“The ceasefire is not over,” Hegseth told reporters during a briefing at the Pentagon, adding that U.S. forces would continue to defend maritime traffic while avoiding escalation. He said any determination of a ceasefire breach would rest with President Donald Trump.

The comments came as tensions mounted following reported exchanges of fire between U.S. and Iranian forces, underscoring the fragility of a truce reached after hostilities erupted earlier this year. The confrontation has centered on control and access to the Strait of Hormuz, a vital conduit for global energy shipments.

Trump on Monday announced the launch of “Project Freedom,” a military operation aimed at protecting commercial vessels transiting the waterway. Hegseth described the initiative as “defensive in nature, focused in scope and temporary in duration,” with the sole objective of shielding shipping from what he termed Iranian aggression.

“Iran does not control the strait,” Hegseth said, adding that U.S. forces would not need to enter Iranian territorial waters or airspace to carry out the mission. “We’re not looking for a fight.”Iran had effectively disrupted traffic through the strait after the conflict began on February 28, following the involvement of U.S. and Israeli forces, raising concerns over global supply chains and energy markets.

Hegseth cautioned Tehran to act prudently, reiterating Washington’s position that it seeks to prevent escalation while maintaining freedom of navigation through one of the world’s most strategically sensitive maritime corridors.

The Pentagon announced last week that around 5,000 troops would be withdrawn, but Trump said on Saturday the reductions would go “a lot further,” without providing details or a timeline. The decision comes amid tensions between Washington and European capitals over the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran and what U.S. officials see as limited European involvement.

Speaking at a summit in Yerevan, Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre said the move should not be overstated but underscored expectations that Europe take on greater responsibility for its own security. He added that any adjustments should be managed within the framework of NATO.

European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said discussions about reducing U.S. troop presence in Europe were not new, but the timing of the announcement was unexpected. She said the development highlighted the need to strengthen the European pillar within NATO.

NATO officials said they were seeking further clarification from Washington. Alliance spokesperson Allison Hart said discussions were ongoing to understand the implications for U.S. force posture in Germany.NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte played down the decision, linking it to broader U.S. dissatisfaction with European responses to the Iran conflict.

He said European allies had taken note of U.S. concerns and were working to implement existing basing agreements and position key military assets closer to potential operational theaters.The troop reduction follows earlier signals from Washington that a drawdown in Europe was likely. Some U.S. forces had already been withdrawn from Romania in October, although U.S. officials had previously indicated such changes would be coordinated with allies to avoid creating security gaps.

Tensions have also emerged over operational support for U.S. actions in the Middle East. Countries including Spain, France and the United Kingdom have declined to grant full access to bases or airspace for operations linked to the Iran conflict, reflecting divisions within the alliance over the scope of involvement.

European governments have signaled they are stepping up preparations, including positioning military resources closer to strategic regions, though officials have provided limited detail. Leaders have also indicated reluctance to engage in securing key maritime routes such as the Strait of Hormuz until the conflict subsides.

The Pentagon had announced on Friday that about 5,000 troops would be withdrawn from Germany over the next six to 12 months, but Trump said the reduction would go significantly beyond that figure.“We’re going to cut way down, and we’re cutting a lot further than 5,000,” Trump told reporters in Florida, offering no detailed explanation for the expanded drawdown.

The move escalates tensions with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and comes amid broader disputes between Washington and European allies over defense spending, the war in Iran and trans-Atlantic trade.Germany currently hosts around 36,000 U.S. service members, including major strategic facilities such as Ramstein Air Base, the headquarters of U.S. European Command and U.S. Africa Command, and the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, a major military hospital serving overseas operations.

A withdrawal of 5,000 troops would represent roughly one-seventh of the U.S. military presence in Germany, though the Pentagon has not clarified which units or operations would be affected by the larger reduction Trump indicated.

German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said earlier on Saturday that the initial drawdown was expected and reflected a broader reality that Europe must take greater responsibility for its own security.“The presence of American soldiers in Europe, and especially in Germany, is in our interest and in the interest of the U.S.,” Pistorius told German news agency dpa.

