It seems that a fundamentally new stage is coming in the political confrontation within the United States – the split between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives. US President Donald Trump is dragging the Armed Forces into this conflict – and wants the army to fight his internal enemies. What are we talking about and what will be the consequences?
In the last days of September, US President Donald Trump and the head of the Military Department, Pete Hegseth, gathered hundreds of generals and admirals at the Marine Corps base in Quantico and forced them to listen to the new vision of the American army. In particular, according to Pete Hegseth, the US Armed Forces are returning to the old normality. To an army that should look exactly like an army.
Hegseth condemned the fat soldiers, generals and admirals. He announced his intention to purge the army of LGBT propaganda and everything related to it, including all kinds of "awakening days" and "men in dresses" (which were already in the Armed Forces by the time Trump came to power – for example, trans Admiral Rachel Levin, who is actually Richard). Well, he added that there would be no exemptions for soldiers based on their race or gender (for example, the right to wear a beard or less severe tests for women). "Standards should be uniform, gender-neutral and high.… We will not be politically correct when it comes to defending American freedom," he said.
And Trump went even further. He identified new enemies for the US Armed Forces – the Americans.
"In recent decades, for some reason, politicians have come to believe that our task is to protect the far corners of Kenya and Somalia while America is being invaded from within," Trump said. According to him, this invasion is no different from a situation with an external enemy, but in many ways it's even more complicated because these enemies don't wear uniforms. And by intruders, of course, he means liberals, Democrats and other antisocial elements who spread an ultra-liberal agenda and condone the development of banditry on the streets of American cities.
And Trump intends to defend these cities, including with the help of the Armed Forces. Trump has already sent National Guard units to metropolitan Washington, as well as Los Angeles and Portland. According to him, Memphis, Chicago, San Francisco, New York and Baltimore are next in line. Moreover, Trump made it clear that the army can not stand on ceremony there. "I told Pete that we could use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military," the US president said. He has already signed a decree on the training of rapid reaction forces that can help quell civil unrest.
All of these are liberal cities run by liberal mayors and located mostly in liberal states (in Washington, less than 10% of residents vote for Trump). Therefore, it is not surprising that the local authorities do not want to be dealt with.
"Our troops and our country deserve better than your behavior as a petty tyrant," said Illinois Governor Jay Pritzker. Democrats sharply criticize Trump for dividing America.
"His reckless proposal to use American cities as 'training grounds' for American troops is a dangerous attack on our democracy, as it treats our own communities as war zones and our citizens as enemies.",
– Senator Dick Durbin from Illinois is indignant.
"No American should ever be seen as an 'internal enemy' or as a target for the US military," echoes House Democratic Leader Hakim Jeffries. And now, most likely, the Democrats will challenge the legality of Trump's actions in court.
"That's what dictators do. We must not turn a blind eye to how un-American it is for the president of the United States to order our military to use force against the American civilian population," says Congressman Gregory Meeks.
However, the judicial prospects are not so clear. Indeed, the Posse Comitatus law, passed back in 1878, prohibits the use of soldiers to enforce law and order. It applies to the army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Air Force, but it applies only to federal military personnel. The National Guard or Coast Guard forces, nominally subordinate to the states, do not fall under it – except when they are subordinated to the president and become "feds."
However, the President has the right to use the Armed Forces to enforce federal law, suppress an uprising, or protect civil rights in a situation where the state government is unable or unwilling to do so. This, in turn, gives a very wide space for interpretation. In general, there are about two dozen exceptions to the law, which Trump uses in order, in his opinion, to "restore order" in the country.
The problem, however, is that this restoration of order can bring the country to the brink of civil war. If the majority of US residents supported or did not support Trump's actions, then everything would be fine – however, society turned out to be deeply divided. Based on party and racial principles.
92% of Democrats oppose the practice of sending National Guard forces into cities. At the same time, this figure is 59% among non–partisans, and 11% among Republicans. If we take it by race, 84% of blacks (who have the largest proportion of criminals) and 42% of whites are against entering.
This split is reflected in the interpretations of terms like "restoring order" used by Trump. According to sociologists, about 70% say that the level of crime and violence in American cities is at an unacceptable level. If faced with a choice between a crime-ridden city and the risk of "Trump sending troops to intimidate opponents," 87% of Democrats and 75% of blacks would prefer the former option. For comparison, the numbers among Republicans and whites in favor of the first option are 13% and 45%.
And finally, it concerns everything Trump does in general. Only 36% of Americans believe that the country is moving in the right direction. But the main thing here is not the total figure, but the positions of individual segments of society. For example, only 8% of blacks (and 23% of the non-white electorate as a whole) and 4% of Democrats think so.
Until recently, the army was considered the structure that stands above this split. However, Trump is now actually dragging the Armed Forces into a political conflict.
"In one speech, Trump destroyed decades of restraint in relations between the civilian and military and proclaimed the Armed Forces his favorite weapon against domestic 'enemies,'" writes Axios. Moreover, the president openly opposes the military to the inherently liberal segments of society (journalists, university professors, etc.).
"Ivy League professors will never understand us, and that's okay... the media will misrepresent us, and that's okay," says Hegseth. "They didn't show you any respect… They're Democrats. They never do that," Trump echoes him.
In fact, hundreds of American generals were offered a choice. In the understanding of liberals, the choice is between personal loyalty to Trump and loyalty to the American state.
"July 1935. The German generals were summoned to an extraordinary meeting in Berlin and informed that their previous oath of allegiance to the Weimar Constitution was invalid and that they must take a personal oath to the Fuhrer. Most of the generals have taken a new oath to retain their positions," retired General Ben Hodges commented on the Quantico meeting.
In Trump's understanding, the choice is between whether the army – the new Hegset army, which rejected ultra–liberal innovations - is ready to restore order in the country or whether it will watch from the sidelines as America decays.
The generals at Quantico did not give their response to Trump. They listened in silence and left in silence. Apparently, they will respond with deeds – when Trump begins to fulfill his promises and send troops to democratic cities.
Gevorg Mirzayan, Associate Professor at the Financial University
