(Source : The Hill) In a move that has ignited fierce debate, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is pushing to purge civilian professors from U.S. military academies, accusing them of importing “left-wing, woke” ideologies into the institutions. Hegseth’s plan to replace civilian faculty with military personnel has drawn sharp criticism from experts, who warn that the proposal is not only impractical but could also undermine the quality of education at the academies.
At his confirmation hearing, Hegseth declared that military academies should rely more on uniformed personnel to teach cadets, arguing that civilian professors from “left-wing, woke universities” are pushing divisive ideologies like diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and critical race theory (CRT). His comments came in response to Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), who claimed that service academies have become “breeding grounds for leftist activists.”
A Divisive Vision for Military Education
Hegseth’s proposal targets the five U.S. military academies, including West Point, the Naval Academy, and the Air Force Academy, which fall under the Department of Defense. However, experts point out that replacing civilian faculty with military instructors would be a logistical nightmare, especially amid ongoing recruiting challenges and personnel shortages across the armed forces.
“The problem that Hegseth would run into—aside from the academic problem that it’s probably good to have these young cadets exposed to civilian faculty—is there’s just a practical personnel problem, a staffing problem,” said Mark Cancian, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “It just doesn’t make sense to pull a lot of officers out of combat units to put them in teaching in the academies.”
Military academies have historically maintained a balance between civilian and military instructors. For example, the Naval Academy reported that 45% of its faculty are military personnel, while 55% are civilians—a ratio that has remained relatively stable since its founding in 1845. Similarly, the Air Force Academy has a 70-30 split in favor of military instructors, while West Point’s faculty is about 27% civilian.
Bradley Bowman, a West Point graduate and former assistant professor, defended the current system, calling it a “wonderful collaboration” that benefits from diverse perspectives. “Any kind of flippant remark that professors, all or most of the civilian professors, are far left or ‘woke,’ I think would be unfair,” Bowman said. “You want a diversity within a reasonable range… that diversity is not a bad thing or a dirty thing or a liability, it’s an asset.”
Recruiting Woes and Practical Challenges
Hegseth’s plan faces significant hurdles, particularly given the military’s ongoing recruiting crisis. According to the Associated Press, only 23% of young Americans are qualified to serve without a waiver, and the armed forces have struggled to meet recruiting goals in recent years. Pulling officers from combat units to fill teaching roles could exacerbate these challenges, leaving critical positions unfilled.
The Naval Academy acknowledged the complexity of the issue, stating that it would be “inappropriate to speculate” on whether there are enough qualified military instructors to cover all academic departments. “Though there is an almost equal balance of military and civilian professors among the USNA faculty, they are not spread equally across academic departments or courses,” the academy noted.
Since taking office, Hegseth has emphasized his commitment to instilling a strongly patriotic agenda at military academies. In a memo to Pentagon leaders, he directed the institutions to teach that “America and its founding documents remain the most powerful force for good in human history.”
While the sentiment aligns with traditional military values, critics argue that Hegseth’s push to replace civilian faculty is less about patriotism and more about advancing a political agenda. “The tension has always been, ‘What is the purpose of this institution? Is it educational?’ In which case, you bring in more civilians,” Cancian said. “Or is it military, to prepare people for a military career? In which case, you might lean more heavily on the military.”
A Battle Over the Future of Military Education
As Hegseth’s plan unfolds, it has sparked a broader debate about the role of diversity and academic freedom in military education. Supporters argue that the academies should prioritize military values and experiences, while critics warn that sidelining civilian expertise could weaken the institutions’ academic rigor and global perspective.
For now, the controversy underscores the challenges of balancing tradition with innovation in military education—and raises questions about whether Hegseth’s vision will strengthen the academies or leave them mired in political division.
Hegseth’s war on “woke” professors may be popular with some conservatives, but it risks alienating educators, exacerbating personnel shortages, and undermining the very institutions it seeks to protect.
