🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump and his Pentagon chief his appointed defense secretary are mounting an concerted effort to infuse with partisan politics the highest echelons of the US military – a move that bears disturbing similarities to Soviet-era tactics and could require a generation to repair, a retired infantry chief has cautions.

Maj Gen Paul Eaton has issued a stark warning, arguing that the initiative to align the higher echelons of the military to the president’s will was without precedent in living memory and could have long-term dire consequences. He cautioned that both the credibility and operational effectiveness of the world’s most powerful fighting force was in the balance.

“When you contaminate the body, the remedy may be incredibly challenging and damaging for commanders in the future.”

He continued that the moves of the administration were jeopardizing the standing of the military as an non-partisan institution, separate from partisan influence, under threat. “To use an old adage, trust is established a drop at a time and emptied in gallons.”

A Life in Uniform

Eaton, seventy-five, has spent his entire life to the armed services, including over three decades in uniform. His parent was an military aviator whose aircraft was lost over Southeast Asia in 1969.

Eaton personally graduated from the US Military Academy, completing his studies 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 rebuild the Iraqi armed forces.

War Games and Current Events

In recent years, Eaton has been a consistent commentator of alleged political interference of defense institutions. In 2024 he was involved in scenario planning that sought to model potential authoritarian moves should a a particular figure return to the presidency.

Many of the scenarios envisioned in those drills – including politicisation of the military and deployment of the state militias into urban areas – 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 secretary of defense. “He not only expresses devotion to the president, he professes absolute loyalty – whereas the military is bound by duty to the nation's founding document,” Eaton said.

Soon after, a series of firings began. The independent oversight official was dismissed, followed by the judge advocates general. Subsequently ousted were the service chiefs.

This Pentagon purge sent a direct and intimidating message that echoed throughout the branches of service, Eaton said. “Comply, or we will dismiss you. You’re in a new era now.”

An Ominous Comparison

The dismissals also sowed doubt throughout the ranks. Eaton said the effect drew parallels to Joseph Stalin’s elimination of the top officers in Soviet forces.

“The Soviet leader killed a lot of the top talent of the military leadership, and then inserted party loyalists into the units. The uncertainty that permeated the armed forces of the Soviet Union is similar to today – they are not killing these men and women, but they are removing them from posts of command 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 debate over deadly operations in international waters is, for Eaton, a indication of the erosion that is being caused. The administration has claimed the strikes target “narco-terrorists”.

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 irrespective of whether they are combatants.

Eaton has expressed certainty about the illegality of this action. “It was either a war crime or a unlawful killing. So we have a real problem here. This decision bears a striking resemblance to a WWII submarine captain machine gunning victims in the water.”

The Home Front

Looking ahead, Eaton is deeply worried that actions of international law abroad might soon become a reality domestically. The federal government has federalised national guard troops and sent them into multiple urban areas.

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

Eaton’s gravest worry is a violent incident between federal forces and state and local police. He described a hypothetical 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 escalation in which each party think they are following orders.”

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