In an unclassified summary released by the Pentagon on Monday, an internal review shed light on the handling of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin hospitalization in January, following surgery to treat prostate cancer. While acknowledging room for improvement in processes, the review emphasized the absence of ill intent or deliberate concealment.
The three-page summary attributed the delayed disclosure to the unprecedented nature of the situation and the desire to uphold Austin’s medical privacy. It highlighted the necessity for clearer guidelines to facilitate smoother transitions of authority in such circumstances.
Following the release of the review, Austin directed the implementation of its recommendations, aiming to enhance preparedness for potential future transfers of authority. Notably, Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks assumed Austin’s responsibilities during his hospitalization, a decision made by his military assistants once he was transferred to critical care.
Criticism ensued as it came to light that neither Hicks nor the White House were informed of Austin’s hospitalization until two days after his transfer to critical care.
Also Read | Pentagon Watching Strange Balloon in Western US Sky
Congress and the public were only made aware on Jan. 5, prompting scrutiny over the delayed notification.
Acknowledging the missteps, Austin assumed full responsibility for the handling of the situation, expressing regret over the delayed disclosure during a subsequent press conference upon his return to work at the Pentagon.
He acknowledged his failure to inform both the president and the American public about his cancer diagnosis, accepting accountability for the oversight.
As Austin prepares to testify before the House Armed Services Committee on Thursday regarding the events surrounding his hospitalization, scrutiny over the handling and disclosure of the incident remains heightened.
Alongside the internal review, the Defense Department inspector general has launched an independent investigation, reflecting the seriousness with which the matter is being addressed.
