Gen. Chris Donahue, the four-star officer who commanded U.S. Army forces across Europe and Africa, and who became an iconic figure as the last American service member to leave Afghanistan in 2021, submitted his retirement papers this week at the request of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. The departure strips the Army of one of its most combat-tested leaders and marks the latest in a string of senior military exits under Hegseth's tenure.
Donahue will relinquish command on July 2, Fox News reported. His deputy, Maj. Gen. Christopher Norrie, will assume temporary command. The move comes as Hegseth prepares to downgrade the post itself from a four-star to a three-star billet, effectively eliminating the position Donahue held and making his retirement all but inevitable.
The 56-year-old general carried two decades of combat experience, led the Army's elite Delta Force, and commanded the famed 82nd Airborne Division during the chaotic 2021 Afghanistan withdrawal. A night-vision photograph of Donahue boarding the last C-17 out of Kabul became one of the defining images of that chapter. He was widely regarded as a potential future Army chief of staff.
The mechanism behind Donahue's exit tells the story. Hegseth moved to convert the U.S. Army Europe and Africa command from a four-star post to a three-star one, the Daily Mail reported, citing ABC News. With no four-star billet available, Donahue had no lateral move left. Retirement was the only option.
Lt. Gen. Kevin Admiral, a three-star officer, is expected to be nominated by Hegseth to fill the downgraded role. The restructuring aligns with the defense secretary's broader push to shift Europe's defense burden onto European allies themselves.
Speaking to NATO officials in Brussels, Hegseth framed the review in blunt terms. Fox News quoted him saying:
"This will be a real review. It will be designed to ensure that NATO is moving fast and irreversibly toward Europe leading, stepping up to take primary responsibility for the defense of Europe."
That review, a six-month evaluation of U.S. troop levels across Europe, was announced last week. The Pentagon also disclosed plans to reduce fighter jets, drones, warships, and submarines stationed in the region. For allies who have long relied on American military hardware as a backstop, the message is unmistakable: the free ride is winding down.
Hegseth's six-month review of U.S. forces in Europe had already put NATO capitals on notice before Donahue's departure was confirmed.
Donahue is far from alone. Since Hegseth took office, more than two dozen military leaders have left or retired early, the Washington Examiner reported. That number includes Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. CQ Brown and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti, both ousted under Hegseth's watch.
In April, during the U.S. military confrontation with Iran, Hegseth forced out Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George after repeated clashes. Among the friction points: Hegseth's decision to block the promotions of four Army officers. George was not the only April casualty. Maj. Gen. William Green Jr., the Army's chief of chaplains, and Gen. David Hodne, head of Army Transformation and Training Command, were also pushed out.
The forced retirement of Gen. Randy George drew particular attention at the time, given that it occurred in the middle of active military operations.
Supporters of the overhaul describe it as a long-overdue streamlining of a bloated general officer corps. Detractors call it a hollowing-out of military leadership. The truth of which characterization holds will depend on what follows, whether the leaner command structure produces a more agile force or leaves dangerous gaps in institutional knowledge at a moment when European security is more contested than it has been in decades.
Donahue's name will always be linked to that green-tinted night-vision photograph from August 2021. As commander of the 82nd Airborne, he oversaw the final hours of America's longest war and walked up the ramp of the last transport plane himself. The image circled the globe. It was supposed to mark the end of an era.
Four years later, the general who closed out that chapter now closes his own career, not on a tarmac in Kabul, but in the bureaucratic corridors of a Pentagon undergoing rapid transformation. Whether he clashed directly with Hegseth or simply found himself holding a rank with no remaining chair, the result is the same.
The U.S. Army acknowledged the departure in measured language. "The Army thanks Gen. Donahue for his leadership of U.S. Army Europe and Africa," a service statement said, as quoted by Fox News.
Hegseth's broader personnel moves have not gone without scrutiny, even from within conservative media. Newsmax host Greg Kelly publicly pushed back after another high-profile firing, raising questions about the pace and rationale of the shakeup.
The Pentagon's six-month Europe review, the command downgrade, and the steady exodus of senior leaders all point in one direction: Hegseth is rebuilding the military's leadership layer from the ground up. The defense secretary has made clear he wants a smaller, more responsive officer corps and a posture that forces European nations to invest in their own defense rather than sheltering under American power.
That is a defensible strategic vision. American taxpayers have subsidized Europe's security for the better part of eight decades. NATO members have routinely failed to meet their own defense spending commitments. Pressing them to carry more weight is not reckless, it is overdue.
But the speed of the personnel turnover raises a practical question that even supporters should take seriously. Institutional memory matters in military command. The officers being removed are not political appointees who rotate with administrations. They are career warfighters with decades of operational experience in theaters that remain active and volatile.
During the U.S. confrontation with Iran, Hegseth publicly noted American air and naval superiority, yet the Strait of Hormuz remained under Iranian control for months. The $25 billion price tag of the Iran operation drew sharp questions from members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.
Democratic lawmakers have seized on the departures to question Hegseth's leadership. But their complaints carry less weight when they spent years tolerating a Pentagon bureaucracy that was itself resistant to reform and accountability. The question is not whether the Pentagon needed change. It did. The question is whether this pace of change, during a period of active global tension, produces strength or creates openings that adversaries can exploit.
Donahue has not publicly commented on his departure. The Pentagon has not responded to press inquiries about the specifics of his exit. The identities of the four Army officers whose promotions Hegseth blocked remain undisclosed. And the full scope of the European troop review, which specific assets will be pulled, which will remain, has not been detailed.
Some Republican voices have urged the administration to avoid unforced errors that could become political liabilities. Retiring Sen. Thom Tillis warned that a pattern of avoidable missteps could cost the party in future elections.
Reforming the Pentagon is the right instinct. Decades of bureaucratic drift, mission creep, and a culture that promoted caution over results earned the overhaul that Hegseth is attempting. But reform built to last requires more than speed. It requires a clear answer to the question every taxpayer and service member deserves: who fills the gap when the experienced leaders are gone?
Tearing down a bloated structure is the easy part. Building something better in its place, that is where the real test begins.
