What specific military units or deployments has Pete Hegseth served in that relate to his tattoos?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Pete Hegseth served as an infantry officer in the U.S. Army National Guard and deployed to Guantánamo Bay (2004–05), to Iraq with the 3rd Brigade, 101st Airborne Division (2005–06) as an infantry platoon leader and civil‑military operations officer in Samarra, and later to Afghanistan as a counterinsurgency instructor with the Minnesota Army National Guard; those deployments are repeatedly cited in official and press biographies [1] [2] [3]. His tattoos — notably a Jerusalem (Crusader) cross and the Latin phrase “Deus Vult,” and a later Arabic tattoo reading kafir (“infidel”) — have been linked in reporting to symbols evoking the Crusades and to controversies about whether they signaled anti‑Muslim or Christian‑nationalist sentiment [4] [5] [6].
1. Military record tied to the tattoos: service locations and units
Hegseth’s service record shows helm‑to‑heel National Guard experience that reporters and critics connect to the imagery on his skin. He was commissioned as an infantry officer in the Army National Guard after Princeton and deployed with a New Jersey unit to Guantánamo Bay in 2004–05; he served in Iraq in 2005 as an infantry platoon leader with the 3rd Brigade of the 101st Airborne Division and performed civil‑military operations in Samarra in 2006; in 2012 he deployed to Afghanistan as a senior counterinsurgency instructor with the Minnesota Army National Guard [1] [2] [7].
2. Which tattoos reporters say relate to those deployments
Journalists and fact‑checkers have catalogued Hegseth’s tattoos and highlighted three that critics link conceptually to his combat service and views formed there: a large Jerusalem (Crusader) cross on his chest, the Latin phrase “Deus Vult” on his right biceps, and an Arabic script reading كافر (kafir) that surfaced in 2025 photos [4] [5] [6]. Reporting notes the Crusader cross and “Deus Vult” explicitly reference medieval crusading language and imagery that some interpreters tie to certain combatant or ideological worldviews [8] [4].
3. Interpretations made by news organizations and advocacy groups
Outlets such as The Guardian, New Lines, Snopes, Newsweek and others have framed those inks as provocative in the context of his deployments and public statements. The Guardian and Newsweek reported the Arabic tattoo appears to read “kafir” and called attention to its potential offensiveness to Muslim service members and communities [5] [9]. Snopes and New Lines examined the Crusader‑related imagery and discussed how those symbols are used by some Christian‑nationalist and far‑right circles even if the tattoos could have alternative personal meanings [6] [8].
4. What the sources say about causation versus correlation
Available reporting documents a correlation between Hegseth’s service history and the symbolism of his tattoos but does not provide a definitive, sourced statement from Hegseth tying each tattoo to a specific deployment or unit action. Profiles and fact‑checks catalogue both the deployments and the tattoos and note his own comments in some interviews defending or explaining certain ink, but the material in the provided sources does not establish that a given deployment directly produced a specific tattoo [1] [4] [6]. In other words: the record shows both service and tattoos; sources link them thematically, not with a clear one‑to‑one origin story for each tattoo [1] [4].
5. Competing viewpoints and implicit agendas
Supporters and transition spokespeople framed Hegseth’s tattoos as personal religious and patriotic expression and pushed back on claims they signal extremism [7] [10]. Critics — civil‑rights groups like CAIR and several news outlets — argue the inks (especially “kafir” and crusader imagery) send hostile messages toward Muslims and resonate with Christian‑nationalist currents; CAIR explicitly called the kafir tattoo “a sign of both anti‑Muslim hostility and personal insecurity” [11] [5]. Some opinion outlets and investigative pieces use the tattoos to argue broader concerns about Hegseth’s fitness and worldview; defenders call that politicized targeting [12] [10].
6. What’s not in these sources (and reporting limits)
The provided sources do not include a documented, contemporaneous statement from Hegseth definitively that each tattoo was inked because of a particular deployment, unit, or incident — available sources do not mention a specific deployment as the direct origin of each tattoo [1] [4]. Nor do these items include medical or service‑record evidence linking tattoo controversies to formal disciplinary action beyond reporting of National Guard personnel actions and debate in 2021 [1] [6]. Finally, interpretation of symbols is contested: some outlets stress historical or personal religious meanings while others emphasize current political connotations — both positions are present in the record [8] [6].
Bottom line: Hegseth’s verified deployments (Guantánamo Bay; Iraq with 3rd Brigade, 101st Airborne; Afghanistan training role) are well documented and are the backdrop reporters use to interpret his Crusader and Arabic tattoos; sources link the imagery to contested ideological meanings but do not prove a direct causal link between a specific deployment and an individual tattoo [1] [2] [5] [4].