemen strikes messaging leaks

WASHINGTON, DC: Several of President Donald Trump’s senior national security officials, with backing from a key Senate Republican, placed responsibility on Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth for transmitting potentially classified information in a group chat discussing US military strikes in Yemen, which included a journalist as a participant, CNN reported.

During a hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard firmly denied that the messages contained classified material. Under scrutiny from Democratic senators, both officials asserted that no intelligence information requiring classification had been shared in the chat.

“There were no classified or intelligence equities that were included in that chat group at any time,” Gabbard testified. Ratcliffe, echoing this stance, maintained that no sensitive intelligence information from the CIA or the broader intelligence community was involved. However, when questioned about whether operational details concerning forthcoming strikes that Hegseth reportedly shared were classified, both officials deferred to the defence secretary, citing his authority to determine classification.

“With respect to the assertions and the allegations that there was strike packages or targeting information or things that relate to DOD, as I pointed out, the Secretary of Defence is the original classification authority for determining whether something is classified or not, and as I’ve understood from media reports, the Secretary of Defence has said the information was not classified,” Ratcliffe told lawmakers.

When asked whether such details should be considered classified, Gabbard also deferred, stating, “I defer to the Secretary of Defence and the National Security Council on that question,” as per reports by CNN.

The conversation signaled a widening effort to shift scrutiny away from intelligence agencies and onto Hegseth, one of Trump’s cabinet members. While the messages in the group chat largely revolved around general foreign policy discussions on the March strikes against Iran-backed militants, the texts reportedly sent by Hegseth–including specifics about US attack targets, weapons, and sequencing–have drawn the most concern.

According to multiple current and former defence officials, any discussion of an attack’s timing, targets, or weapons systems is typically classified due to the potential risks such disclosures pose to US military personnel. Signal, the encrypted messaging platform used for the discussion, is a commercial application that is not authorised for handling classified government communications.

During the hearing, Republican Sen. Tom Cotton, chairman of the Intelligence Committee, suggested that Gabbard and Ratcliffe were making a distinction between military intelligence classified under the defence secretary’s authority and intelligence controlled by the civilian intelligence community.

“They testified–correct me if I’m wrong–there’s no intelligence community classified information,” Cotton said.

“That’s correct,” Ratcliffe and Gabbard confirmed. “I can again confirm that with respect to the communications that were related as to me, there was no classified information,” Ratcliffe reiterated.

Hegseth, addressing reporters on Monday evening, dismissed concerns that war plans had been discussed over text, despite the Trump administration’s earlier acknowledgment that the messages were authentic.

“Nobody was texting war plans and that’s all I have to say about that,” Hegseth said when asked why the information was inadvertently shared with The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg. Speaking at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam in Hawaii, Hegseth also criticised the journalist, calling him “deceitful and highly discredited.”

Trump, when asked about the situation on Tuesday, stated, “There was no classified information, as I understand it,” but did not specify who provided him with that assessment.

Gabbard initially declined to confirm whether she had participated in the group chat, citing an ongoing National Security Council review. However, she later responded to specific questions based on her recollections of the conversation.

Ratcliffe and Gabbard both claimed they did not remember any discussions of operational planning, though Gabbard later acknowledged that the group had engaged in “a discussion around targets in general.” According to The Atlantic, messages later confirmed as authentic by the NSC showed Hegseth providing “precise information about weapons packages, targets, and timing.”

The controversy may ultimately hinge on how Hegseth’s classification authority is interpreted. As defence secretary, he has the power to declassify certain materials, though Ratcliffe stated on Tuesday that he was unaware if Hegseth had done so in this case.

Neither Gabbard nor Ratcliffe directly criticised Hegseth or indicated that they held him responsible for the ongoing debate over the messages. Ratcliffe, in particular, attempted to draw a distinction between intelligence community practices and Pentagon procedures, emphasising that Signal is approved for certain government use but not for classified material. However, he conceded that “pre-decisional strike deliberation should be conducted through classified channels.”

Gabbard repeatedly claimed not to recall specific details of the chat. However, some Republican lawmakers have pointed the blame directly at Hegseth.

“I think the most accountable, or the most guilty person is the secretary of defence because he put in all the highly classified information,” Republican Rep. Don Bacon, a member of the House Armed Services Committee and former Air Force Brigadier General, told CNN. (ANI)