Hegseth Unveils Six Initiatives Focused on Autonomous Warfare and Force Resilience

Executive Summary

• Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced six initiatives at Marine Corps Base Quantico on September 30, including a planned four-star Autonomous Warfare Command, Project Meridian, FORTRESS America, the Next Great American Base, America’s Corps of Cadets and an Office of Religious Affairs.
• The most significant force-structure change is the proposed Autonomous Warfare Command, intended to centralize and accelerate the development, acquisition and fielding of autonomous and robotic capabilities across the joint force. The department plans an interim Project Agincourt organization while working toward a formal command.
• The broader program links battlefield autonomy with domestic military resilience. FORTRESS America calls for greater installation energy independence, stronger domestic supply chains and protection of bases against cyber, physical and unmanned threats.

Hegseth Unveils Six New U.S. Military Initiatives

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth used his September 30 State of the Force address at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia, to announce six initiatives intended to reshape how the U.S. military develops autonomous systems, studies future warfare, protects domestic installations, builds its officer pipeline and supports military religious affairs.

The address was delivered to approximately 600 O-3 officers and E-6 enlisted personnel, rather than the senior military audience that attended Hegseth’s Quantico address one year earlier. The format placed the initiatives directly before the officers and enlisted leaders expected to implement policy at the operational and tactical levels.

The most consequential initiative for force modernization is the planned Autonomous Warfare Command, which Hegseth described as a four-star functional combatant command with service-like authorities. The department intends for the command to be established by October 1, 2027, subject to the legal and organizational steps required to create it.

Taken together, the announcements point to an effort to connect autonomous warfare, faster acquisition, infrastructure resilience and industrial capacity rather than treating them as separate modernization programs.

Autonomous Warfare Command Moves Autonomy Toward a Joint Command Structure

The planned Autonomous Warfare Command, also referred to as AutoWarCom, is designed to address one of the Pentagon’s central modernization problems: how to move autonomous and robotic technologies from experimentation into large-scale operational use.

Hegseth said the command would focus on autonomous and robotic capabilities across the joint force. The department also plans new military occupational specialties in each service to create dedicated career paths and institutional expertise for autonomous warfare.

The proposed structure represents a significant change from the traditional service-by-service model for developing and procuring military equipment. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps and Space Force organizations each have their own acquisition structures, operational requirements and technology programs. A joint command focused specifically on autonomy could provide a common mechanism for experimentation, operational feedback and rapid fielding.

However, the command is not yet an operational combatant command. Its final authorities, headquarters structure, leadership and relationship with existing service acquisition organizations remain to be established. The department will also have to work with Congress on the authorities required to formalize the organization.

That distinction is important. The announcement establishes a direction and an implementation pathway, not an already functioning four-star command.

Project Agincourt Provides the Interim Path

Hegseth also announced Project Agincourt, which will serve as the transitional mechanism for building the future Autonomous Warfare Command.

The project will operate through the existing Direct Reporting Portfolio Manager for unmanned systems and is intended to combine operators, engineers and private-sector developers in shorter development and adaptation cycles. Defense Innovation Unit Director Owen West and Navy Senior Chief Max Strasiser were identified to lead the effort.

This approach reflects a lesson increasingly visible in recent conflicts: unmanned systems can change rapidly enough that a conventional acquisition cycle may struggle to keep pace with operational requirements.

The challenge is not simply buying more drones. A sustainable autonomous warfare architecture requires common data pathways, communications, navigation, command and control, testing, electronic warfare resilience, logistics and trained personnel.

That means the effectiveness of AutoWarCom will ultimately depend on how successfully it integrates these supporting functions rather than on the number of autonomous platforms purchased.

Project Meridian Looks Beyond the Current Generation of Warfare

The second major initiative, Project Meridian, is intended to examine how warfare could evolve across multiple domains.

The project will be facilitated by Department of War Chief Technology Officer Emil Michael and co-directed by Elon Musk, Anduril founder Palmer Luckey and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. The department says the study will examine future warfighting requirements across domains ranging from the subterranean environment to cislunar space.

Hegseth said the project is not intended to write new operational strategy or policy. Instead, its stated purpose is to identify future domains and capabilities that the United States will need to master.

The study is scheduled for completion within 120 days, with an unclassified report for public release and a classified annex.

From a force-planning perspective, the significance of Project Meridian will depend on whether its findings translate into measurable changes in research priorities, experimentation, acquisition programs and force structure.

The Pentagon already maintains numerous technology initiatives involving artificial intelligence, autonomy, directed energy, biotechnology, robotics and advanced sensing. A central question will therefore be whether Meridian consolidates those efforts into a coherent long-term framework or creates another layer of strategic planning.

FORTRESS America Targets Military Infrastructure and Supply Chains

The third initiative, FORTRESS America, is broader than a conventional military construction program.

The acronym stands for Federal Operations for Resilience, Troop Resources, Energy, Supply and Survivability. Hegseth said the initiative will seek to make major U.S. military installations capable of generating their own power while strengthening domestic sources of defense-critical materials and protecting installations against cyber, physical and unmanned threats.

The energy component addresses a longstanding defense infrastructure vulnerability. Government Accountability Office assessments have previously documented the dependence of military installations on commercial electricity and the operational consequences of prolonged utility disruptions.

