🔗 Share this article

The former president and his defense secretary his appointed defense secretary are leading an systematic campaign to infuse with partisan politics the highest echelons of the American armed forces – a push that is evocative of Stalinism and could require a generation to repair, a former senior army officer has stated.

Maj Gen Paul Eaton has sounded the alarm, saying that the campaign to align the senior command of the military to the president’s will was extraordinary in modern times and could have lasting damaging effects. He cautioned that both the reputation and capability of the world’s dominant armed force was in the balance.

“When you contaminate the organization, the cure may be very difficult and costly for administrations downstream.”

He stated further that the decisions of the administration were jeopardizing the status of the military as an apolitical force, separate from party politics, in jeopardy. “As the phrase goes, trust is established a drop at a time and lost in buckets.”

A Life in Uniform

Eaton, 75, has dedicated his lifetime to defense matters, including nearly forty years in the army. His father was an military aviator whose B-57 bomber was lost over Southeast Asia in 1969.

Eaton himself graduated from West Point, graduating soon after the end of the Vietnam conflict. He advanced his career to become a senior commander and was later assigned to Iraq to train the local military.

War Games and Reality

In recent years, Eaton has been a sharp critic of alleged political interference of military structures. In 2024 he participated in war games that sought to predict potential concerning actions should a certain candidate return to the Oval Office.

A number of the scenarios simulated in those drills – including partisan influence of the military and use of the state militias into jurisdictions – have reportedly been implemented.

The Pentagon Purge

In Eaton’s assessment, a key initial move towards eroding military independence was the installation of a political ally as the Pentagon's top civilian. “The appointee not only expresses devotion to an individual, he declares personal allegiance – whereas the military is bound by duty to the nation's founding document,” Eaton said.

Soon after, a succession of dismissals began. The top internal watchdog was removed, followed by the top military lawyers. Subsequently ousted were the service chiefs.

This wholesale change sent a clear and chilling message that reverberated throughout the branches of service, Eaton said. “Fall in line, or we will remove you. You’re in a new era now.”

A Historical Parallel

The dismissals also sowed doubt throughout the ranks. Eaton said the impact reminded him of Joseph Stalin’s political cleansings of the top officers in Soviet forces.

“Stalin executed a lot of the best and brightest of the military leadership, and then inserted political commissars into the units. The uncertainty that gripped 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 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 furor over lethal US military strikes in international waters is, for Eaton, a sign of the damage that is being wrought. The Pentagon leadership has asserted the strikes target “narco-terrorists”.

One early strike has been the subject of intense scrutiny. Media reports revealed that an order was given to “take no prisoners.” Under established military law, it is prohibited to order that all individuals must be killed regardless of whether they are a danger.

Eaton has expressed certainty about the ethical breach of this action. “It was either a violation of the laws of war or a murder. So we have a major concern here. This decision is analogous to a U-boat commander machine gunning survivors in the water.”

The Home Front

Looking ahead, Eaton is extremely apprehensive that breaches of international law overseas might soon become a reality within the country. The administration has nationalized national guard troops and sent them into several jurisdictions.

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

Eaton’s biggest fear is a dramatic clash between federalised forces and municipal law enforcement. He conjured up 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 all involved think they are acting legally.”

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