🔗 Share this article

The former president and his defense secretary his appointed defense secretary are engaged in an concerted effort to infuse with partisan politics the top ranks of the American armed forces – a move that bears disturbing similarities to Stalinism and could take years to repair, a former infantry chief has cautions.

Retired Major General Paul Eaton has issued a stark warning, saying that the effort to align the higher echelons of the military to the executive's political agenda was without precedent in recent history and could have long-term dire consequences. He noted that both the credibility and capability of the world’s dominant armed force was under threat.

“Once you infect the organization, the remedy may be exceptionally hard and painful for presidents in the future.”

He added that the actions of the current leadership were putting the status of the military as an independent entity, outside of partisan influence, in jeopardy. “As the phrase goes, trust is established a ounce at a time and drained in torrents.”

A Life in Uniform

Eaton, 75, has dedicated his lifetime to defense matters, including 37 years in uniform. His parent was an military aviator whose aircraft was lost over Laos in 1969.

Eaton himself graduated from West Point, graduating soon after the end of the Vietnam conflict. He rose through the ranks to become infantry chief and was later deployed to Iraq to train the Iraqi armed forces.

Predictions and Current Events

In recent years, Eaton has been a vocal opponent of perceived political interference of military structures. In 2024 he took part in tabletop exercises that sought to anticipate potential concerning actions should a a particular figure return to the presidency.

A number of the scenarios predicted in those drills – including politicisation of the military and deployment of the state militias into urban areas – have already come to pass.

A Leadership Overhaul

In Eaton’s assessment, a first step towards eroding military independence was the selection of a media personality as secretary of defense. “He not only expresses devotion to the president, he professes absolute loyalty – whereas the military is bound by duty to the nation's founding document,” Eaton said.

Soon after, a succession of removals began. The independent oversight official was dismissed, followed by the judge advocates general. Subsequently ousted were the top officers.

This Pentagon purge sent a direct and intimidating message that echoed throughout the military services, Eaton said. “Comply, or we will fire you. You’re in a new era now.”

An Ominous Comparison

The purges also planted seeds of distrust throughout the ranks. Eaton said the effect reminded him of Joseph Stalin’s political cleansings of the best commanders in the Red Army.

“Stalin executed a lot of the best and brightest of the military leadership, and then placed party loyalists into the units. The fear that swept the armed forces of the Soviet Union is reminiscent of today – they are not killing these men and women, but they are stripping them from leadership roles with similar impact.”

The end result, Eaton said, was that “you’ve got a dangerous precedent inside the American military right now.”

Rules of Engagement

The controversy over armed engagements in the Caribbean is, for Eaton, a indication of the damage that is being wrought. The Pentagon leadership has stated the strikes target drug traffickers.

One particular strike has been the subject of intense scrutiny. Media reports revealed that an order was given to “take no prisoners.” Under US military manuals, it is a violation to order that all individuals must be killed without determining whether they are combatants.

Eaton has stated clearly about the ethical breach of this action. “It was either a violation of the laws of war or a unlawful killing. So we have a real problem here. This decision is analogous to a U-boat commander attacking victims in the water.”

The Home Front

Looking ahead, Eaton is deeply worried that actions of rules of war outside US territory might soon become a threat at home. The federal government has nationalized state guard units and sent them into numerous cities.

The presence of these personnel in major cities has been contested in the judicial system, where legal battles continue.

Eaton’s gravest worry is a violent incident between federal forces and state and local police. He painted a picture of a theoretical scenario where one state's guard is commandeered and sent into another state against its will.

“What could go wrong?” Eaton said. “You can very easily see an confrontation in which each party think they are right.”

Eventually, he warned, a “major confrontation” was likely to take place. “There are going to be civilians or troops getting hurt who really don’t need to get hurt.”