🔗 Share this article

The former president and his defense secretary his appointed defense secretary are engaged in an aggressive push to infuse with partisan politics the highest echelons of the American armed forces – a move that bears disturbing similarities to Soviet-era tactics and could take years to rectify, a retired infantry chief has cautions.

Retired Major General Paul Eaton has raised profound concerns, arguing that the initiative to align the senior command of the military to the executive's political agenda was extraordinary in living memory and could have lasting damaging effects. He warned that both the reputation and operational effectiveness of the world’s dominant armed force was in the balance.

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

He continued that the actions of the current leadership were jeopardizing the standing of the military as an independent entity, outside of electoral agendas, at risk. “To use an old adage, trust is built a drip at a time and drained in buckets.”

An Entire Career in Uniform

Eaton, seventy-five, has devoted his whole career to military circles, including 37 years in uniform. His father was an military aviator whose B-57 bomber was lost over Laos in 1969.

Eaton himself trained at West Point, earning his commission soon after the end of the Vietnam conflict. He advanced his career to become a senior commander and was later sent to the Middle East to rebuild the Iraqi armed forces.

War Games and Current Events

In the past few years, Eaton has been a consistent commentator of perceived political interference of military structures. In 2024 he was involved in war games that sought to anticipate potential concerning actions should a a particular figure return to the presidency.

A number of the outcomes envisioned in those planning sessions – including politicisation of the military and deployment of the national guard into certain cities – have since occurred.

A Leadership Overhaul

In Eaton’s view, a opening gambit towards undermining military independence was the selection of a television host as secretary of defense. “The appointee not only swears loyalty to an individual, he professes absolute loyalty – whereas the military swears an oath to the constitution,” Eaton said.

Soon after, a succession of dismissals began. The independent oversight official was removed, followed by the top military lawyers. Out, too, went the senior commanders.

This Pentagon purge sent a unmistakable and alarming message that reverberated 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 created uncertainty throughout the ranks. Eaton said the impact drew parallels to Joseph Stalin’s 1940s purges of the best commanders in Soviet forces.

“Stalin purged a lot of the best and brightest of the military leadership, and then placed political commissars into the units. The fear that swept the armed forces of the Soviet Union is similar to today – they are not killing 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 furor over deadly operations in Latin American waters is, for Eaton, a sign of the harm that is being inflicted. The Pentagon leadership has claimed the strikes target cartel members.

One early strike has been the subject of intense scrutiny. Media reports revealed that an order was given to “take no prisoners.” Under accepted military manuals, it is prohibited to order that all individuals must be killed irrespective of whether they are a danger.

Eaton has no doubts about the potential criminality of this action. “It was either a violation of the laws of war or a homicide. So we have a major concern here. This decision is analogous to a WWII submarine captain attacking survivors in the water.”

The Home Front

Looking ahead, Eaton is deeply worried that violations of rules of war abroad might soon become a threat at home. The administration has federalised national guard troops and sent them into numerous cities.

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

Eaton’s gravest worry is a dramatic clash between federal forces and local authorities. He described a imaginary 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 both sides think they are acting legally.”

At some point, 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.”