Trump-Fired General Warns Against Politicizing Military

Retired General Charles Q. Brown Jr., the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who was fired by President Donald Trump last year, issued a warning about the growing use of the U.S. military in politically charged domestic debates, arguing that asking the armed forces to solve civilian problems risks undermining the institution.

Brown’s warning came in a Foreign Affairs essay published Friday, coinciding with America’s 250th anniversary celebrations. His column, co-authored with Duke University political scientist Peter Feaver and attorney Andrew Kragie, reflects on the relationship between the military and civilian government from the nation’s founding through the present day.

The essay warns against expanding the military’s role in politically contentious domestic missions. While Brown and his co-authors do not cite a specific example, they point to the prospect of using troops to address crime in cities as the kind of responsibility they argue is better handled by civilian institutions.

The authors added a stark warning: “If you ask too much of the military, you risk the entire enterprise.”

Brown and his co-authors stress that the military has an important ceremonial role in national life, citing honor guards, parades and flyovers as examples of legitimate public service. Their concern, they write, arises when the armed forces are increasingly tasked with politically contentious missions better handled by civilian institutions.

Brown's Warning

The essay marks one of Brown’s most significant public interventions since his dismissal as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Trump administration’s broader shake-up of military leadership. Brown was fired in February last year along with several other senior Pentagon officials, a move that sparked concern among some lawmakers and former military leaders who feared that the changes could inject politics into an institution traditionally defined by its nonpartisan role.

Brown’s article frames the issue through the lens of American history, arguing that the nation’s founders were deeply concerned about preventing military power from eclipsing civilian authority.

The authors point to George Washington’s decision to defer repeatedly to the Continental Congress during the Revolutionary War despite frustration with lawmakers, describing it as a foundational example of military leaders remaining subordinate to elected civilian government.

They also cite former President Dwight Eisenhower’s farewell warning about the military-industrial complex, arguing that democracy depends on ordinary citizens and civilian institutions solving political disputes rather than outsourcing them to the armed forces.

In response to the essay, the Defense Department pointed Newsweek to a Friday X post from chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell, who wrote:

“Under the prior administration, Brown helped champion divisive COVID-19 vaccine mandates that purged thousands of capable service members, stood by as mandatory DEI ideology trainings were established that elevated identity over merit, and was silent when ‘extremism’ stand-downs that functioned as witch hunts against conservatives took place.

“These actions eroded readiness, morale, and trust while turning the Pentagon into a vehicle for social engineering. For him to now decry politicization rings hollow. [Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth] has restored an apolitical warrior ethos by eliminating DEI bureaucracies, refocusing leaders on lethality and standards, and empowering commanders to prioritize combat excellence over ideology, delivering the merit-based, mission-focused military our nation demands.”

Pentagon Shake-Up

Brown’s essay landed amid continuing debate over high-profile Pentagon leadership changes during Trump’s second term.

Hegseth has overseen a series of removals, departures and reorganizations involving senior military leaders. Critics have questioned whether the changes risk discouraging officers from providing candid advice, while supporters have argued that civilian leaders have every right to reshape military leadership.

The controversy intensified in recent months following the departure of more senior officers. General Chris Donahue, the head of U.S. Army Europe and Africa, as well as all NATO land forces in Europe, unexpectedly resigned this week as the top U.S. Army chief on the continent.

"General officers and flag officers serve at the pleasure of the president and the secretary of war,” Parnell told Newsweek last weekend. “They always have and always will.”

Senator Tim Kaine warned last weekend that lawmakers are increasingly concerned about whether experienced military leaders are being pushed aside.

“Are you pushing out the truth tellers to surround yourself by yes-men?” the Virginia Democrat asked.

Representative Don Bacon, a Nebraska Republican and former Air Force brigadier general, said last weekend on CNN that the removals had “politicized the process unnecessarily.” Critics have argued that abrupt dismissals without clear explanations could send a signal through the chain of command that disagreement carries professional risk.

Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina has also emerged as one of the administration’s most outspoken critics on the issue. In May, he warned Hegseth against sidelining Donahue, adding in an X post: "Hegseth continues to surprise and disrespect our greatest allies and some of our best military professionals with impulsive decisions not grounded in reality or good judgment."

The debate has fueled discussion in Congress about whether lawmakers should impose new reporting requirements when senior military leaders are removed, though no major restrictions have yet been enacted.

Jason Watson Arrest

The question of politics inside the military was thrust into the spotlight from another direction this week as well.

Major Jason Watson, a decorated Air Force logistics officer stationed in Poland, was arrested Wednesday after staging a protest on the steps of the U.S. Capitol while calling for Trump’s impeachment. According to Capitol Police, Watson refused orders to end the demonstration after the member of Congress who had escorted him onto the steps left the area. He was arrested for alleged crowding, obstructing and incommoding.

Watson, who appeared in uniform during the protest, later became the subject of an Air Force investigation.

“I expect every Airman and Guardian to comply with all laws and policies governing personal conduct, political participation, and the wear of the uniform," Dr. Troy E. Meink, secretary of the Air Force, said in an X post. "Americans place their trust in us. We cannot, and will not, compromise the trust of the Nation."

Military and Democracy

Rather than focusing on any single political controversy, Brown’s essay argues that the challenge extends beyond one administration or one policy dispute.

The authors note that both Republican and Democratic administrations have at times relied heavily on the military when civilian systems seemed unable to address major problems. They cite examples ranging from disaster relief and economic crises to the military’s role during the COVID-19 pandemic.

But they argue that the temptation to turn to the armed forces whenever civilian institutions struggle risks weakening both.

“The military can help by honoring the important national service that civilians do out of uniform,” they wrote. "Service to a cause greater than oneself, a virtue cultivated in military training, is accessible to all regardless of whether they wear the uniform."

As the United States celebrates its 250th birthday, Brown’s message is ultimately less about generals than citizens. The retired chairman argues that the long-term health of the republic depends not on military intervention in political disputes but on civilians maintaining the institutions and traditions of democratic government themselves.

2026 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.

This story was originally published July 3, 2026 at 3:00 PM.