Van Hollen, Warren, Open New Investigation into Hegseth's Role in Dismantling Military’s Civilian Harm Prevention Guard Rails

U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) led nine senators in opening a new investigation into Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth's role in weakening civilian harm prevention programs and the catastrophic civilian impacts of President Trump's war in Iran.

"The high human toll of this war reflects the administration's broader disregard for the strategic, legal, and moral imperative to minimize civilian harm," wrote the lawmakers. "We call on the administration to immediately end the war in Iran and fully restore Congressionally authorized programs and staffing to mitigate civilian harm."

Since the start of President Trump's illegal war in Iran, attacks on civilian infrastructure have led to more than 1,700 civilian deaths, along with strikes on more than 20 schools and a dozen health care facilities.

"We are concerned that these were all preventable tragedies…This is a concerning pattern and raises questions about whether the administration is upholding international law and the laws of war," wrote the senators. The Senators called on DoD to answer questions about reported attacks on two separate elementary schools in Iran that killed more than 170 people, most of them children.

Prior to the war, Secretary Hegseth made deep cuts to the military's civilian harm mitigation and response (CHMR) programs, fired personnel at DoD's Civilian Protection Center of Excellence, and slashed CHMR staff at the U.S. combatant commands "by more than 90 percent." All the cuts were reportedly made over the objections of veterans organizations and top military officials, including admirals, generals, and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"We are also concerned that your leadership is further harming the credibility of our armed forces, exacerbating threats to civilians and U.S. servicemembers alike," wrote the senators.

Secretary Hegseth has mocked "stupid rules of engagement" and threatened to offer "no quarter, no mercy for our enemies" in Iran, which would violate international law and the military's own Law of War Manual.

"These statements not only harm civilians and undermine established standards, but also endanger U.S. servicemembers with greater risk of reciprocation and erode good order and discipline," warned the senators.

Senior military officials in the Trump administration agree that mitigating civilian harm is vital for national security. Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby wrote to Congress that, "it is in the U.S. national interest, as well as morally right, to seek to reduce civilian harm to the degree possible." During his confirmation, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine said that combatant commanders who incorporated CHMR personnel into planning "see positive impacts from the program."

"Your attempts to gut DoD's civilian harm institutions contradicts more than a decade of bipartisan consensus and DoD-led reforms, initiated during the first Trump administration," noted the senators.

"The importance of protecting civilian life to the greatest extent possible is central to effective military operations and differentiates the United States from our adversaries…We call on the administration to immediately end the war in Iran, fully restore Congressionally authorized programs and staffing to mitigate civilian harm," concluded the senators.

The lawmakers asked Hegseth to explain the cuts to civilian harm programs and explain what steps the Pentagon is taking to protect civilian lives in Iran by May 4, 2026.

Senators Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) joined in signing the letter.

Full text of the letter is available here or below:

Dear Secretary Hegseth,

We write regarding our concerns about the Department of Defense's (DoD) degradation of civilian harm prevention programs and its impact on the Department's ability to prevent, mitigate, and investigate harm to civilians. Over the course of President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu's war in Iran, attacks on civilian infrastructure and communities have led to more than 1,700 confirmed civilian deaths. Alarming reports of attacks on more than 20 schools and a dozen health care facilities further illustrate the war's risks to civilians.

Troubling allegations of civilian harm incidents in which the U.S. was or may have been responsible for civilian harm in this war include:

• A missile strike on a girls' elementary school in Minab, Iran that killed 175 children and teachers - likely the deadliest child casualty event by American forces since 1991.
• A ballistic missile attack on an elementary school and sports hall in Lamerd, Iran that killed at least 21 people.
• An airstrike on a major highway bridge used for commerce and travel that did not "provide any military advantage" to the US. Reports indicate that the attack killed eight people and injured more than a hundred others.
• The use of scatterable antitank landmines that have landed indiscriminately in residential Iranian villages and reportedly killed a civilian. Landmines are indiscriminate weapons that can harm civilians for decades after use.

