National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster and White House chief of staff John
Kelly watched a presidential appearance alongside Secretary of State Rex
Tillerson and Vice President Mike Pence in August. (photo: Chip
Somodevilla/Getty Images)
America's Slow-Motion Military Coup
By Stephen Kinzer, The Boston Globe
19 September 17
In a democracy, no one should be comforted to hear that generals have
imposed discipline on an elected head of state. That was never supposed to
happen in the United States. Now it has.
Among the most enduring political images of the 20th century was the
military junta. It was a group of grim-faced officers - usually three - who
rose to control a state. The junta would tolerate civilian institutions that
agreed to remain subservient, but in the end enforced its own will. As
recently as a few decades ago, military juntas ruled important countries
including Chile, Argentina, Turkey, and Greece.
These days the junta system is making a comeback in, of all places,
Washington. Ultimate power to shape American foreign and security policy has
fallen into the hands of three military men: General James Mattis, the
secretary of defense; General John Kelly, President Trump's chief of staff;
and General H.R. McMaster, the national security adviser. They do not put on
their ribbons to review military parades or dispatch death squads to kill
opponents, as members of old-style juntas did. Yet their emergence reflects
a new stage in the erosion of our political norms and the militarization of
our foreign policy. Another veil is dropping.
Given the president's ignorance of world affairs, the emergence of a
military junta in Washington may seem like welcome relief. After all, its
three members are mature adults with global experience - unlike Trump and
some of the wacky political operatives who surrounded him when he moved into
the White House. Already they have exerted a stabilizing influence. Mattis
refuses to join the rush to bomb North Korea, Kelly has imposed a measure of
order on the White House staff, and McMaster pointedly distanced himself
from Trump's praise for white nationalists after the violence in
Charlottesville.
Being ruled by generals seems preferable to the alternative. It isn't.
Military officers, like all of us, are products of their background and
environment. The three members of Trump's junta have 119 years of uniformed
service between them. They naturally see the world from a military
perspective and conceive military solutions to its problems. That leads
toward a distorted set of national priorities, with military "needs" always
rated more important than domestic ones.
Trump has made clear that when he must make foreign policy choices, he will
defer to "my generals." Mattis, the new junta's strongman, is the former
head of Central Command, which directs American wars in the Middle East and
Central Asia. Kelly is also an Iraq veteran. McMaster has commanded troops
in Iraq and Afghanistan almost without interruption since he led a tank
company in the 1991 Gulf War.
Military commanders are trained to fight wars, not to decide whether
fighting makes strategic sense. They may be able to tell Trump how many
troops are necessary to sustain our present mission in Afghanistan, for
example, but they are not trained either to ask or answer the larger
question of whether the mission serves America's long-term interest. That is
properly the job of diplomats. Unlike soldiers, whose job is to kill people
and break things, diplomats are trained to negotiate, defuse conflicts,
coolly assess national interest and design policies to advance it.
Notwithstanding Mattis's relative restraint on North Korea, all three
members of Trump's junta promote the confrontational approach that has
brought protracted war in Afghanistan, Iraq and beyond, while fueling
tension in Europe and East Asia.
Our new junta is different from classic ones like, for example, the
"National Council for Peace and Order" that now rules Thailand. First, our
junta's interest is only international relations, not domestic policy.
Second, it did not seize power in a coup, but derives its authority from the
favor of an elected president. Third and most important, it main goal is not
to impose a new order but to enforce an old one.
Last month, President Trump faced a crucial decision about the future of
America's war in Afghanistan. This was a potential turning point. Four years
ago Trump tweeted, "Let's get out of Afghanistan." If he had followed that
impulse and announced that he was bringing American troops home, the
political and military elite in Washington would have been stunned. But
junta members swung into action. They persuaded Trump to announce that
instead of withdrawing, he would do the opposite: reject "rapid exit" from
Afghanistan, increase troop strength, and continue "killing terrorists."
It is no great surprise that Trump has been drawn into the foreign policy
mainstream; the same happened to President Obama early in his presidency.
More ominous is that Trump has turned much of his power over to generals.
Worst of all, many Americans find this reassuring. They are so disgusted by
the corruption and shortsightedness of our political class that they turn to
soldiers as an alternative. It is a dangerous temptation.
e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
