Pete Hegseth, Donald Trump’s choose to guide the Division of Protection, sat in entrance of a display screen with the headline: “Study Disproves Military Extremism Problem.”
“They knew this was a sham,” Hegseth mentioned, referring to Protection Secretary Lloyd Austin and different navy leaders. “Then they do the study, which confirms what we all know.”
However The Related Press has discovered that the research, “Prohibited Extremist Activities in the U.S. Department of Defense” carried out by the Institute for Protection Analyses, relied on outdated knowledge, deceptive analyses and ignored proof that pointed to the other conclusion.
The truth is, the AP discovered that the IDA report’s authors didn’t use newer knowledge that was supplied to it, and as an alternative based mostly considered one of its foundational conclusions on Jan. 6 arrest figures that had been greater than two years outdated by the point of the report’s public launch.
Consequently, the report grossly undercounted the variety of navy and veterans arrested for the Jan. 6 assault and offered a deceptive image of the severity of the rising downside, the AP has discovered.
Spike in navy extremism
The variety of service members and veterans who radicalize make up a tiny fraction of a share level of the tens of millions and tens of millions who’ve honorably served their nation. But their influence could be massive.
Ordered by Austin after the Jan. 6 rebellion, the IDA analysis was revealed quietly simply earlier than Christmas 2023 — almost 18 months late and with no announcement. Its key suggestion: the DOD ought to “not overreact and draw too large of a target” in its anti-extremism efforts, regardless of Austin’s promise to assault the issue head-on within the wake of Jan. 6.
However IDA’s researchers based mostly a key discovering on an undercount of navy service members and veterans who participated within the Jan. 6 rebellion. The IDA — a longtime associate to the Pentagon that has acquired greater than a billion {dollars} in contracts over the previous decade to supply analysis and strategic consulting to the nation’s navy — based mostly this conclusion on arrests made as of Jan. 1, 2022, the yr instantly following the assault. As of that date, 82 of the 704 folks arrested had navy backgrounds, or 11.6% of the entire arrests, IDA reported.
However within the months and years that adopted, the variety of arrestees with a navy background almost tripled.
IDA’s report states that its analysis was carried out from June 2021 by June 2022. By June 2022, the variety of energetic or former navy members arrested had grown by almost 50%, in accordance with the identical dataset IDA cited from the Program on Extremism at George Washington College. When IDA’s report was revealed a yr and a half later, in December 2023, 209 folks with navy backgrounds who attended the rebellion had been arrested, or 15.2% of all arrests.
That has since grown to 18%, in accordance with knowledge collected by the Nationwide Consortium for the Examine of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, or START, on the College of Maryland. It represents a major statistical enhance, and rises above the overall inhabitants estimates IDA cited amongst its reasoning for recommending the Pentagon not overreact. START’s analysis was additionally funded by DOD, and different federal businesses.
Extra broadly, as the AP reported in an investigation revealed final month, greater than 480 folks with a navy background had been accused of ideologically pushed extremist crimes from 2017 by 2023, together with the greater than 230 arrested in reference to the Jan. 6 rebellion, in accordance with knowledge collected and analyzed by START. Although these numbers mirror a small fraction of those that have served within the navy — and Austin, the present protection secretary, has mentioned that extremism is just not widespread within the U.S. navy — AP’s investigation discovered that plots involving folks with navy backgrounds had been extra prone to contain mass casualties.
The IDA’s 199-page report conceded that there was “some indication” that the radicalization numbers within the veterans group might be “slightly higher and may be growing” however mentioned its evaluate discovered “no evidence” that was the case amongst energetic obligation troops.
The truth is, knowledge present that since 2017 each service members and veterans are radicalizing at a sooner fee than folks with out navy coaching. Lower than 1% of the grownup inhabitants is presently serving within the U.S. navy, however energetic obligation navy members make up a disproportionate 3.2% of the extremist circumstances START researchers discovered between 2017 and 2022.
Even that quantity is regarded as an undercount, in accordance with Michael Jensen, START’s lead researcher. He famous that the navy makes use of administrative discharges to quietly take away extremists from the ranks — such circumstances don’t present up in START’s knowledge as a result of the navy doesn’t launch details about them.
Jensen, who was consulted by IDA for its report and is cited in it 24 instances, mentioned utilizing the Jan. 6 arrest knowledge alone, even when calculated appropriately, was not a sound method to measuring extremism amongst energetic obligation navy.
