🔗 Share this article

The former president and his Pentagon chief his appointed defense secretary are engaged in an systematic campaign to infuse with partisan politics the top ranks of the US military – a strategy that is evocative of Soviet-era tactics and could need decades to repair, a retired senior army officer has warned.

Retired Major General Paul Eaton has sounded the alarm, stating that the effort to subordinate the higher echelons of the military to the president’s will was unparalleled in modern times and could have severe future repercussions. He noted that both the credibility and capability of the world’s preeminent military was at stake.

“Once you infect the institution, the remedy may be exceptionally hard and damaging for administrations downstream.”

He continued that the moves of the administration were placing the status of the military as an independent entity, separate from electoral agendas, in jeopardy. “As the saying goes, reputation is built a ounce at a time and lost in gallons.”

An Entire Career in Uniform

Eaton, 75, has spent his entire life to defense matters, including nearly forty years in the army. His parent was an military aviator whose B-57 bomber was shot down over Laos in 1969.

Eaton personally graduated from West Point, earning his commission soon after the end of the Vietnam war. He climbed the ladder to become a senior commander and was later deployed to the Middle East to train the local military.

War Games and Current Events

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

A number of the outcomes predicted in those exercises – including politicisation of the military and use of the state militias into urban areas – have already come to pass.

A Leadership Overhaul

In Eaton’s analysis, a key initial move towards compromising military independence was the appointment of a media personality as secretary of defense. “He not only expresses devotion to the president, he professes absolute loyalty – whereas the military swears an oath to the nation's founding document,” Eaton said.

Soon after, a succession of removals began. The independent oversight official was removed, followed by the judge advocates general. Out, too, went the top officers.

This Pentagon purge sent a clear and chilling message that echoed throughout the armed forces, Eaton said. “Fall in line, or we will fire you. You’re in a changed reality now.”

An Ominous Comparison

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

“The Soviet leader purged a lot of the most capable of the military leadership, and then placed party loyalists into the units. The fear that swept the armed forces of the Soviet Union is reminiscent of today – they are not killing these officers, but they are removing them from posts of command with parallel consequences.”

The end result, Eaton said, was that “you’ve got a 1940s Stalin problem inside the American military right now.”

Rules of Engagement

The furor over lethal US military strikes in the Caribbean is, for Eaton, a symptom of the erosion that is being caused. The administration has claimed the strikes target cartel members.

One particular strike has been the subject of intense scrutiny. Media reports revealed that an order was given to “kill everybody.” Under US military doctrine, it is forbidden to order that survivors must be killed regardless of whether they are a danger.

Eaton has expressed certainty about the illegality of this action. “It was either a grave breach or a murder. So we have a major concern here. This decision looks a whole lot like a WWII submarine captain firing upon survivors in the water.”

Domestic Deployment

Looking ahead, Eaton is extremely apprehensive that breaches of rules of war outside US territory might soon become a threat at home. The administration has assumed control of state guard units and sent them into several jurisdictions.

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

Eaton’s gravest worry is a direct confrontation between federalised forces and municipal law enforcement. 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 confrontation in which each party think they are right.”

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