🔗 Share this article

The former president and his Pentagon chief his appointed defense secretary are mounting an aggressive push to politicise the senior leadership of the American armed forces – a push that smacks of Soviet-era tactics and could require a generation to undo, a former senior army officer has stated.

Maj Gen Paul Eaton has raised profound concerns, stating that the campaign to align the higher echelons of the military to the president’s will was extraordinary in recent history and could have lasting damaging effects. He warned that both the reputation and capability of the world’s most powerful fighting force was under threat.

“When you contaminate the body, the solution may be very difficult and painful for administrations in the future.”

He stated further that the actions of the administration were putting the status of the military as an non-partisan institution, separate from party politics, in jeopardy. “As the phrase goes, reputation is earned a drop at a time and lost in torrents.”

A Life in Service

Eaton, seventy-five, has spent his entire life to defense matters, including nearly forty years in uniform. His father was an air force pilot whose B-57 bomber was lost over Southeast Asia in 1969.

Eaton personally was an alumnus of West Point, graduating soon after the end of the Vietnam conflict. He advanced his career to become infantry chief and was later deployed to Iraq to train the Iraqi armed forces.

Predictions and Current Events

In the past few years, Eaton has been a vocal opponent of perceived manipulation of defense institutions. In 2024 he was involved in scenario planning that sought to model potential concerning actions should a a particular figure return to the presidency.

A number of the outcomes envisioned in those exercises – including politicisation of the military and sending of the national guard into certain cities – have already come to pass.

The Pentagon Purge

In Eaton’s assessment, a first step towards eroding military independence was the installation of a media personality as the Pentagon's top civilian. “He not only pledges allegiance to the president, he professes absolute loyalty – 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 top military lawyers. Also removed were the service chiefs.

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

A Historical Parallel

The removals also created uncertainty throughout the ranks. Eaton said the impact was reminiscent of Joseph Stalin’s elimination of the military leadership in the Red Army.

“The Soviet leader purged a lot of the top talent of the military leadership, and then installed political commissars into the units. The doubt that gripped the armed forces of the Soviet Union is reminiscent of today – they are not executing these men and women, 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 debate over deadly operations in the Caribbean is, for Eaton, a symptom of the damage that is being wrought. The Pentagon leadership has stated the strikes target “narco-terrorists”.

One early strike has been the subject of legal debate. Media reports revealed that an order was given to “take no prisoners.” Under US military manuals, it is a violation to order that survivors 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 murder. So we have a serious issue here. This decision looks a whole lot like a WWII submarine captain attacking victims in the water.”

Domestic Deployment

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

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

Eaton’s gravest worry is a direct confrontation between federal forces and state and local police. He described 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 both sides think they are following orders.”

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