Jack Reed, a Democrat, represents Rhode Island in the U.S. Senate and is a former Army paratrooper.
Firing military officers for perceived disloyalty endangers the nation
Trump’s removal of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, others might only be the beginning.
February 21, 2025 The Washington Post
By Jack Reed
The implications for our national security cannot be overstated. A clear message is being sent to military leaders: Failure to demonstrate personal and political loyalty to Trump could result in retribution, even after decades of honorable service. In particular, firing the military’s most senior legal advisers is an unprecedented and explicit move to install officers who will yield to the president’s interpretation of the law, with the expectation they will be little more than yes men on the most consequential questions of military law.
Trump has already fired the Coast Guard’s top admiral, Linda Fagan, for reasons that appear political. He has taken partisan steps by stripping retired Gen. Mark A. Milley and former defense secretary Mark T. Esper of their protective details and removing their portraits from the Pentagon.
The firings are sure to create a dangerous ripple up and down the ranks. Leaders might hesitate to refuse illegal orders, speak their minds about best practices or call out abuses of power.
A commitment to provide the “best military advice” exists at every level in the ranks. Commanders expect their troops to give them the facts, straight and true, because lives are on the line. But firing officers as a political litmus test poisons this military ethos. It sends an immediate signal to service members that the best military advice might have career-ending consequences.
Congress expects the same candor from senior officers as presidents have enjoyed for decades. Lawmakers like me rely on senior officers to provide their best judgments — without fear of retribution — for both the security of our country and that of the 2 million service members who put themselves in harm’s way.
As retired Gen. Martin Dempsey and Peter Feaver recently wrote: “Preemptively firing generals would only politicize the military and make it less candid, less ready, less professional and less lethal.”
Trump’s advisers have defended the firings and their “warrior board” proposal by pointing to Gen. George C. Marshall’s “plucking board” of 1940, which removed senior military officers who had languished in the service for years. Marshall’s actions did lead to a number of generals being dismissed. But the current administration fails to acknowledge that Marshall’s board was not designed to cull senior leaders for their personal beliefs but rather to quickly create promotion opportunities for promising junior officers ahead of America’s entrance to World War II.
The comparison is not relevant. Young officers at that time were stymied by a promotion system that rewarded seniority above merit, unlike today’s system.
Further, Marshall was able to carry out his review board only because Congress — through the Second Supplemental Appropriation Act of 1940 — reformed the criteria for military promotions by prioritizing merit over seniority. Trump is endangering our security by ignoring existing law and injecting politics and nonmerit principles into the military promotion system.
As in Marshall’s era, the United States will face threats in the years ahead, and we must ensure that the rising generation of military leaders is prepared to meet them.
U.S. service members, like the nation they represent, are extremely diverse in racial, socioeconomic and political backgrounds. All of them should expect that they can have successful careers in the military. However, if young Americans perceive the military to be a place where leaders are punished at the whims of politicians, we will lose countless potential recruits.
When I joined the Army in the early 1970s, the military was rife with racial tension, women were prohibited from many roles and entire communities of Americans were banned from serving. Today, our military is fully integrated and every qualified individual, regardless of gender, race, religion or sexual orientation may pursue a military career. By no coincidence, our military is more lethal than ever.
We need it to remain so. Trump is entitled to a staff of civilians who are politically loyal to him. For the safety of all Americans, however, his military officers must remain free to give their best military advice without fear of reprisal.