Recently, former President Donald Trump stated His intention to “call for the resignation of all senior military officials involved in the disaster in Afghanistan” hearkens back to his past comments over the summer calling for the resignation or firing of generals and admirals who had politicized the mission and discredited their leadership.
Not surprisingly, critics of the president on the left have described the depoliticization of the military as “Loyalist“Injecting senior officers into the military's senior echelons will be a modest but important component of any effort to restore the military's organizational integrity. (Related article: Terence P. Jeffrey: The message Biden should send to China)
As an example of the dangerous politicization of the military: Lieutenant General Shoshana Chatfield To his former fellow soldiers Skeptical of the law It failed to pass Congress because a large proportion of House and Senate members are men. Air Force Major General Scott Cain “A message of unityCommenting on the death of George Floyd, he inappropriately embroiled leadership at Eglin Air Force Base in a media-driven cultural and political storm.
in 2023 Department of Defense Pride Events, Lieutenant General Deanna Burtrecognized by Defense Scoop Pioneerswhich seems to have been criticized.Anti-LGBTQ” The law was denounced as harmful to military readiness. Lt. Gen. Burt, who was in a Space Force uniform from the Pentagon, declared:Affirming gender“Legislation protecting children from sex-reassignment surgery would be detrimental to military readiness,” Lt. Gen. Burt said. Every corner of Congress and Online ConservativesBut there was no formal reprimand for politicizing her job and inserting herself into a heated political debate.
The sentiments expressed by Chatfield and Burt were widespread throughout the military leadership. Lieutenant General Ronald P. Clark Recently promoted to general and nominated for assignment CommanderThe U.S. Army Pacific Command at Fort Shafter in Hawaii has declared its allegiance to left-wing ideology. In 2020, Clark spoke at Duke University.He advocated for “diversity and inclusion in the senior ranks” and said “we need to have mentors at the academy and visit the ROTC program.”
In the same speech, he advocated for renaming the base and supporting removing Gen. Robert E. Lee's name from recruiting materials. Lectures for Association of the U.S. Army Midday ReportClark said diversity and inclusion are the Army's “goals.”
Although there appears to be an increasingly liberal trend among the military elite, these senior military leaders do not deserve promotion. According to the survey According to the Center for American Renewal, more than 42% of generals and admirals publicly support DEI as military policy.
Although civil service ethics and standards require them to remain politically neutral and eschew partisan politics, nearly 40 of the more than 500 generals have made their political beliefs an important part of their public identity.
These political biases are coming at a time when our military faces a double crisis. Recruitment The Army may meet its recruiting goal for the first time in three years in 2024, but that's because The goal was loweredAccording to The Wall Street JournalFewer than 9% of veteran households want their family members to join the military, 80% of enlistees come from veteran familiesAmerican Principles Project Survey More than one-third of recently discharged veterans have children. Serve That's because the military's leadership has become politicized, with left-wing political policies alienating families the military has traditionally relied on to fill its ranks and exacerbating the recruitment crisis.
“In his next term, Trump will have the right and the obligation to correct this crisis of perception and performance by firing generals and admirals who, objectively, demonstrate a lack of willingness to uphold their oath of office. The politicization of the officer service is reason enough for any president to make military personnel decisions.” 18 U.S.C. Chapter 29, Article 88 of the UCMJ, Dodd 1344.10 It would allow the commander in chief to legitimately investigate online activity to determine whether politics have affected an officer's ability to do their job. This is not a witch hunt, as left-leaning reporters may misrepresent, but a common-sense effort to keep politics out of the military.
The next Trump Administration should select a Secretary of Defense who is committed to this important mission. Title 10, Code 526 It gives the Secretary of State the power to reduce the ranks of general officers below the legal minimum of 240. In World War II, there were only seven four-star generals with approximately 15 million active-duty soldiers. In 2024, with 1.3 million Americans on active duty, a roster of 42 four-star generals creates complexity that convolutes the bureaucracy. The explosion in the officer ranks has led to a top-heavy, unwieldy organization.
Reducing the number of bloated generals would have benefits beyond eliminating left-wing ideology and improving the agility of the military as a whole: Generals require significant financial support from the Department of Defense. RAND estimates The average O-7 general (one star) costs about $600,000 in salary, staff, and benefits. For an O-10 (four star), this number rises to $3 million. In some cases, the rank of an O-10 general alone can cost as much as $10 million per year.
These expenditures are even more puzzling when so many ranks are surplus to current military needs: In World War II, the ratio of generals to active duty soldiers was 1:6,000; today it is 1:1,400. If Trump were to go ahead with a reorganization of the combatant commands and decide to reduce the current number of generals to meet this ratio, he would immediately save up to $400 million.
By reducing the bloated officer ranks, the military could focus on confronting real threats instead of promoting critical race theory, DEI, and transgenderism. Then, perhaps, we could address our recruitment/retention and readiness crises and restore the health and vitality of our military under stronger, leaner, and more capable leadership.
Because this effort is likely to invite criticism from both political parties who rush to defend officers who are their friends or who live in their own states or districts, the White House should remain closely involved in officer promotions to ensure the integrity of future leaders and return the military to proper civilian control under political leadership chosen by the president and commander in chief. Previous research.
With determined and committed leadership, the next Trump Administration can restore the officer corps to the standard military professional ethics essential to the war effort and national defense.
Troup Hemenway is president of personnel policy and founder of the Association of Republican Presidential Appointees. Will Thibault is director of the American Military Project at the Claremont Institute's Center for the American Way of Life.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.
As an independent, nonpartisan news service, all content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation is available free of charge to any legitimate news publisher with a large readership. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and affiliation with the DCNF. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