“J6 is an absolutely terrible event to use to try to estimate the scope of extremism in the active service population since most active services members would not have had the opportunity to participate in that event even if they wanted to,” Jensen mentioned.
Jensen’s statement is underscored by information obtained by AP. One grievance filed to the DOD Inspector Normal’s whistleblower hotline on March 17, 2021, and obtained by a Freedom of Data Act request, mentioned an energetic obligation service member in Germany expressed an curiosity in heading to Washington for Jan. 6, however mentioned he wasn’t capable of go due to his navy service.
Screenshots from Fb supplied with the grievance present he informed his cousin, “I would join you but my current tour is in Germany,” and mentioned in one other put up on Jan. 3, 2021, he was contemplating shopping for a airplane ticket. The grievance mentioned the servicemember’s cousin was later arrested.
Unhealthy knowledge, false assertions
IDA’s researchers had been supplied START’s knowledge, Jensen mentioned, which is broadly thought of probably the most complete have a look at the difficulty. IDA’s report even known as it “perhaps the best effort to date” in accumulating knowledge on extremists within the navy. However IDA by no means adopted as much as get it, he mentioned.
“We showed them data from over 30 years when they visited with us, so they knew the data were out there to look at a longer timespan,” Jensen mentioned. “We offered it, and offered to help in any other way we could, but we never heard from them again after our one and only meeting.”
The IDA spokesperson mentioned its researchers relied on stories START revealed that summarized components of their knowledge by 2021. These stories and the info that underlie all of them discovered “a significant uptick” in such circumstances, however IDA failed to notice these findings in its conclusions.
And in some components of the report, IDA cited START’s numbers from 2018, which had been by then years outdated, and which didn’t totally mirror a major enhance that started the earlier yr. A footnote says there’s newer knowledge, however fails to say Jensen’s supply to supply entry.
AP additionally discovered a number of cases the place IDA made assertions that had been factually inaccurate or incomplete, resulting in questions concerning the rigor of its work, and about whether or not the Pentagon offered satisfactory entry to info.
As one instance, IDA states that “IDA found no evidence of participation in violent extremist events by DOD civilians or defense contractor employees.”
However AP obtained information displaying a number of allegations about Jan. 6 alone in opposition to contractors and a civilian worker.
One, made to the Inspector Normal’s workplace on Jan 8, 2021, almost three years earlier than the report was revealed, mentioned a contractor on the Joint Synthetic Intelligence Middle known as in to conferences from the protest on Jan. 6, and had unfold conspiracy theories together with QAnon in addition to others involving synthetic intelligence and the DOD. This grievance resulted within the contractor’s termination.
As well as, there have been broadly publicized circumstances of protection contractors who had been accused of collaborating in Jan. 6, together with a Navy contractor who was a Nazi sympathizer and a former Particular Forces soldier who was a navy contractor.
And in one of the notable violent extremist occasions within the years previous to Jan. 6, a protection contractor with a safety clearance participated within the Unite the Proper rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017. Michael Miselis, a member of the violent white supremacist group Rise Above Motion, pleaded responsible to federal rioting fees.
The circumstances collectively increase questions concerning the rigor of the IDA’s report and why it could make such assertions. IDA didn’t clarify why it missed these broadly reported circumstances.
Heidi Beirich, co-founder of the World Challenge Towards Hate and Extremism, mentioned the AP’s evaluate confirmed the IDA report was “a mess,” with “bad data, unsubstantiated conclusions, and false assertions.”
That Hegseth, a former Nationwide Guardsman who himself had been flagged as a possible insider risk for a tattoo on his bicep that has been linked to extremist teams, doesn’t see the significance of rooting out extremism within the ranks is a catastrophe, she mentioned.
“It’s a shame that a shoddy report by the Pentagon gives an opening to views like Hegseth’s and will perpetuate a head-in-the-sand approach to a serious national security issue,” mentioned Beirich, an knowledgeable in extremist actions who has testified earlier than Congress about extremism within the navy.
“Too many terrorist attacks have been perpetrated by active-duty military and veterans, and ignoring this problem just makes the American people less safe,” she mentioned. “Making light of the problem is ultimately a threat to the security of the American people, and politicizing the problem, which Republicans have done over recent years, means more violence.”