We are concerned that these were all preventable tragedies. The high human toll of this war reflects the administration's broader disregard for the strategic, legal, and moral imperative to minimize civilian harm. Prior to the war, you reportedly overruled top military leaders and made deep cuts to DoD's mitigation and response (CHMR) programs, fired personnel at DoD's Civilian Protection Center of Excellence (CPCoE) and slashed CHMR staff at the U.S. combatant commands "by more than 90 percent." This included eliminating the entire civilian harm office at Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), removing civilian harm specialists from target development strike teams, and reducing the team of 10 at U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) to only one full time staff.

This is a concerning pattern and raises questions about whether the administration is upholding international law and the laws of war. The President has repeatedly threatened civilian infrastructure and called for mass annihilation of civilians, writing that "[a] whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again," drawing bipartisan condemnation that the U.S. would threaten to take actions that experts agree would be war crimes.

We are also concerned that your leadership is further harming the credibility of our armed forces, exacerbating threats to civilians and U.S. servicemembers alike. In the first week of the war, you said it would be fought with "no stupid rules of engagement." You have repeatedly derided "tepid legality." You declared that there would be "no quarter, no mercy for our enemies." International law and the DoD Law of War Manual explicitly forbid declaring that "no quarter will be given" or threatening to conduct hostilities on that basis. These statements not only harm civilians and undermine established standards, but also endanger U.S. servicemembers with greater risk of reciprocation and erode good order and discipline.

The reduction of civilian harm is essential for the U.S. military's operational effectiveness and central to U.S. interests. As General Joseph Votel, the former commander of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) has noted, failing to prevent civilian harm "can actually undermine the mission that the military has been sent in to do." DoD's Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Action Plan (CHMR-AP) affirmed that efforts to mitigate civilian harm are "critical to achieving long-term success on the battlefield." CHMR and CPCoE civilian harm specialists support operational commanders, map out civilian presence in combat theatres, analyze operational risks, and provide expertise on the discriminate use of force to be consistent with U.S. and international law. These efforts conserve resources by focusing military planning, operations, and munitions towards high-value, strategic targets and avoid the negative moral and strategic costs of killing civilians.

Senior DoD officials in the Trump administration agree that mitigating civilian harm is a vital national security imperative. Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Elbridge Colby wrote to members of Congress that, "I believe it is in the U.S. national interest, as well as morally right, to seek to reduce civilian harm to the degree possible." During his confirmation, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine said that combatant commanders who incorporated CHMR personnel into planning "see positive impacts from the program."

Your attempts to gut DoD's civilian harm institutions contradicts more than a decade of bipartisan consensus and DoD-led reforms, initiated during the first Trump administration, to systematically prevent, and address civilian harm in DoD operations. This included unifying a civilian harm reporting process that was fragmented across the military services and developing a set of standard assessment procedures to analyze instances of civilian harm caused by U.S. forces. Congress codified these reforms into law on a bipartisan basis, authorized research that evaluated gaps in DoD's civilian harm procedures, required DoD to submit reports on civilian casualties resulting from US military operations, and formalized the creation of the Civilian Protection Center of Excellence (CPCoE) to institutionalize DoD processes to mitigate civilian harm.

Organizations representing thousands of former service members called on DoD to protect the civilian harm program. Top military officials, including admirals, generals, and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff all pushed back against the dismantlement of civilian harm offices. Yet the administration opted to pursue these cuts that are contrary to U.S. law. The importance of protecting civilian life to the greatest extent possible is central to effective military operations and differentiates the United States from our adversaries. We call on the administration to immediately end the war in Iran, fully restore Congressionally authorized programs and staffing to mitigate civilian harm, and provide complete responses to the attached questions no later than May 4, 2026:

Questions

1. What steps and precautions is DoD taking to prevent, mitigate, and respond to civilian harm from U.S. and partner actions in the war in Iran?

2. How many personnel are dedicated to preventing and responding to civilian harm within each of the eleven combatant commands? Please provide a breakdown of CHMR personnel, including the number of personnel in place as of January 20, 2025, and the number in place now, at: AFRICOM, CYBERCOM, CENTCOM, EUCOM, INDOPACOM, NORTHCOM, SOCOM, SOUTHCOM, SPACECOM, and STRATCOM.

