Yemen war plans: What did Trump aides leak to The Atlantic in Signal chat?

Yemen war plans: What did Trump aides leak to The Atlantic in Signal chat?

The Atlantic magazine’s editor-in-chief revealed in an article published on Monday that Trump administration officials had provided him with important military information about the US’s March 15 airstrikes against Yemen’s Houthi rebel targets.

Jeffrey Goldberg, a veteran journalist, said that US government officials accidentally added him to a texting channel where they mapped out the strike.

The US government has confirmed that the message thread is authentic. Criticism of the Trump administration have alleged that senior officials were responsible for a significant security breach in the wake of the incident.

Here is more about what happened, what was revealed, how US officials have responded, and what’s next:

What transpired?

In his opening article for The Atlantic on Monday, Goldberg wrote, “The world discovered shortly before 2 p.m. eastern time]18:00 GMT] on March 15 that the United States was bombing Houthi targets across Yemen.

“I, however, knew two hours before the first bombs exploded that the attack might be coming. The secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, texted me the war plan at 11:44am [15:44 GMT] to make sure I knew this.

What transpired is shown below.

On March 11, Goldberg received a connection request from someone named Michael Waltz on Signal, an encrypted messaging service. The US national security adviser is Michael “Mike” Waltz.

Goldberg claimed that Waltz was trying to connect with him at first, but that he did not initially believe that. He thought it could be someone pretending to be Waltz, who would attempt to get information out of Goldberg.

The editor continued, though, that he had previously met Waltz. Given the contentious relationship Trump’s administration has with journalists, Goldberg wrote, “I didn’t find it particularly odd that he might be reaching out to me. I did think it might be something.”

Goldberg accepted the request, still hoping this was the real Waltz, he wrote.

On Signal, Goldberg was added to the “Houthi PC small group,” which was posted on March 13. According to Goldberg’s prior reporting on the US government, PC here meant Principals Committee, a committee made up of senior cabinet members and typically concerned with security issues.

Who was involved in the group chat?

According to Goldberg, the group had 18 members overall. messages from the group, besides Waltz, were:

  • Someone identified as MAR which Goldberg presumed was Secretary of State Marco “Antonio” Rubio.
  • Trump’s vice president, JD Vance, was identified as the identity of the person.
  • Tulsi Gabbard, the US director of national intelligence, was allegedly TG, according to Goldberg.
  • An account with the name Scott B, presumably Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent “or someone spoofing his identity”, wrote Goldberg.
  • Pete Hegseth, allegedly the US defense secretary, was referred to as a user.
  • Someone called John Ratcliffe, who allegedly served as the CIA’s director.
  • Another user named Brian. Who is it that Goldberg assumed to be? Waltz’s chief of staff is Brian McCormack, while Brian Hughes serves as the spokesman for the National Security Council. It is unclear if the Brian on the group was either of them.
  • Who was identified as “SM,” according to Goldberg as Homeland Security Advisor Stephen Miller.
  • Joe Kent, the name of Trump’s nominee to lead the National Counterterrorism Center, was identified as the individual.

What exactly did the military chat reveal?

Waltz briefed the group that this was a team that had been set up “for coordination on Houthis,” and that his deputy was putting together “a tiger team at deputies/agency Chief of Staff level” following the meeting in the Sit Room this morning for action items and will send that out later this evening. The White House’s Sit Room, or Situation Room, is a complex in intelligence management where the most recent details about a military or political situation are shared.

Waltz then requested the members of the chat to name a point of contact from their team to coordinate with Waltz’s team over the next days and the group members began to name individuals from their teams.

Waltz wrote: “Team, you should have a statement of conclusions with taskings per the President’s guidance this morning in your high side inboxes” at 8:05 am (12:05 GMT) on March 14. Classified communication systems are represented by a high side inbox.

The messages also seemed to show Vance in disagreement with the approach towards Yemen that Hegseth and Waltz appeared to be pushing. The account named Vance wrote on March 14 that “I believe we are making a mistake.”

“The Suez is where 3 percent of US trade occurs. 40 percent of European trade does”, the account wrote in a message.

There is a compelling argument to delay this for a month, the Vance account added.

Ratcliffe’s messages, according to Goldberg, “could be interpreted as being related to actual and current intelligence operations” be read by the group.

The Atlantic editor added that Hegseth responded to Vance’s concerns, acknowledging them, but arguing that delaying the operation came with risks that “1) this leaks, and we look indecisive, 2) Israel takes an action first – or Gaza cease fire falls apart – and we don’t get to start this on our own terms”.

Hegseth continued, “We can manage both. If there was a final go or no go vote, I think we should execute.

Waltz also chimed in with a message about trade figures and the limited capabilities of European navies.

The Vance account responded, “Let’s go if you think we should do it.” I detest “bailing Europe out once more”… To this, the Hegseth account said, “VP: I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It is PATHETIC.

The Hegseth account posted a “TEAM UPDATE” on March 15 at 11:44 a.m. (8:44 GMT). Goldberg did not reveal details of this update in his article, saying that if an adversary of the US saw these details, they could harm the American military and intelligence personnel.

However, Goldberg did point out that the Hegseth message contained operational details of the March 15 attacks in Yemen, including information on who would be hit, how to use weapons, and the sequence of events that would occur.

Hegseth had a plan in his message, but Goldberg waited in his car in a parking lot for a supermarket to see if the attacks actually occurred at the time that was scheduled. They did, in Yemeni capital Sanaa, Goldberg wrote he found out through X.

At least 53 people were killed and others were hurt in the strikes, some of them children.

How did Goldberg act?

Goldberg exited the group chat and sent Waltz a message on Signal and an email to several US officials with questions about whether the group was real, and whether the officials knew Goldberg was included.

According to Goldberg, Vance’s representative William Martin claimed that despite the false impressions made by the messages, Vance was completely in favor of Trump. According to Goldberg’s article, “Vice President Vance unwaveringly supports this administration’s foreign policy.”

How have US government officials responded?

This appears to be a legitimate message chain, according to National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes, who responded, “We are looking into how an unintentional number was added to the chain.”

The thread illustrates how thoughtfully and thoughtfully senior officials collaborate on policy. The ongoing success of the Houthi operation demonstrates that there were no threats to troops or national security. “

Hegseth told reporters on Monday, “I’ve heard how it was characterized. Nobody was texting war plans. And that’s all I have to say about that. “

At a Monday press conference, US State Department spokesman Tammy Bruce chose not to comment on the situation.

During a Monday White House event in Louisiana, Trump was also asked about the scandal. I don’t know anything about it, “Trump said, adding that he was not a huge fan of The Atlantic. He appeared to interpret the breach as an attempt to thwart Yemen’s US attack.

Could the Espionage Act be violated by this?

Goldberg wrote that Waltz may have violated the Espionage Act, citing this to several national security lawyers interviewed by The Atlantic.

The transmission of information intended to obstruct US armed forces operations is a federal law that was first passed in 1917. Goldberg is unable to obtain the necessary authorization to view classified information.

Democrats have called for an investigation into this.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said in a statement that “if House Republicans are truly committed to keeping America safe, they must join Democrats in conducting a thorough, serious, and thorough investigation into this unacceptable and irresponsible national security breach.”

On his X account, Delaware Senator Chris Coons wrote, “These actions need to be subject to an oversight hearing and accountability.”

Source: Aljazeera

234Radio

234Radio is Africa's Premium Internet Radio that seeks to export Africa to the rest of the world.