🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump and his Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth are leading an concerted effort to infuse with partisan politics the highest echelons of the American armed forces – a move that smacks of Soviet-era tactics and could require a generation to undo, a retired senior army officer has warned.

Maj Gen Paul Eaton has sounded the alarm, saying that the effort to align the top brass of the military to the executive's political agenda was unparalleled in living memory and could have long-term dire consequences. He noted that both the credibility and capability of the world’s preeminent military was at stake.

“Once you infect the body, the remedy may be incredibly challenging and damaging for presidents downstream.”

He stated further that the moves of the administration were placing the standing of the military as an independent entity, outside of partisan influence, at risk. “To use an old adage, credibility is earned a drip at a time and lost in torrents.”

A Life in Service

Eaton, 75, has spent his entire life to defense matters, including nearly forty years in the army. His parent was an air force pilot whose B-57 bomber was lost over Laos in 1969.

Eaton himself was an alumnus of the US Military Academy, graduating soon after the end of the Vietnam conflict. He advanced his career to become a senior commander and was later deployed to the Middle East to restructure the local military.

Predictions and Current Events

In the past few years, Eaton has been a sharp critic of alleged manipulation of military structures. In 2024 he took part in tabletop exercises that sought to anticipate potential authoritarian moves should a certain candidate return to the Oval Office.

Several of the actions envisioned in those planning sessions – including partisan influence of the military and deployment of the national guard into jurisdictions – have reportedly been implemented.

A Leadership Overhaul

In Eaton’s assessment, a key initial move towards compromising military independence was the installation of a political ally as secretary of defense. “He not only pledges allegiance 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 removed, followed by the judge advocates general. Out, too, went the service chiefs.

This Pentagon purge sent a unmistakable and alarming message that echoed throughout the branches of service, Eaton said. “Fall in line, or we will remove you. You’re in a changed reality now.”

An Ominous Comparison

The removals also sowed doubt throughout the ranks. Eaton said the impact reminded him of Joseph Stalin’s 1940s purges of the best commanders in Soviet forces.

“The Soviet leader executed a lot of the most capable of the military leadership, and then inserted party loyalists into the units. The uncertainty that gripped the armed forces of the Soviet Union is similar to today – they are not executing these individuals, but they are ousting them from positions of authority with a comparable effect.”

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

Rules of Engagement

The furor over deadly operations in the Caribbean is, for Eaton, a indication of the harm that is being caused. 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 “kill everybody.” Under established military manuals, it is prohibited to order that all individuals must be killed without determining whether they are combatants.

Eaton has stated clearly about the illegality 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 looks a whole lot like a U-boat commander machine gunning victims in the water.”

Domestic Deployment

Looking ahead, Eaton is extremely apprehensive that violations of international law outside US territory might soon become a reality domestically. The federal government 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 cases continue.

Eaton’s gravest worry is a violent incident between federalised forces and local authorities. He described a theoretical 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 both sides think they are following orders.”

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