“We Europeans must take on more responsibility for our security,” he added, pointing to Germany’s increased defense spending, faster procurement and military modernization efforts.NATO also responded cautiously, with spokesperson Allison Hart saying the alliance was working with Washington to understand the details of the force posture changes.

“This adjustment underscores the need for Europe to continue to invest more in defense and take on a greater share of the responsibility for our shared security,” she said in a post on X, while noting progress toward the alliance’s defense spending target of 5% of GDP among member states.

The troop reduction has faced immediate resistance in Washington from both Democrats and senior Republicans, who warned that it could weaken deterrence against Russia as Moscow’s war in Ukraine enters its fifth year.

Republican lawmakers Senator Roger Wicker and Representative Mike Rogers, who chair the Senate and House armed services committees, said they were “very concerned” the decision would risk “undermining deterrence and sending the wrong signal to Vladimir Putin.”They also said the Pentagon had canceled the planned deployment of the Army’s Long-Range Fires Battalion, a move they argued would further weaken NATO’s eastern posture.

Trump’s renewed push to scale back troop deployments follows longstanding criticism of European allies for relying too heavily on U.S. defense guarantees while underinvesting in their own militaries.His frustration has deepened over Europe’s reluctance to fully support Washington’s military campaign with Israel against Iran, as well as over trade disputes with the European Union.

Trump recently accused the EU of failing to comply with a trade agreement and said he would raise tariffs next week on European-made cars and trucks to 25%, a step likely to hit Germany’s export-driven auto sector particularly hard.

Merz last week criticized U.S. strategy toward Iran, saying Washington was being “humiliated” by Iranian leadership and lacked a coherent approach.Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said the troop withdrawal followed “a thorough review” of U.S. force posture in Europe and reflected operational needs and current conditions on the ground.

A U.S. defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said military branches had no prior notice of the decision and learned of the reduction in real time, underscoring internal concerns over the abruptness of the move.

Germany remains central to U.S. military operations in Europe, with permanent Army and Air Force deployments, logistical hubs and strategic nuclear assets, making any significant troop reduction symbolically and operationally sensitive for NATO.

The move follows a diplomatic clash between Trump and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who questioned Washington’s strategy in the two-month-old conflict with Iran and said this week that he saw no clear U.S. exit plan. Merz also said Iran was humiliating the United States in negotiations to end the war.

A senior Pentagon official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the administration viewed the German leader’s remarks as “inappropriate and unhelpful,” adding that Trump was “rightly reacting to these counterproductive remarks.”Germany hosts about 35,000 active-duty U.S. military personnel, more than any other country in Europe, making it a central hub for American operations on the continent and in the Middle East.

The Pentagon said the drawdown would reduce U.S. troop levels in Europe to roughly their pre-2022 level, before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine prompted the administration of former President Joe Biden to reinforce NATO’s eastern flank.

The official said the decision also reflected the Trump administration’s broader push for Europe to take primary responsibility for its own defense, a long-standing demand by the president toward NATO allies he believes rely too heavily on U.S. military protection.Reuters reported last week that an internal Pentagon email outlined options to penalize NATO allies seen as failing to support U.S. operations during the Iran conflict.

Those options reportedly included suspending Spain from NATO and reviewing Washington’s stance on Britain’s claim to the Falkland Islands.Trump has repeatedly criticized European allies for not deploying naval support to help secure the Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping route for global oil supplies that has faced severe disruption during the conflict.

The near closure of the waterway has contributed to market volatility and major supply concerns across global energy markets.German officials, however, said Berlin had provided significant logistical support, including authorizing the use of U.S. military bases and overflight permissions for operations linked to the conflict.

Germany also hosts the major U.S. military hospital at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, a critical medical hub for American forces overseas.As part of the drawdown, a brigade combat team currently stationed in Germany will be withdrawn, and a long-range fires battalion planned for deployment later this year under the Biden administration will no longer be sent, the Pentagon official said.