3. Reports indicate that CENTCOM's civilian harm team was cut from a group of 10 fulltime staff to only one in 2025, but that the team was subsequently restaffed to assist with the war in Iran. How many CHMR staff are currently employed at CENTCOM (please indicate full-time staff and those with collateral duties, as well as civilian, active duty, or contractor)?

a. Of these, how many are temporarily employed to assist CENTCOM operations with the war in Iran?

b. What are the roles and responsibilities of these staff?

c. On what date were additional CHMR specialists brought on to assist with the CENTCOM mission?

d. To what extent were the number of CHMR specialists within "strike cells" at CENTCOM reduced prior to the war in Iran?

e. Were CHMR specialists and personnel from the CPCoE involved in planning prior to the launch of the war in Iran? To what extent are CPCoE staff currently supporting CENTCOM?

f. What recommendations, if any, were provided to CENTCOM officials by CHMR specialists?

i. To what extent were these recommendations adopted by CENTCOM over the course of the campaign in Iran?

4. Multiple senior career military leaders opposed efforts to degrade the CHMR programming, including through cuts to staff at the CPCoE and U.S. combatant commands.

a. Please provide any and all correspondence, memorandum, meeting transcripts, regarding the decision to slash CHMR programs within DoD.

b. Please provide a copy of the June 2025 memorandum from then CENTCOM Commanding General Kurilla opposing the cuts to CHMR.

c. How many CHMR personnel were reassigned? Please disaggregate CHMR personnel reassignment by command and full time employee versus contractor status.

d. How many former CHMR personnel were terminated? Please disaggregate CHMR personnel termination by command and full time employee versus contractor status.

e. How many staff at the CPCoE took voluntary buyouts?

5. What is DoD's assessment of how civilian harm caused by U.S. forces and its allies and partners contribute to:

a. Recruitment efforts by non-state armed groups and foreign states?

b. Anti-American sentiment?

c. Risks to U.S. citizens residing in the Middle East and other conflict areas?

d. Intelligence gathering capabilities?

6. By DoD's estimates, how many civilians have been killed over the course of the war since February 28, 2026?

a. What share of those civilians killed were from U.S. operations?

7. By DoD's estimates, how many civilians have been injured over the course of the war since February 28, 2026?

a. What share of those civilians injured were from US operations?

8. By DoD's estimates, how many people have been displaced over the course of the war since February 28, 2026?

9. Have US forces used cluster bombs to disperse mines, including BLU-91 antitank mines and BLU-92 antipersonnel mines, in the war in Iran?

a. If so, have cluster bombs been equipped with wind-corrected munitions dispenser tail kits to minimize the potential of hitting civilian infrastructure and targets?

b. What is DoD's assessment of the civilian harm risk associated with the use of cluster bombs to distribute BLU-91 and BLU-92 mines?

10. How many civilian harm reports has DoD received since February 28, 2026?

a. How many of these reports have gone through an initial review?

b. How many of these reports have had a civilian harm assessment initiated, and what is the current status of these assessments?

c. How many AR 15-6 investigations into civilian harm has DoD opened since the start of the war in Iran?

11. What is the status of the of DoD's investigation into the airstrike on Minab, Iran?

a. How was this target identified? Was artificial intelligence used at any point in the target development process to identify, prioritize, or recommend this target?

b. What is the timeframe for a final report? c. Will the final investigation be shared with Congress and the U.S. public, with only narrow redactions to protect the privacy of individuals or national security?

12. Has DoD opened an investigation into the February 28, 2026 ballistic missile attack on an elementary school and sports hall in Lamerd, Iran?

a. How was this target identified? Was artificial intelligence used at any point in the target development process to identify, prioritize, or recommend this target?

b. Were collateral damage estimations conducted prior to this strike? Was civilian harm foreseen? What steps did DoD take, if any, to minimize civilian harm as a result of this strike?

Sincerely,