One of the reasons so many Americans never believed Donald Trump’s promise to end the “forever wars” was a simple observation. To all but his most fanatical followers, it’s clear he possesses a megalomaniacal personality and violent temperament. How could someone with such characteristics resist the urge to lead a war? It seemed fundamental to his personality and his desire to go down in history.
During the 2016 campaign the country was still dealing with fairly regular terrorist attacks from followers of ISIS, and despite Trump’s professed disdain for the leadership that took the U.S. into Afghanistan and Iraq, it was clear when you listened closely to him that he was contemptuous of their apparent unwillingness to take the gloves off. He was never some kind of peacenik. After all, Trump confessed to being a big fan of torture, casually saying, “Would I approve waterboarding? You bet your a*s I would. In a heartbeat. I would approve more than that. It works. And if it doesn’t work, they deserve it anyway for what they do to us.”
He repeatedly stated his belief that the U.S. should have “taken” Iraq’s oil. His supposed isolationism was nothing more than a crude way of differentiating himself from the decisions of his predecessors.
Trump was talked out of military action by his advisers more than once during his first term, and he seemed more or less content with ordering assassinations and limited bombing strikes. But there was one big decision he made in 2019 that telegraphed and previewed his true beliefs about warfare: his pardoning, over the strenuous objections of the military brass, of service members and contractors accused of war crimes.
One was known to shoot at unarmed civilians to “make them afraid” and was serving a 19-year sentence for ordering the murder of two unarmed Afghan villagers. Another was awaiting trial on charges of killing a suspected Afghan bomb maker. Then there was the Navy SEAL who had been accused and acquitted of murder but was convicted of posing with a mutilated corpse of an Iraqi soldier. Over the objections of top SEAL commanders, Trump reversed his demotion and invited him to a Christmas party at Mar-a-Lago.
Trump made his philosophy known in October 2019 when he tweeted, “We train our boys to be killing machines, then prosecute them when they kill!” At the time, it seemed odd that he tagged “Fox & Friends Weekend” co-host Pete Hegseth in the post. But Hegseth had been publicly and privately lobbying for the pardons, and he and Trump had a meeting of the minds on the subject.
Aside from all Hegseth’s character flaws and a lack of experience that should have disqualified him for the job, it was largely that episode that horrified so many political observers when Trump nominated him as defense secretary. Here was someone who openly supported war criminals, defended the barbarity at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison and believed torture to be justified.
Now that Trump has finally let his warmongering flag fly the way he always wanted to, we are seeing exactly how dangerous this partnership may end up being.
Hegseth’s intentions as secretary were never secret. Since his confirmation he has crusaded to rid the Pentagon of “wokeness,” by which he means any desire for diversity, intolerance of racism and bigotry, and adherence to the rules of war. He has purged the military’s top brass of many of its Black and women officers, and he took an ax to the Judge Advocate General’s office, which administers the military justice system. All of this was done in service of his aim of returning the Pentagon to a “warrior ethos” — which is really nothing more than a simple-minded call to be more macho and violent. The fact that he chose to rename the Defense Department as the Department of War should settle any dispute about his worldview.
Now that Trump has launched a growing war with Iran, which he seems convinced will result in Middle East peace — something he announced he had achieved with the Gaza ceasefire deal — we are about to see how this warrior ethos works in practice.
From the carnage inflicted on Indigenous and enslaved peoples to barbarity in the Philippines during the Spanish-American war — celebrated repeatedly by Trump during the 2016 campaign — and the My Lai massacre in Vietnam, America has plenty of blood on its hands. Atrocities have been a feature of warfare since time began. But over the centuries, humans developed rules of warfare designed to, at least in theory, minimize the blood-letting. Since the horrors of the 20th-century’s two world wars and the development of technology that can deliver mass injury and slaughter, it has become more important than ever.
America used to at least give lip service to the rules of war, if only for the self-serving reasons that it would protect their own troops. But Trump and Hegseth’s overwhelming hubris seems to preclude even that as a concern, with the defense secretary callously dismissing the deaths of American service members and the president shrugging off the possibility of reprisals on American soil.
On Feb. 28, just as the war had started, an airstrike hit an elementary school in the Iranian town of Minab, near the adjacent naval base operated by Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. More than 175 civilians were reportedly killed, many of them children. According to the New York Times, the available evidence suggests it was a U.S. missile that hit the school. The administration says they are investigating.
No one has implied this was a targeted attack. One assumes that it was a mistake resulting in “collateral damage,” as the military likes to call it. But it is a perfect example of the kind of stories we are going to start seeing juxtaposed with Hegseth’s grotesque rhetoric in these first few days of the war. He has cheered the conflict as having “no stupid rules of engagement, no nation-building quagmire, no democracy building exercise, no politically correct wars.” The Israelis, he said, are “good partners, unlike so many of our traditional allies who wring their hands and clutch their pearls, hemming and hawing about the use of force.” Hegseth’s irresponsible commentary will have the effect of robbing the U.S. military of any benefit of the doubt, as it well should.
America had already squandered most of its moral authority with the Iraq debacle, and Trump’s paeans to peace notwithstanding, it’s clear that we’ve now embraced a mercenary foreign policy in which there are no rules nor restraint. The president said as much in January when he was asked by the New York Times if there were any limits on his global powers. “Yeah, there is one thing,” he replied. “My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”
It appears he meant it.