FORTRESS America therefore connects installation resilience with military readiness. An air base cannot generate combat power if its fuel systems, communications networks, command facilities or electrical infrastructure are disrupted.

The initiative also calls for greater domestic production and stockpiling of materials such as rare earths, specialty metals, semiconductors and propellants. That objective aligns with longstanding concerns over foreign dependencies within the defense industrial base. GAO reported in 2025 that the Defense Department relies on a global network of more than 200,000 suppliers and identified foreign-source dependencies as a national security risk in certain supply chains.

The practical challenge will be cost and scale. Domestic production capacity cannot be created simply through policy direction. It requires mines, refining capacity, component manufacturing, qualified suppliers, skilled labor, transportation infrastructure and long-term demand.

The Next Great American Base

Hegseth also announced The Next Great American Base, a competition to identify a state willing to host a new large-scale military installation.

The department said the proposed installation could support approximately 15,000 to 25,000 service members. State governors and adjutants general will be invited to present proposals for hosting the installation.

The concept is directly linked to FORTRESS America. The proposed installation is envisioned as a self-sustaining power projection platform with independent infrastructure and greater resilience against external disruption.

The initiative also highlights a less visible dimension of force modernization: military construction.

Modern aircraft, autonomous systems and advanced weapons require facilities capable of supporting their power, data, maintenance, training and security requirements. Building those functions into a new installation from the beginning could be easier than retrofitting legacy bases, although the cost, environmental review, land acquisition and local infrastructure requirements remain unresolved.

America’s Corps of Cadets Expands the Officer Pipeline

The fifth initiative, America’s Corps of Cadets, seeks to expand the number of universities providing structured military training and leadership development.

The initial group consists of five universities, not six: Louisiana State University, Liberty University, Tuskegee University, Mississippi State University and Hillsdale College. Each has been designated a Distinguished Military College under the new program.

The initiative builds on the existing Corps of Cadets programs at the nation’s six Senior Military Colleges.

The department’s stated objective is to increase the number of commissioning pathways while embedding military discipline and leadership development within participating institutions. The program also provides participating schools with Honor School status, giving them priority in future officer commissioning.

The long-term effect will depend on participation levels, commissioning numbers and how the new programs integrate with existing Reserve Officers’ Training Corps and service accession systems.

Office of Religious Affairs Adds a Direct Reporting Function

The sixth initiative establishes an Office of Religious Affairs reporting directly to the Secretary of War.

According to the department, the office will advocate for religious support budgets and infrastructure while working with the existing service chaplaincies. The department stated that chaplaincies will remain the primary providers of religious support and that the new office will not compel participation or favor a particular faith.

Unlike the other initiatives, this office is primarily organizational rather than technological or force-structure focused. Its significance will depend on how it affects resource allocation, policy coordination and access to religious support across the services.

What the Six Initiatives Mean for Force Modernization

The six initiatives are different in scope, but three broad themes connect them.

The most consequential technical issue is likely to be the integration of autonomy into the broader force rather than the creation of another category of unmanned equipment.

Future operations will increasingly involve combinations of crewed aircraft, autonomous aircraft, unmanned surface vessels, ground robots, sensors and AI-enabled command systems. These systems will need to operate in environments where communications can be jammed, navigation signals can be disrupted and data links can be attacked.

That places greater importance on resilient autonomy, distributed command and control, interoperability and human oversight.

The second major issue is industrial capacity. Rapid fielding only matters if the United States can manufacture systems at sufficient scale, replenish losses and continually upgrade software and hardware as adversaries adapt.

FORTRESS America addresses part of that problem from the infrastructure and supply-chain side, while AutoWarCom addresses it from the operational and acquisition side.

Implementation Will Determine the Strategic Effect

The announcements establish an ambitious modernization framework, but most of the initiatives remain at an early implementation stage.

The Autonomous Warfare Command still requires organizational development and congressional engagement. Project Meridian has yet to produce its findings. FORTRESS America must translate broad resilience goals into installation-level projects and supply-chain investments. The Next Great American Base has not yet selected a location, while the new cadet programs must build their institutional structures and commissioning pipelines.

The distinction between announcement and fielded capability will therefore be critical when measuring progress.

For the autonomous warfare initiative in particular, the Pentagon will need to demonstrate that faster acquisition can coexist with testing, cybersecurity, safety, interoperability and reliable logistics. Speed alone does not guarantee combat effectiveness.

For FORTRESS America, the measure will be whether installations can sustain operations through prolonged disruption rather than simply maintain backup generators for short outages.

For Project Meridian, the key test will be whether its recommendations influence actual budgets, programs and force design.

A Broader Shift Toward Resilience and Autonomy

Hegseth’s six initiatives collectively move beyond individual weapons programs.

The proposed command for autonomous warfare addresses the organization of future combat capabilities. Project Meridian addresses long-range technology planning. FORTRESS America addresses the physical and industrial foundations that allow forces to operate under attack. The new base concept addresses future infrastructure, while America’s Corps of Cadets focuses on personnel and leadership pipelines.

That combination reflects a broader shift in military modernization from individual platforms toward the systems that connect technology, people, infrastructure and industrial capacity.

Whether the approach produces measurable changes in U.S. military readiness will depend on implementation, funding, congressional authorities and the ability of the services to integrate the new structures with existing programs.

For now, the September 30 State of the Force address marks the beginning of those processes rather than their completion.