Trump's joint chiefs shakeup won't politicize military, contends national security expert

President Trump’s decision to fire Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Charles Q. Brown Jr. has drawn criticism from politicians and former military leaders who say the move threatens to politicize the armed forces.

Yet some national security experts say the move does the opposite. Robert Greenway, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Allison Center for National Security, told The Washington Times’ “Threat Status” podcast that Mr. Trump’s decision is consistent with his promise to turn the military away from diversity, equity and inclusion programs and toward lethality and warfighting.

“And I don’t share the concern frankly with many that this is going to indicate or result in a politicized military,” Mr. Greenway said. “I don’t think that’s the case and I don’t think it was the case when this has happened before.”

Mr. Greenway told Threat Status that the president has the right to choose a team that aligns with his vision. He added that the recent dismissals of Gen. Brown and several military lawyers aren’t unprecedented and don’t indicate an attempt to overhaul the typical functions of the military.

“In terms of the service judge advocate generals,” he said, “my assessment of the cause for their termination was they left the boundaries of legal advice within the services and became vocal and enthusiastic advocates for DEI-related principles that drifted away from meritocracy.”

While Air Force Gen. Brown is respected in military circles, he drew heat from conservatives after speaking about his experiences as a Black man in the military in the wake of the death of George Floyd in 2020.

A purely meritocratic military is what Mr. Trump’s new appointee to lead the Joint Chiefs, Air Force Lt. Gen. Dan “Razin” Caine, is all about, according to Mr. Greenway. Gen. Caine has an extensive service record that includes combat roles in Iraq. Mr. Greenway said Gen. Caine gets results and will bring necessary lethality to the armed forces.

“He was deputy commander of the task force responsible for executing the campaign that defeated the territorial caliphate of ISIS,” Mr. Greenway said. “The department wrestled with this in the Obama administration, failed to do it. President Trump came in and consulting with generals like General Cane got the result that we wanted.”

Additionally, Gen. Caine could bring competency and accountability to the Defense Department.

“The department has notoriously failed to pass an audit, no one knows where the money is going, and it’s a lot of money. $850 billion a year. Dan has a unique background in private industry and enterprise. And that gives him an ability, I think, to balance the books,” Mr. Greenway said. “It has to be about competence and character and nothing else or the military is not capable of executing its function. And if it can’t, then we face a survivability crisis.”

Still, Democratic politicians say the firings will erode the political neutrality of the military, asserting that the moves will facilitate Mr. Trump’s goal of using the men and women in uniform to crack down on illegal immigration.

While Gen. Caine’s military record is extensive, he lacks some of the required command assignments to hold the head role of the Joint Chiefs. Mr. Trump could waive that requirement.