President Donald Trump has shifted his attention away from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during high-level Iran conflict briefings, giving more weight to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s economic strategy, a move officials say reflects growing doubts about military pressure and mounting supply issues.
President Trump, who launched military action against Iran in February, is now in the seventh month of a grinding conflict that has tested both the Pentagon’s readiness and the administration’s internal unity. According to Reuters reporting, Trump has begun relying more on Bessent’s financial pressure tactics, including expanded Treasury sanctions targeting Iranian oil money, while Defense Secretary Hegseth’s standing inside the Situation Room has appeared diminished.
This reported shift comes after a late July Camp David meeting where Trump confronted Hegseth about dwindling munitions stockpiles, raising questions about the Pentagon’s ability to maintain pressure on Iran. Although the White House has asserted that both secretaries “had equal footing with Trump,” unnamed insiders describe a new dynamic at the top. “The environment changed,” one source told The Daily Mail, adding that Trump “can’t bludgeon them anymore.”
Strikes on Iran have reportedly paused since July 29, with the administration instead emphasizing sanctions designed to disrupt “billions in profits” for the Iranian regime. This pivot has come as Iran continues to resist Trump’s demands regarding its nuclear program and the strategic Strait of Hormuz.
Hegseth, once a key figure in launching the military campaign, now faces scrutiny not only from the White House but also from Congress and within his own party. Earlier rifts over his leadership have spilled into public view, as detailed in recent reporting on adviser departures and replacement rumors.
At the heart of the change is a rare moment of public tension between Trump and Hegseth at Camp David in late July. Trump reportedly pressed Hegseth on whether America’s munitions shortages had been “fixed.” That direct challenge, described by sources as a turning point, was followed by Trump’s growing reliance on Bessent’s economic approach. One insider described the two secretaries’ contrasting styles: “One is a sledgehammer, and the other is a scalpel.”
White House officials have downplayed any sidelining, insisting that “Secretary Bessent has been involved throughout this entire conflict, and Secretary Hegseth will continue to be heavily involved.” But the record shows that Bessent’s role has expanded, especially as military options have narrowed and sanctions become the administration’s primary tool.
Hegseth, meanwhile, continues to provide war updates alongside General Dan Caine, Vice President JD Vance, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Still, critics within Trump’s circle have accused Hegseth of simply “telling Trump what he wants to hear”, an allegation that, whether fair or not, has fueled talk of leadership changes at the Pentagon. Such rumors have circulated before, including reports that Trump had considered ousting Hegseth over disagreements about Iran, as covered in previous coverage of ouster speculation.
With U.S. strikes on Iran apparently halted since late July, the Treasury Department’s sanctions powers have taken center stage. Bessent, who holds a seat on the National Security Council, is now tasked with using financial leverage to disrupt Iranian oil revenues and pressure the regime into concessions. According to Reuters, these sanctions are aimed at cutting off “billions in profits” from Iran’s oil exports, a bet that economic pain will succeed where military force has stalled.
This economic strategy comes at a moment when the Pentagon’s resources are under the microscope. The munitions shortages that surfaced at Camp David have only sharpened the administration’s urgency to find non-military levers. Lawmakers and outside observers have questioned whether the Pentagon’s leadership has prepared adequately for sustained conflict, a theme echoed in recent criticism from Rep. Don Bacon and others who say Hegseth’s approach has left the Pentagon weakened.
Pressure on Hegseth has not been limited to internal administration dynamics. Congressional scrutiny over his firing of senior military officers and broader concerns about the Pentagon’s readiness have put him further on the defensive, as detailed in Senator Susan Collins’s recent confrontation.
The White House has rejected the narrative that Hegseth is being cast aside, emphasizing in public statements that both he and Bessent remain central to the administration’s Iran policy. “Secretary Bessent has been involved throughout this entire conflict, and Secretary Hegseth will continue to be heavily involved,” a White House official told The Daily Mail. Another official insisted the two have “equal footing with Trump.”
Yet the pause in strikes and the new focus on sanctions suggest a clear recalibration. The administration’s hope appears to be that financial pressure will force Iran to the table without further taxing America’s strained military resources. And while Hegseth continues to brief the president, the White House’s own statements and the rhythm of decision-making point to Bessent’s star rising just as Hegseth’s grip weakens.
Trump’s pattern of backing top officials in public while shifting his inner circle’s balance of power is nothing new. After the Camp David confrontation, the president publicly defended Hegseth, an episode explored in recent reporting on Trump’s support for Hegseth, but behind the scenes, priorities and confidantes often change quickly in response to new setbacks.
With the Iran conflict grinding on and Washington’s patience for military stalemate wearing thin, the next phase of the administration’s approach will test whether economic pain alone can deliver results that force the regime’s hand.
When the dust settles, it won’t be rhetoric or titles that matter, but whether the president’s team can deliver measurable results for the American people, without running down our arsenal or letting bureaucratic turf wars dictate national security.