Ongoing reports and analysis

In its first eight months so far, the Trump administration has fired or otherwise relieved some 15 senior military officers, most of whom were high-ranking three- and four-stars in the force. The first three months alone saw the abrupt removal of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the chief of naval operations, commandant of the Coast Guard, vice chief of staff of the Air Force, director of the National Security Agency, and the seniormost lawyers in the Army, Navy, and Air Force. After what seemed like a pause, the forced removals renewed with the firings of the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and two admirals, the unexpected early retirement of the Air Force chief of staff, and the out-of-cycle reassignment of the superintendent of the Naval Academy. In addition, the administration made numerous unexpected personnel appointments that effectively ended the careers of some of the most celebrated military leaders. Beyond all of this, reportedly President Donald Trump plans to personally interview all prospective four-star nominees across the services.

The administration couched the removals as consistent with the presidential prerogative to choose its military advisors. Previous presidents did have this power, and every administration has fired a few military leaders, made some surprise appointments, or exercised close presidential scrutiny of the selection of personnel to a few of the seniormost positions. None has relieved so many, nor shaped the appointments so forcefully, this early in the president’s tenure. No previous administration exercised its power in this dramatic fashion for fear that doing so would effectively treat the senior officer corps as akin to partisan political appointees whose professional ethos is to come and go with changes of administration, rather than career public servants whose professional ethos is to serve regardless of changes in political leadership.

In its first eight months so far, the Trump administration has fired or otherwise relieved some 15 senior military officers, most of whom were high-ranking three- and four-stars in the force. The first three months alone saw the abrupt removal of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the chief of naval operations, commandant of the Coast Guard, vice chief of staff of the Air Force, director of the National Security Agency, and the seniormost lawyers in the Army, Navy, and Air Force. After what seemed like a pause, the forced removals renewed with the firings of the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and two admirals, the unexpected early retirement of the Air Force chief of staff, and the out-of-cycle reassignment of the superintendent of the Naval Academy. In addition, the administration made numerous unexpected personnel appointments that effectively ended the careers of some of the most celebrated military leaders. Beyond all of this, reportedly President Donald Trump plans to personally interview all prospective four-star nominees across the services.

The administration couched the removals as consistent with the presidential prerogative to choose its military advisors. Previous presidents did have this power, and every administration has fired a few military leaders, made some surprise appointments, or exercised close presidential scrutiny of the selection of personnel to a few of the seniormost positions. None has relieved so many, nor shaped the appointments so forcefully, this early in the president’s tenure. No previous administration exercised its power in this dramatic fashion for fear that doing so would effectively treat the senior officer corps as akin to partisan political appointees whose professional ethos is to come and go with changes of administration, rather than career public servants whose professional ethos is to serve regardless of changes in political leadership.

These personnel moves have been poorly explained to both the public and the individuals relieved, but one thing was made clear: None of the officers had committed a grave fault—insubordination or dereliction—that would have made their removal obvious and noncontroversial. To relieve so many senior officers so soon in an administration amounted to a dramatic break with past precedent, raising two obvious questions: What are historical norms and best practices around relieving senior military leaders, and how should senior officers still serving function in the present moment?

Then-U.S. President Bill Clinton (right) speaks with chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell during a ceremony for veterans at the White House in 1993.Dirck Halstead/Getty Images

The power to determine who will lead the military is an important lever of civilian control. The framers of the Constitution saw it as vital and took pains to share that power between the executive and legislative branches. Civil-military relations theory likewise underscores the role of the rewards and punishments inherent in the up-or-out system of promotions. When presidents have expressed an extreme reluctance to exercise control for fear of the political clout of senior military officers—think President Bill Clinton during his first months in office—the resulting diminished expectation of punishment can........

© Foreign Policy