🔗 Share this article

The former president and his Pentagon chief his appointed defense secretary are engaged in an concerted effort to politicise the top ranks of the US military – a move that bears disturbing similarities to Soviet-era tactics and could take years to repair, a former senior army officer has warned.

Maj Gen Paul Eaton has raised profound concerns, arguing that the campaign to align the higher echelons of the military to the president’s will was without precedent in recent history and could have severe future repercussions. He warned that both the credibility and efficiency of the world’s dominant armed force was under threat.

“If you poison the institution, the remedy may be very difficult and damaging for commanders downstream.”

He stated further that the actions of the administration were placing the position of the military as an apolitical force, free from partisan influence, in jeopardy. “As the phrase goes, credibility is built a drop at a time and emptied in gallons.”

An Entire Career in Uniform

Eaton, 75, has dedicated his lifetime to military circles, including 37 years in uniform. His father was an air force pilot whose aircraft was shot down over Southeast Asia in 1969.

Eaton personally graduated from the US Military Academy, graduating soon after the end of the Vietnam conflict. He climbed the ladder to become infantry chief and was later sent to the Middle East to train the local military.

Predictions and Reality

In the past few years, Eaton has been a consistent commentator of perceived manipulation of military structures. In 2024 he took part in scenario planning that sought to anticipate potential concerning actions should a certain candidate return to the presidency.

Several of the scenarios predicted in those planning sessions – including partisan influence of the military and use of the state militias into jurisdictions – have already come to pass.

The Pentagon Purge

In Eaton’s view, a key initial move towards undermining 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 is bound by duty to the rule of law,” Eaton said.

Soon after, a wave of firings began. The top internal watchdog was dismissed, followed by the judge advocates general. Out, too, went the service chiefs.

This Pentagon purge sent a clear and chilling message that rippled throughout the branches of service, Eaton said. “Fall in line, or we will dismiss you. You’re in a new era now.”

An Ominous Comparison

The purges also created uncertainty throughout the ranks. Eaton said the effect was reminiscent of Joseph Stalin’s elimination of the best commanders in the Red Army.

“The Soviet leader killed a lot of the most capable of the military leadership, and then placed ideological enforcers into the units. The uncertainty that permeated the armed forces of the Soviet Union is similar to today – they are not killing these individuals, but they are removing them from posts of command with parallel consequences.”

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 lethal US military strikes in Latin American waters is, for Eaton, a indication of the damage that is being inflicted. The Pentagon leadership has stated the strikes target “narco-terrorists”.

One particular strike has been the subject of legal debate. Media reports revealed that an order was given to “kill everybody.” Under accepted military law, it is a violation to order that all individuals must be killed irrespective of whether they pose a threat.

Eaton has no doubts about the potential criminality of this action. “It was either a grave breach or a unlawful killing. So we have a major concern here. This decision bears a striking resemblance to a U-boat commander machine gunning victims in the water.”

Domestic Deployment

Looking ahead, Eaton is profoundly concerned that actions of international law overseas might soon become a reality within the country. The federal government has assumed control of national guard troops and sent them into numerous cities.

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

Eaton’s biggest fear is a direct confrontation between federal forces and local authorities. He painted a picture of 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 escalation in which all involved think they are right.”

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