Jeffrey Goldberg reveals sensitive U.S. military plans from Signal chat
- Goldberg was mistakenly added to a Signal group chat of national security officials discussing military operations against Houthi militants in Yemen.
- The Atlantic published details from the chat, including a timeline of military strikes, inciting controversy over potential national security violations.
- The incident has led to ongoing discussions about the balance between journalistic responsibility and national security.
In a recent publication, Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic disclosed details from an encrypted group chat on the messaging app Signal, which he was accidentally added to. The chat included high-ranking national security officials discussing military operations against Houthi militants in Yemen. These discussions occurred shortly before a military operation was initiated, leading to the subsequent publication of the timeline for attacks and specific instructions regarding military actions. Despite the publication occurring over a week after the strikes on the Houthis, the decision raised significant concerns regarding national security protocol and journalistic ethics. The article sparked outrage among members of the Trump administration, with several officials criticizing Goldberg’s decision to release content from the chat. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, who reportedly added Goldberg to the chat, stated he took full responsibility for the error but questioned whether Goldberg had deliberately infiltrated the conversation or if it was due to technical issues. The officials reiterated, however, that no classified information was shared during the discussion, which has brought the legality and ethical considerations about publishing such information into debate. Merely weeks after the attacks, Republican representatives and administration members expressed dismay over what they perceived as irresponsibility in publishing information that could jeopardize national security. Goldberg, in his defense, claimed he refrained from sharing certain sensitive details, including the identities of CIA operatives and specific military targets. Nonetheless, he argued that there is a public interest in understanding how senior officials were communicating regarding essential military operations on an unsecured platform. The conversation around this incident continues to unfold, with Congress members investigating the implications of such discussions taking place in nonsecure messaging environments. The National Security Council is reviewing the details of the published messages to determine the severity of the breach, if any, and how such occurrences can be avoided in the future to maintain operational security for national defense.