Defense: Why is Trump purging the Pentagon?
Trump fires a half-dozen top military leaders
President Trump shredded “America’s soft power” by gutting USAID, said Max Boot in The Washington Post. “Now he seems bent on damaging U.S. hard power too.” Hours after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced plans last week to cut 5,400 civilian Pentagon employees, Trump conducted his own “Friday-night massacre.” He fired a half-dozen top military leaders, including Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr.—the second African-American to serve as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff—and Adm. Lisa Franchetti, chief of Naval Operations.
Hegseth offered no rationale for the dismissals, except that they would somehow refocus the military on its “core mission of deterring, fighting, and winning wars.” But it’s telling that Trump’s chosen replacement for Brown is Lt. Gen. Dan “Razin” Caine, a white, retired, three-star Air Force officer. Caine’s selection tells “Black and female officers that their prospects for promotion may be gravely limited,” said Fred Kaplan in Slate. Worse is Trump’s stated reason for the pick: that when he met Caine during a 2018 visit to troops in Iraq, Caine put on a MAGA hat and told him, “I think you’re great, sir. I’ll kill for you, sir.” Trump’s proud sharing of this story—denied by Caine and other officials—is a “nerve-wracking” clue to the president’s plans for the military once he’s cleansed its upper ranks of diversity and suspected disloyalty.
Gen. Brown “is an honorable man,” said Rich Lowry in National Review, but he had to go. The former F-16 pilot “used his position as a political soapbox,” releasing an emotional video after the 2020 killing of George Floyd about the challenges of being Black in the Air Force. Brown’s job is to be a killer, not to pontificate on “hot-button political and social issues.” Like many of the other fired generals, he is a bland product of an “ossified” system that rewards “bureaucratic conformity” over original thinking. That’s doubly true of the military lawyers known as “judge advocates general” (JAGs), said The Wall Street Journal. When Trump fired the three JAGs overseeing the Army, Navy, and Air Force last week, it set off a predictable “media panic” about imminent “lawlessness.” In truth, the JAGs had long favored “risk elimination over mission success,” leaving America’s military far less lethal and effective than it needs to be in this dangerous world.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Call me paranoid, said Charles P. Pierce in Esquire, but yes, it does feel “troublesome” that Trump specifically fired the lawyers charged with resisting illegal presidential orders. Nor was it reassuring when Hegseth explained the JAGs had been fired to stop them from being “roadblocks to anything that happens.” We know what kind of “anything” Hegseth might have in mind, said Paul McLeary in Politico. The former Fox News host promotes a swaggering “warrior ethos” that rejects the Geneva Conventions. In Trump’s first term, he successfully lobbied Trump to pardon two soldiers charged with war crimes and to reinstate Eddie Gallagher, a Navy SEAL accused of killing civilians and stabbing a teenage ISIS prisoner to death.
Trump’s purge has nothing to do with “lethality, or promoting ‘warfighters,’ or any other buzzwords,” said Tom Nichols in The Atlantic. It’s the next step in his pursuit of total power. After capturing the intelligence services, the Justice Department, and the FBI, the Pentagon is “the last piece he needs to establish the foundations for authoritarian control of the U.S. government.” With “his generals” in charge, Trump can start building a military that is loyal to him—and not to the Constitution. “It is praetorianism, plain and simple.”
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
The Week’s big New Year’s Day quiz 2026Quiz of the Year How much do you remember about 2025’s headlines? Put yourself to the test with our bumper quiz of the year
-
Is tanking ruining sports?Today's Big Question The NBA and the NFL want teams to compete to win. What happens if they decide not to?
-
‘Netflix needs to not just swallow HBO but also emulate it’instant opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
Trump considers giving Ukraine a security guaranteeTalking Points Zelenskyy says it is a requirement for peace. Will Putin go along?
-
Why is Trump’s alleged strike on Venezuela shrouded in so much secrecy?TODAY'S BIG QUESTION Trump’s comments have raised more questions than answers about what his administration is doing in the Southern Hemisphere
-
Vance’s ‘next move will reveal whether the conservative movement can move past Trump’Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
What have Trump’s Mar-a-Lago summits achieved?Today’s big question Zelenskyy and Netanyahu meet the president in his Palm Beach ‘Winter White House’
-
Biggest political break-ups and make-ups of 2025The Explainer From Trump and Musk to the UK and the EU, Christmas wouldn’t be Christmas without a round-up of the year’s relationship drama
-
Donald Trump’s squeeze on VenezuelaIn Depth The US president is relying on a ‘drip-drip pressure campaign’ to oust Maduro, tightening measures on oil, drugs and migration
-
Trump appears numerous times in new Epstein batchSpeed Read
-
Trump vs. states: Who gets to regulate AI?Feature Trump launched a task force to challenge state laws on artificial intelligence, but regulation of the technology is under unclear jurisdiction