U.S. President Donald Trump and U.S. First Lady Melania Trump at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, U.S., February 13, 2026. REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz
With the blessing of President Donald Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth continues to rail against "woke" policies in the U.S. military and promises to purge the armed forces of leaders who don't fit into the "warrior ethos" he favors. Loyalty to the MAGA movement is another requirement that Trump and Hegseth have for military nominees.
But retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, in an article published by the conservative website The Bulwark on February 18, lays out an array of reasons why MAGA loyalty tests are "corrosive" to the wellbeing of the U.S. Armed Forces.
"Sometimes, the promotion lists are delayed for any number of reasons," Hertling explains. "Some of those delays are justified, as when questionable behavior by specific officers requires a double check…. The reason the one-star list has been held up in recent months appears to be the inclusion of Col. Dave Butler, an officer with a flawless career and huge potential…. The entire one-star promotion list has been delayed for months, reportedly because Hegseth personally asked the secretary of the Army to remove Butler from the promotion list — an extraordinary and highly unusual intervention by a civilian leader who likely has little firsthand knowledge of Butler's career or the decades of service that led to his selection."
Hertling adds, "More disturbing is the reported rationale: Butler's association with leaders Hegseth dislikes, including former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley. If true, this action crosses a dangerous line."
The former U.S. Army Europe commander stresses that political loyalty tests make the military less, not more, effective.
"The implications are immediate and corrosive," Hertling warns. "If promotions to general officer rank can be rescinded for perceived associations with others, officers may begin to prioritize 'safe' assignments or noncontroversial bosses. Candor — already fragile in large bureaucracies — may diminish if officers fear that honest service under controversial leaders will later be used against them. The apolitical ethic that underpins the profession of arms risks erosion."
Hertling continues, "The Army's strength has always rested on trust: trust that performance matters more than patronage, that merit outweighs politics, and that the institution protects those who serve honorably in any job they are assigned. Undermining that trust does not merely harm an officer's career; it weakens the foundation of professional military service."