Trump push to politicize US military ‘reminiscent of Stalin’, top general warns | Donald Trump
The former infantry chief who trained troops to invade Iraq has warned that Donald Trump and defense secretary Pete Hegseth are engaged in an aggressive attempt to politicize the top levels of the US military, which smacks of Stalinism and could take years to repair.
Major General Paul Eaton sounded the alarm in an interview with the Guardian, saying the effort to subordinate the military’s upper echelons to the will of the US president was unprecedented in recent history and could have dire long-term consequences. He warned that both the reputation and efficiency of the world’s most powerful fighting force were in the balance.
“There is an active effort to politicize the armed forces,” Eaton said. “Once you infect the body, treatment can be very difficult and painful for lower-level presidents.”
He added that the actions of Trump and the Pentagon’s pick put the military’s position as an independent entity independent of party politics at risk. “So reputation is built drop by drop and poured into buckets.”
Eaton, 75, has spent his entire life in military circles, including 37 years of active duty. His father was an air force pilot whose B-57 bomber was shot down over Laos in 1969, when Eaton was 18.
The remains of Air Force Colonel Norman Eaton were found and identified in 2006.
Eaton himself was trained at West Point, the US military academy that trains commissioned officers in New York. He graduates shortly after the end of the Vietnam war. He rose through the ranks of the U.S. military to infantry commander and was sent to that country to rebuild the Iraqi armed forces after the initial invasion of Iraq was completed in 2003.
Eaton has harshly criticized Trump’s manipulation of military structures in recent years. In the summer of 2024, he participated in war games organized by the Brennan Center for Justice. The think tank that tried to predict then-Republican candidate Trump’s most dangerous authoritarian move to return to the White House.
Many of the actions envisioned in these tabletop exercises, including the politicization of the military and other key government institutions and the deployment of the national guard to Democratic-controlled cities, have already occurred during Trump’s second presidency.
According to Eaton’s analysis, Trump’s first step toward compromising military independence was to appoint Hegseth as secretary of defense. The former Fox & Friends host was an advisor to Trump and supported his first presidential run in 2016.
“Hegseth not only swears loyalty to Trump, he also swears loyalty to Trump – whereas the military swears loyalty to the constitution,” Eaton said.
The shootings began shortly after Hegseth settled into the Pentagon. Within a week of Trump’s inauguration, the military inspector who served as an independent monitor was fired, followed by the firing of the top official. military lawyers (judge lawyers) advise on the laws of armed conflict.
Senior officers also came out. Charles Brown, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was fired in February and replaced with Lt. Gen. Dan Caine, who Trump claimed had expressed his love for the president and would “kill for him” (Caine has denied ever saying such things). Most senior officers navy and the air force was abandoned in rapid succession.
Eaton said the Pentagon purge sent a clear and chilling message that resonated throughout the military services. “Toe the line, or we’ll fire you. You’re in a different world now. This is Trump’s world, and for God’s sake, that’s what we’re going to do.”
The layoffs also sowed doubt in the ranks. Would senior military officers kowtow to Trump and his defense secretary? Or will they advocate adhering to military rules of engagement?
Eaton said the effect reminded him of Joseph Stalin’s purges of senior officers in the Soviet forces in the 1940s. “Stalin killed many of the best and brightest of military leaders and then installed political commissars in the troops. The suspicion that gripped the Soviet Union’s armed forces is reminiscent today; they do not kill these men and women, but remove them from positions of authority to similar effect.”
The end result, Eaton said, was that “the American military right now has a 1940s Stalin problem.”
For Eaton, the outrage over the U.S. military’s deadly attacks on boats in Latin American waters is a sign of the damage being done. The administration claims the attacks target “narco-terrorists” who are in “armed conflict” with the United States by bringing illegal drugs into the country.
The first of more than 20 strikes occurred on September 2. The incident involved a controversial second attack that led to the deaths of two survivors clinging to the bombed wreckage of the boat.
The Washington Post revealed that Hegseth gave the order to “kill everyone.” According to the manual of the Ministry of Defense laws of warIt is forbidden to order the killing of any combatant, regardless of whether he or she poses a threat.
Eaton has no doubt about the illegality of the second strike on September 2. “It was either a war crime or murder. So we have a real problem here. This decision is akin to a submarine commander machine-gunning victims in the water during World War II.”
Hegseth tried to drive home the new way of doing things at a strange summit of military commanders in Quantico, Virginia, in September. He chastised them for so-called wokeness, liberal thinking, and the presence of “fat generals and admirals in the halls of the Pentagon.”
Anyone in the room who disagreed with him was encouraged to resign.
According to Eaton, the meeting was “disgusting” and “uncharacteristic of the U.S. military. The senior leaders of our armed forces are sober people who do not speak in terms of fatness, ‘kill ’em all,’ or ‘gloves off.'”
Looking ahead to 2026, Eaton is deeply concerned that the Pentagon’s alleged violations of the rules of war outside US territory may soon occur domestically. The Trump administration federalized the National Guard and sent them to numerous cities against the wishes of Democratic mayors and state governors.
The presence of national guard soldiers in Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., the Chicago area and other areas has been challenged in federal courts and litigation is ongoing.
In October, Eaton joined a delegation that included Vote Vets, the organization for which he serves as an advisor, to meet with JB Pritzker, the Democratic governor of Illinois. The retired two-star general said they advised Pritzker to stand firm against sending troops to Chicago.
“We told him: You need to protect your citizens from federal attacks.”
Eaton’s biggest fear is that at some point there could be a dramatic clash of forces, pitting the federal National Guard against state and local police. He envisioned the imaginary scenario of federalizing the Texas national guard (i.e., ordering it out of state control and into national control) and importing it into Baltimore, Maryland, against the wishes of the city and state.
“What could go wrong?” Eaton said. “You can very easily see a tension where both parties feel they are in the right to obey orders they believe were legally given.”
He warned that “an unforgettable event” was likely to happen sooner or later. “People who don’t really need to be hurt will get hurt, too.”
