It's kinda make sense that the military would want to use homegrown product (in this case, samsung) so they can fully control what's running. They seem to want a fully locked down device, with wifi, usb, tethering, mic and camera disabled while in premise.

The reason is purportedly because iPhones do not fully comply with the restrictions outlined by the National Defence Mobile Security, a mobile device management application operated by the military authorities.

For instance, when activating the security app, it begins to restrict several smartphone functions, including the camera, Wi-Fi, tethering, USB functions and the microphone.

However, Apple does not allow third-party apps to control iPhones’ inherent features, except for the camera.

I don't know too much about the relative security chops of different smartphones, however in terms of what's actually in this article it seems reasonable for the government department to consider the iphone a security issue within the context where it presents this particular problem and for the reason why it presents that problem for them. However, it does also seem like the very reason this is a security concern in this more narrow context is arguably a better security option in almost every other context so I wonder if that's what they were getting at with the scare quotes.

In the case of defence personnel entering secure locations they say the iphone represents a threat because it doesn't allow 3rd party apps to control inherent functions of the device, so the defence force cannot use an app they developed which would presumably do things like disable all voice recording abilities so they can be sure that people walking around secure locations aren't unknowingly or deliberately transmitting or recording conversations and sensitive information. I can see why this would be a problem for them, however if you don't work in defence and are an average consumer, the fact that random 3rd party developers can not do exactly what such an app would be designed to prevent sounds like a more secure way to operate. In that scenario, apps are incapable of controlling inherent functions of the phone unless they're developed by Apple. Obviously this leaves the door just as open for untrustworthy behaviour from Apple themselves, but if you've chosen to trust them, you can at least be sure that no one else is controlling your device in ways you wouldn't want, unless the device is somehow hacked but in that case, well it really doesn't matter which phone it is because somehow it's security has been circumvented and at that point all bets are off.

The issue is probably that they don't have thier own backdoor on iPhones like they probably do with Samsungs.

Doubles as an IED! (I know that's a different phone, just wanted to make that joke.)

An iED?

Also

The devices set to be prohibited include all types of smartwatches and wearable devices as well.

I'm surprised they weren't already restricting most personal electronics in sensitive spaces. That's pretty basic stuff

I’m surprised microphone and camera privileges aren’t part of any device management software.

The headline is technically correct. They are worried over iPhones being used in a manner that affects the security of the military base.

but also informal communications such as private phone calls (within military buildings).

They are worried about iOS being insecure as it's been shown time and time again that iOS devices keep getting hacked and this kind of thing happens. Here is the latest issue with it from 12 days ago.

When dealing with the military, you need to make sure your devices are secure, not "well basic users most likely couldn't break into it."

Now, the title is terrible because it does point out later in the article that many devices will be banned, so it's most likely not just iPhones, but also off the shelf Samsung phones as well. They will most likely want a secure smartphone like a Samsung Tactical Edition smartphone, as those are secure and have military designs.

This sounds a lot like security concerns to me.

I didn't think you understand how the military views security. It is not the same way you or I do.