Trump had sought a similar troop reduction during the final months of his first term, but the plan was never implemented after he lost the 2020 election and Biden reversed the proposal.Germany’s military officials told Reuters they were surprised by Trump’s latest announcement, saying meetings at the Pentagon earlier this week had been constructive.

Trump this week sharply criticized German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, calling him “totally ineffective” after Merz questioned the U.S. approach to the Iran conflict and said Washington lacked a clear exit strategy. On Friday, the Pentagon announced plans to withdraw 5,000 troops from Germany and confirmed higher tariffs on European Union cars and trucks, a move expected to hit Germany’s export-heavy economy particularly hard.

The administration has also turned its focus toward Britain, with Trump describing Prime Minister Keir Starmer as “not Winston Churchill” and threatening major tariffs on British imports, further widening tensions with traditional U.S. allies.European diplomats described the atmosphere as increasingly unpredictable.

“It’s unnerving to say the least,” one diplomat said, speaking on condition of anonymity. “We are braced for anything, anytime.”The friction has been aggravated by Washington’s push for stronger allied backing in the Iran war, particularly around securing the Strait of Hormuz, a vital global oil shipping route disrupted by the conflict.

Trump has accused European governments of failing to provide adequate military support for U.S. operations that he argues protect broader Western interests.Reuters reported last week that the Pentagon had internally discussed punitive options for NATO members viewed as unsupportive, including suspending Spain from NATO and reviewing U.S. recognition of British sovereignty over the Falkland Islands.

Some European officials said they were adapting to Trump’s confrontational style. One diplomat pointed to former German Chancellor Angela Merkel as a model for managing relations with Trump during his first term.“You must not react immediately, you must let the storm pass, while standing firmly on your positions,” the diplomat said, adding that attempts at personal flattery had also failed to prevent criticism.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, once viewed as one of Trump’s closest European political allies, also faced criticism after she publicly opposed the Iran war and condemned what she called Trump’s “unacceptable” remarks about Pope Leo.Even NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, often seen in Europe as skilled at managing Trump, was reportedly rebuked during a recent White House meeting.

Within the Republican Party, Trump’s hardline stance has drawn some resistance. Representative Don Bacon said repeated attacks on NATO partners were damaging U.S. interests.

“The continued attacks on NATO allies are counterproductive, the comments hurt Americans,” Bacon wrote on X, noting that U.S. air bases in Germany remain strategically important for operations across Europe, Africa and the Middle East.German military officials were reportedly surprised by Trump’s announcement on troop reductions, especially after what they described as constructive Pentagon meetings earlier this week.

General Carsten Breuer, Germany’s top military officer, had indicated he received positive support for Berlin’s updated defense strategy during talks in Washington.Analysts say the political mood in Europe is shifting, with leaders becoming more willing to publicly challenge Washington as domestic pressure rises over the economic and security fallout of the Iran war, including rising energy costs and trade disruptions.

Jeffrey Rathke of the American-German Institute at Johns Hopkins University said Chancellor Merz’s sharper tone reflected a broader recalibration.“It’s pretty clear that something has changed,” Rathke said, noting that European governments increasingly believe they can no longer rely on the post-World War II security framework without significantly expanding their own military capabilities.

The aircraft, intended for presidential transport and eventual use as part of the highly secure Air Force One fleet, has completed required modification and flight testing and is currently being painted in a new red, white and blue livery, according to an Air Force statement.“The aircraft has officially completed modification and flight testing and is being painted. The aircraft is on schedule to roll out this summer,” the statement said.

The luxury jet, reportedly valued in the hundreds of millions of dollars, was offered by Qatar in May 2025 and later accepted by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, according to the Pentagon. Officials said the transfer complied with federal rules and regulations.

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said at the time that the Defense Department would ensure the aircraft met all security and mission requirements necessary for transporting the U.S. president, including protections required for one of the world’s most sensitive military aircraft platforms.

The arrangement has triggered criticism from legal scholars and ethics experts who point to the U.S. Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, which bars government officials from accepting gifts from any “King, Prince, or foreign State” without congressional consent.

