🔗 Share this article

The former president and his defense secretary his appointed defense secretary are mounting an concerted effort to politicise the senior leadership of the American armed forces – a strategy that bears disturbing similarities to Stalinism and could need decades to undo, a former senior army officer has warned.

Maj Gen Paul Eaton has sounded the alarm, arguing that the campaign to subordinate the senior command of the military to the executive's political agenda was unparalleled in living memory and could have severe future repercussions. He noted that both the reputation and efficiency of the world’s dominant armed force was in the balance.

“Once you infect the body, the solution may be very difficult and costly for commanders in the future.”

He added that the moves of the administration were putting the position of the military as an independent entity, outside of party politics, in jeopardy. “As the phrase goes, credibility is built a drop at a time and emptied in torrents.”

An Entire Career in Uniform

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

Eaton personally graduated from West Point, completing his studies soon after the end of the Vietnam conflict. He rose through the ranks to become infantry chief and was later assigned to the Middle East to rebuild the Iraqi armed forces.

Predictions and Reality

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

Several of the outcomes predicted in those planning sessions – including partisan influence of the military and deployment of the state militias into jurisdictions – have reportedly been implemented.

A Leadership Overhaul

In Eaton’s view, a opening gambit towards eroding military independence was the installation of a media personality 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 constitution,” Eaton said.

Soon after, a wave of dismissals began. The top internal watchdog was removed, followed by the senior legal advisors. Also removed were the senior commanders.

This Pentagon purge sent a direct and intimidating message that echoed throughout the branches of service, Eaton said. “Toe the line, or we will remove you. You’re in a different world now.”

An Ominous Comparison

The dismissals also planted seeds of distrust throughout the ranks. Eaton said the effect reminded him of the Soviet dictator's 1940s purges of the top officers in Soviet forces.

“Stalin purged a lot of the best and brightest of the military leadership, and then installed ideological enforcers into the units. The doubt that permeated the armed forces of the Soviet Union is reminiscent of 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 lethal US military strikes in Latin American waters is, for Eaton, a indication of the erosion that is being inflicted. The administration has asserted the strikes target cartel members.

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 law, it is forbidden to order that all individuals must be killed irrespective of whether they pose a threat.

Eaton has stated clearly about the potential criminality of this action. “It was either a war crime or a murder. So we have a serious issue here. This decision bears a striking resemblance to a WWII submarine captain machine gunning survivors in the water.”

The Home Front

Looking ahead, Eaton is extremely apprehensive that actions of international law outside US territory might soon become a threat at home. The administration has assumed control of state guard units and sent them into multiple urban areas.

The presence of these troops in major cities has been disputed in the judicial system, where legal battles continue.

Eaton’s gravest worry is a direct confrontation between federalised forces and state and local police. He conjured up 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 increase in tensions in which all involved think they are acting legally.”

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