🔗 Share this article

The former president and his Pentagon chief his appointed defense secretary are mounting an concerted effort to infuse with partisan politics the top ranks of the US military – a move that bears disturbing similarities to Soviet-era tactics and could require a generation to repair, a former infantry chief has warned.

Retired Major General Paul Eaton has raised profound concerns, arguing that the campaign to bend the higher echelons of the military to the president’s will was without precedent in living memory and could have lasting damaging effects. He cautioned that both the credibility and efficiency of the world’s most powerful fighting force was in the balance.

“Once you infect the institution, the cure may be exceptionally hard and costly for presidents that follow.”

He continued that the actions of the administration were jeopardizing the status of the military as an apolitical force, outside of partisan influence, at risk. “As the phrase goes, reputation is built a ounce at a time and lost in torrents.”

A Life in Uniform

Eaton, seventy-five, has devoted his whole career to the armed services, including nearly forty years in uniform. His parent was an air force pilot whose B-57 bomber was shot down over Laos in 1969.

Eaton himself trained at the US Military Academy, earning his commission soon after the end of the Vietnam conflict. He climbed the ladder to become a senior commander and was later deployed to Iraq to restructure the Iraqi armed forces.

War Games 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 scenario planning that sought to anticipate potential concerning actions should a a particular figure return to the Oval Office.

A number of the outcomes simulated in those exercises – including politicisation of the military and use of the national guard into jurisdictions – have already come to pass.

The Pentagon Purge

In Eaton’s view, a first step towards undermining military independence was the appointment of a political ally as secretary of defense. “He not only expresses devotion to an individual, he swears fealty – whereas the military is bound by duty to the constitution,” Eaton said.

Soon after, a series of firings began. The military inspector general was fired, followed by the senior legal advisors. Also removed were the top officers.

This Pentagon purge sent a unmistakable and alarming message that reverberated throughout the armed forces, Eaton said. “Fall in line, or we will fire you. You’re in a different world now.”

An Ominous Comparison

The removals also sowed doubt throughout the ranks. Eaton said the situation reminded him of the Soviet dictator's 1940s purges of the military leadership in Soviet forces.

“The Soviet leader executed a lot of the best and brightest of the military leadership, and then placed ideological enforcers into the units. The uncertainty that swept the armed forces of the Soviet Union is similar to today – they are not executing these officers, but they are stripping them from posts of command with a comparable effect.”

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 lethal US military strikes in the Caribbean is, for Eaton, a symptom of the damage that is being caused. The administration has stated the strikes target drug traffickers.

One initial strike has been the subject of intense scrutiny. Media reports revealed that an order was given to “leave no survivors.” Under established military doctrine, it is prohibited to order that every combatant must be killed irrespective of whether they are combatants.

Eaton has expressed certainty about the illegality of this action. “It was either a war crime or a homicide. So we have a major concern here. This decision looks a whole lot like a WWII submarine captain firing upon 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 reality domestically. The administration has nationalized national guard troops and sent them into numerous cities.

The presence of these soldiers in major cities has been challenged in federal courts, where cases continue.

Eaton’s biggest fear is a dramatic clash between federal forces and municipal law enforcement. He painted a picture of a imaginary 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 all involved think they are right.”

Sooner or later, he warned, a “significant incident” was likely to take place. “There are going to be people harmed who really don’t need to get hurt.”