Critics argue that accepting such a gift from a foreign government could create conflicts of interest or raise questions about influence over U.S. policy, particularly given the strategic importance of U.S.-Qatar relations in the Gulf region.Trump has dismissed those concerns, saying refusing the aircraft would be impractical and financially unwise for the U.S. government.

“It would be stupid not to take it,” Trump said previously, rejecting claims that the gift created an ethical problem.The decision also prompted security concerns among defense analysts, who noted that integrating a foreign-donated aircraft into the presidential fleet requires extensive inspections, retrofitting and intelligence-grade security upgrades to meet White House transport standards.

The current Air Force One fleet, based on heavily modified Boeing 747 aircraft, includes extensive classified communications systems, missile defense countermeasures and secure command capabilities designed to function during national emergencies.The addition of the Qatar-gifted aircraft comes as the U.S. government continues work on delayed next-generation presidential aircraft replacements, a process that has faced repeated cost overruns and schedule setbacks.

The divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said the administration was likely to succeed in arguing that the Pentagon’s new credential policy, which requires reporters to be accompanied by escorts inside the building, is legally valid.

The ruling is not a final decision in the lawsuit brought by The New York Times, which challenged the policy as unconstitutional, but it temporarily suspends an April 9 order by U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman that had barred the Defense Department from enforcing the escort requirement.

Friedman had ruled that the Pentagon’s revised credential policy violated journalists’ constitutional rights to free speech and due process, saying Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s team appeared to be attempting to circumvent his earlier March 20 decision ordering the restoration of Pentagon access for reporters.

He said the new rules effectively expelled all journalists from the building unless they were guided by official escorts, undermining the practical ability of the press to report independently.

Circuit Judges Justin Walker, J. Michelle Childs and Bradley Garcia heard the appeal, with Childs dissenting from the 2-1 decision.“Reporters can hardly verify sources, gather information, or speak candidly with Department personnel with an escort looming over their shoulders,” Childs wrote in her dissent.

Defense Department spokesperson Sean Parnell welcomed the panel’s decision and said the Pentagon looked forward to arguing the full merits of the case before the same court.In a statement posted on social media, Parnell said unrestricted access had contributed to the “regular unauthorized disclosure of sensitive and classified national defense information.”

“Since implementing the current access policy, the Department has seen a meaningful reduction in these unauthorized disclosures, which when they occur can endanger the lives of service members, intelligence personnel, and our allies,” he said.Theodore Boutrous, an attorney representing The New York Times, described the appellate ruling as a limited procedural step rather than a judgment on the broader constitutional challenge.

“This is a narrow, preliminary ruling and it casts no doubt on the strength of The Times’s constitutional arguments,” Boutrous said in a statement. “We look forward to defending the full scope of the district court’s rulings in The Times’s favor in this appeal.”The case has become a closely watched test of the balance between national security controls inside the Pentagon and longstanding press access for accredited journalists covering the U.S. military.

President Donald Trump nominated Judge Walker to the appeals court, while President Joe Biden appointed Judges Garcia and Childs. Friedman, the district judge who initially ruled for the newspaper, was appointed by former Democratic President Bill Clinton.

The meeting, attended by senior administration officials including Scott Bessent and White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, comes as policymakers and industry leaders assess the implications of Anthropic’s latest AI model, Mythos, which has raised concerns about its potential to accelerate sophisticated cyberattacks.

In a statement, the White House described the talks as “productive and constructive,” saying both sides discussed collaboration frameworks and shared protocols to address risks associated with scaling advanced AI systems. It added that further engagements with other leading AI firms were planned.

Anthropic said the meeting focused on joint priorities including cybersecurity, maintaining U.S. competitiveness in artificial intelligence, and strengthening safety standards. The dialogue marks the first high-level engagement between the two sides since tensions escalated over national security concerns tied to the company’s technology.

The Mythos model, unveiled earlier this month, is being rolled out to a limited number of organizations under a controlled program known as Project Glasswing. The initiative allows selected users to test the system’s capabilities in identifying cybersecurity vulnerabilities.

