🔗 Share this article

The former president and his Pentagon chief his appointed defense secretary are mounting an concerted effort to politicise the senior leadership of the American armed forces – a push that is evocative of Soviet-era tactics and could require a generation to rectify, a former senior army officer has warned.

Maj Gen Paul Eaton has issued a stark warning, arguing that the campaign to align the higher echelons of the military to the president’s will was extraordinary 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.

“If you poison the institution, the solution may be very difficult and damaging for administrations that follow.”

He added that the decisions of the administration were putting the position of the military as an non-partisan institution, separate from partisan influence, under threat. “As the saying goes, trust is built a drip at a time and lost in buckets.”

A Life in Service

Eaton, 75, has dedicated his lifetime to the armed services, including nearly forty years in active service. His parent was an air force pilot whose B-57 bomber was shot down over Southeast Asia in 1969.

Eaton himself graduated from West Point, earning his commission soon after the end of the Vietnam war. He advanced his career to become infantry chief and was later deployed to Iraq to restructure the local military.

Predictions and Current Events

In recent years, Eaton has been a vocal opponent of alleged manipulation of defense institutions. In 2024 he participated in scenario planning that sought to predict potential authoritarian moves should a a particular figure return to the White House.

Many of the scenarios predicted in those exercises – including partisan influence of the military and use of the national guard into certain cities – have reportedly been implemented.

The Pentagon Purge

In Eaton’s assessment, a opening gambit towards undermining military independence was the appointment of a media personality as secretary of defense. “The appointee not only swears loyalty to the president, he swears fealty – whereas the military takes a vow to the nation's founding document,” Eaton said.

Soon after, a succession of dismissals began. The top internal watchdog was dismissed, followed by the senior legal advisors. Also removed were the senior commanders.

This Pentagon purge sent a unmistakable and alarming message that echoed throughout the armed forces, Eaton said. “Toe the line, or we will dismiss you. You’re in a changed reality now.”

An Ominous Comparison

The removals also sowed doubt throughout the ranks. Eaton said the effect drew parallels to Joseph Stalin’s 1940s purges of the military leadership in Soviet forces.

“Stalin executed a lot of the best and brightest of the military leadership, and then installed political commissars into the units. The fear that gripped the armed forces of the Soviet Union is comparable with today – they are not executing these individuals, but they are stripping them from leadership roles with a comparable effect.”

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

Legal and Ethical Lines

The furor over lethal US military strikes in the Caribbean is, for Eaton, a indication of the erosion that is being inflicted. The administration has stated the strikes target drug traffickers.

One initial strike has been the subject of ethical questions. Media reports revealed that an order was given to “take no prisoners.” Under accepted military doctrine, it is forbidden to order that all individuals must be killed without determining whether they are a danger.

Eaton has no doubts about the ethical breach of this action. “It was either a violation of the laws of war or a murder. So we have a serious issue here. This decision is analogous to a WWII submarine captain attacking victims in the water.”

The Home Front

Looking ahead, Eaton is deeply worried that breaches of engagement protocols outside US territory might soon become a reality within the country. The federal government has federalised national guard troops and sent them into several jurisdictions.

The presence of these troops in major cities has been contested in the judicial system, where lawsuits continue.

Eaton’s gravest worry is a dramatic clash between federalised forces and state and local police. He painted a picture of a hypothetical scenario where one state's guard is federalised and sent into another state against its will.

“What could go wrong?” Eaton said. “You can very easily see an increase in tensions in which all involved think they are acting legally.”

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