By Tom Nichols
Monday, January 19, 2026
The United States is a global superpower, and its
military trains for war in every domain. During my years as a military
educator, I saw American officers wrestle with any number of scenarios designed
to challenge their thinking and force them to adapt to surprises. One case we
never considered, however, was how to betray and attack our own allies. We did
not ask what to do if the president becomes a threatening megalomaniac who
tells one of our oldest friends, Norway,
that because the Nobel Committee in Oslo refuses to give him a trophy, he no
longer feels “an obligation to think purely of Peace” and can instead turn his
mind toward planning to wage war against NATO.
As
my colleague Anne Applebaum wrote today, Donald Trump’s threatening message
to the Norwegian prime minister should, in any responsible democracy, force the
rest of the U.S. political system to act to control him. The president is
talking about an invasion that would require “citizens of a treaty ally,” as
she put it, “to become American against their will,” all because he “now
genuinely lives in a different reality.” And yet neither Congress nor the
sycophants in the White House seem willing to stop him.
The U.S. military is obligated by law, and by every
tradition of American decency, to refuse to follow illegal orders. But what
about orders that may not be illegal but are clearly immoral and illogical? The
president, for example, can order the Pentagon to plan for an invasion
of Greenland; such an order would be little more than a direction to organize
one more war game. (The military, as it sometimes does during war
games, might not even use real place names, but rather use maps that look a
lot like the North Atlantic as it organizes an invasion of “Verdegrun” or
something.)
But after years of experience with American military
officers, I believe that even these hypothetical instructions will sound
utterly perverse to men and women who have served with the Danes and other NATO
allies. Denmark not only was our ally during the world wars of the 20th
century, but also, as my colleague Isaac Stanley-Becker has written, joined our
fight against the Taliban after 9/11 and suffered significant
casualties for a small nation. Their soldiers bled and
died on the same battlefields as Americans.
American officers know what
Trump is planning—the world knows it, because Trump won’t stop saying
it—and their minds will rebel at directives to take everything they’ve prepared
to do for years and apply it backwards, against the people they have
trained to work with and protect. The president, in other words, will be
ordering them to do something they have been trained never to do.
America’s armed forces are conditioned to obey the orders
of civilian authorities, and rightly so. But these will be orders that force
U.S. military minds to step into a horrifying mirror universe where
the United States is the aggressor against NATO, a coalition that includes
countries that have been our friends for centuries. Should Trump pursue this
scheme of conquest, the military’s training will have to be shattered and
reassembled into a destructive version of itself, as if doctors were asked to
take lifesaving medicines, reconstitute them as poisonous isomers, and then
administer them to patients.
I think back to my days as the chairman of the Strategy
and Policy Department at the War College, and I can only imagine what would
have happened had I convened the faculty and students and said: “It’s time for
us to think about how you might plan for an American invasion of a NATO
country. Small nations have no claim to sovereignty and cannot defend their
borders or possessions; we should create case studies for seizing whatever we
want from them.”
The most likely outcome of such a meeting is that I would
have been called in to explain myself to my superiors. If I had stayed fixated
on such an idea, I might have been relieved of my leadership duties. If I had
remained as adamant as Trump has become on the subject, I might have been
directed to seek counseling or even undergo a renewed background check. Today,
however, this aggressive and immoral stance is the policy of the commander in
chief—because when the president speaks, it is policy—and he may well order the
military to move it from rhetoric to reality.
Some military officers will shrug at Trump’s ravings and
say that orders are orders, and that yesterday’s friends are today’s enemies.
Every defense organization has people in it, uniformed and civilian, who are
morally hollow and see only figures on a map that must be targeted for
elimination. But most Americans, and the members of the military that serves
them, are decent people. They know that attacking your friends is evil and mad.
I am certain that the men and women of the armed forces will be conflicted and
disturbed as they try to turn Trump’s unhinged obsessions into a coherent
military plan.
In the end, however, if senior officers—starting with the
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the heads of each service—follow
Trump down this dark road, the officers and enlisted people below them will
likely obey the chain
of command. Such an outcome would be a tragedy, and potentially a global
catastrophe.
It is not up to the armed forces to put a stop to Trump’s
ghastly ideas. Every molecule in the body of almost every uniformed American
service member is likely to reject doing something they have spent a lifetime
training never to do, but the United States is not run by the military, nor
should it be. Americans, and their elected representatives, must take this
burden away from the armed forces—now.
No comments:
Post a Comment