The Former President's Push to Politicize American Armed Forces Echoes of Stalin, Warns Top Officer

The former president and his defense secretary his appointed defense secretary are leading an aggressive push to infuse with partisan politics the senior leadership of the US military – a push that is evocative of Stalinism and could require a generation to undo, a former infantry chief has cautions.

Retired Major General Paul Eaton has sounded the alarm, stating that the initiative to align the senior command of the military to the executive's political agenda was unparalleled in modern times and could have long-term dire consequences. He noted that both the reputation and capability of the world’s dominant armed force was at stake.

“When you contaminate the institution, the cure may be exceptionally hard and damaging for presidents downstream.”

He added that the decisions of the administration were placing the status of the military as an non-partisan institution, free from party politics, at risk. “As the phrase goes, trust is earned a drip at a time and emptied in gallons.”

An Entire Career in Uniform

Eaton, 75, has devoted his whole career to defense matters, including over three decades in uniform. His father was an military aviator whose B-57 bomber was lost over Laos in 1969.

Eaton himself was an alumnus of West Point, graduating soon after the end of the Vietnam war. He advanced his career to become infantry chief and was later sent to Iraq to restructure the local military.

Predictions and Current Events

In recent years, Eaton has been a consistent commentator of perceived manipulation of defense institutions. In 2024 he took part in tabletop exercises that sought to predict potential power grabs should a certain candidate return to the presidency.

Several of the outcomes simulated in those drills – including politicisation of the military and deployment of the national guard into urban areas – have reportedly been implemented.

The Pentagon Purge

In Eaton’s assessment, a opening gambit towards undermining military independence was the selection of a media personality as secretary of defense. “He not only pledges allegiance to the president, he declares personal allegiance – whereas the military is bound by duty to the rule of law,” Eaton said.

Soon after, a series of firings began. The independent oversight official was fired, followed by the senior legal advisors. Subsequently ousted were the senior commanders.

This Pentagon purge sent a direct and intimidating message that rippled throughout the armed forces, Eaton said. “Comply, or we will dismiss you. You’re in a changed reality now.”

An Ominous Comparison

The dismissals also created uncertainty throughout the ranks. Eaton said the effect drew parallels to Joseph Stalin’s elimination of the best commanders in the Red Army.

“Stalin killed a lot of the most capable of the military leadership, and then placed political commissars into the units. The fear that gripped the armed forces of the Soviet Union is comparable with today – they are not killing these individuals, but they are ousting them from leadership roles with parallel consequences.”

The end result, Eaton said, was that “you’ve got a dangerous precedent inside the American military right now.”

Rules of Engagement

The debate over lethal US military strikes in the Caribbean is, for Eaton, a indication of the erosion that is being caused. The Pentagon leadership has asserted the strikes target “narco-terrorists”.

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

Eaton has stated clearly 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 looks a whole lot like a U-boat commander firing upon survivors in the water.”

Domestic Deployment

Looking ahead, Eaton is extremely apprehensive that breaches of rules of war outside US territory might soon become a possibility at home. The administration has federalised state guard units and sent them into multiple urban areas.

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

Eaton’s biggest fear is a direct confrontation between federal forces and state and local police. He described a hypothetical 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 all involved think they are right.”

At some point, he warned, a “significant incident” was likely to take place. “There are going to be civilians or troops getting hurt who really don’t need to get hurt.”