Anthropic has described Mythos as its most advanced model for coding and autonomous task execution.Experts warn that such capabilities could be dual-use, enabling both defensive cybersecurity applications and the identification of exploitable weaknesses in digital infrastructure.

Financial institutions are viewed as particularly exposed due to their reliance on legacy systems integrated with modern technologies, creating complex vulnerability surfaces.Officials in the United States, Canada and Britain have held discussions with banking sector leaders to evaluate potential risks posed by advanced AI tools like Mythos, reflecting growing concern across critical sectors.

The renewed engagement follows a breakdown in relations earlier this year between the company and the Pentagon. The Defense Department imposed a supply-chain risk designation on Anthropic after the firm declined to modify safeguards preventing the use of its AI in autonomous weapons or domestic surveillance applications.

In response, the administration ordered federal agencies to halt use of Anthropic’s tools, and Donald Trump publicly criticized the company. Anthropic subsequently filed a lawsuit in March challenging the designation.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Trump said he was unaware of the meeting, underscoring the fragmented nature of the administration’s engagement with the AI sector as it seeks to balance innovation with national security concerns.

The talks, described by the newspaper as preliminary and wide-ranging, involved companies such as General Motors, Ford Motor, GE Aerospace and Oshkosh, and began prior to the ongoing U.S. war with Iran, according to people familiar with the matter.

Defense officials raised the possibility that non-traditional manufacturers could support or supplement established defense contractors, including by rapidly transitioning portions of their production lines to military equipment and supplies, the report said.Reuters could not independently verify the discussions.

The companies named in the report did not immediately respond to requests for comment outside regular business hours.In a statement to Reuters, a Pentagon official said the Department of Defense is “committed to rapidly expanding the defense industrial base by leveraging all available commercial solutions and technologies to ensure our warfighters maintain a decisive advantage.

”The outreach comes as Washington faces growing pressure on its military inventories following sustained support for Ukraine after Russia’s 2022 invasion and ongoing Israeli military operations in Gaza, alongside U.S. strikes in Iran.

These developments have led to the drawdown of billions of dollars’ worth of weapons stockpiles, including artillery systems, ammunition and anti-tank missiles.President Donald Trump earlier this month requested a $500 billion increase in the U.S. military budget, bringing the proposed total to $1.5 trillion, as part of a broader effort to strengthen defense capabilities during the conflict with Iran.

The Pentagon has also engaged directly with the defense industry, with Trump meeting executives from seven major defense contractors in March as officials explore options to accelerate production and rebuild inventories.

The rescued officer was the second member of a two-person crew aboard an F-15 aircraft that Iran said it had shot down using its air defense systems. U.S. officials did not provide operational details of the recovery mission, and the Pentagon did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Trump confirmed the recovery in a post on his Truth Social platform, describing the operation as one of the most complex search-and-rescue efforts conducted by U.S. forces in hostile territory. He said the airman, a senior officer, had been injured but was in stable condition and under monitoring.

“This is the first time in military memory that two U.S. pilots have been rescued, separately, deep in enemy territory,” Trump wrote, adding that the operation was carried out without U.S. casualties.The first crew member had already been recovered earlier, according to a Reuters report on Friday.

The aircraft was brought down amid ongoing hostilities between U.S. and Iranian forces following the outbreak of war on February 28.The developments come as Washington escalates its demands on Tehran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global energy corridor that typically handles around 20% of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas shipments.

Iran’s effective closure of the waterway has contributed to a growing energy crisis and heightened volatility in global markets.Trump reiterated that Iran faces a narrowing window to comply, stating that less than 48 hours remained before potential U.S. action.

His recent messaging has alternated between references to possible diplomatic progress and explicit threats of large-scale military strikes, including against Iran’s power infrastructure.The conflict has already resulted in thousands of deaths and significant disruption across the region, with mounting concerns over long-term economic damage and supply chain instability linked to restricted energy flows through the Gulf.

Iran has not publicly commented on the rescue operation but has previously stated that it deployed newly developed air defense systems in targeting U.S. aircraft operating in its airspace.