🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump and his Pentagon chief his appointed defense secretary are mounting an systematic campaign to infuse with partisan politics the senior leadership of the American armed forces – a push that bears disturbing similarities to Stalinism and could require a generation to repair, a retired infantry chief has stated.

Retired Major General Paul Eaton has issued a stark warning, saying that the effort to bend the higher echelons of the military to the president’s will was unparalleled in living memory and could have severe future repercussions. He cautioned that both the standing and efficiency of the world’s most powerful fighting force was at stake.

“When you contaminate the organization, the solution may be very difficult and damaging for commanders downstream.”

He added that the decisions of the administration were placing the status of the military as an independent entity, separate from electoral agendas, in jeopardy. “As the phrase goes, credibility is built a ounce at a time and emptied in torrents.”

An Entire Career in Uniform

Eaton, 75, has devoted his whole career to defense matters, including nearly forty years in the army. His father was an air force pilot whose B-57 bomber was shot down over Laos in 1969.

Eaton personally was an alumnus of West Point, graduating soon after the end of the Vietnam conflict. He advanced his career to become a senior commander and was later assigned to the Middle East to train the Iraqi armed forces.

War Games and Current Events

In the past few years, Eaton has been a vocal opponent of alleged political interference of defense institutions. In 2024 he was involved in scenario planning that sought to anticipate potential authoritarian moves should a a particular figure return to the Oval Office.

Many of the scenarios predicted in those exercises – including politicisation of the military and deployment of the national guard into urban areas – have already come to pass.

The Pentagon Purge

In Eaton’s assessment, a key initial move towards eroding military independence was the appointment of a political ally as secretary of defense. “He not only swears loyalty to an individual, he declares personal allegiance – whereas the military swears an oath to the nation's founding document,” Eaton said.

Soon after, a succession of firings began. The military inspector general was removed, followed by the judge advocates general. Subsequently ousted were the top officers.

This wholesale change sent a direct and intimidating message that echoed throughout the branches of service, Eaton said. “Toe the line, or we will fire you. You’re in a changed reality now.”

A Historical Parallel

The dismissals also planted seeds of distrust throughout the ranks. Eaton said the impact was reminiscent of the Soviet dictator's 1940s purges of the top officers in the Red Army.

“Stalin killed a lot of the top talent of the military leadership, and then placed party loyalists into the units. The fear that permeated the armed forces of the Soviet Union is similar to today – they are not executing these men and women, but they are ousting them from positions of authority 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 controversy over lethal US military strikes in international waters is, for Eaton, a symptom of the erosion that is being caused. The administration has asserted the strikes target “narco-terrorists”.

One initial strike has been the subject of legal debate. Media reports revealed that an order was given to “kill everybody.” Under US military manuals, it is prohibited to order that survivors must be killed irrespective of whether they are a danger.

Eaton has stated clearly about the illegality of this action. “It was either a violation of the laws of war or a homicide. So we have a serious issue here. This decision bears a striking resemblance to a U-boat commander machine gunning survivors in the water.”

Domestic Deployment

Looking ahead, Eaton is extremely apprehensive that breaches of international law overseas might soon become a possibility at home. The administration has nationalized state guard units and sent them into numerous cities.

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

Eaton’s gravest worry is a direct confrontation between federal forces and local authorities. He conjured up 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 escalation in which each party 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.”