In an unusual speech and charged with political connotations, President Donald Trump urged on Tuesday to the main military leaders of the United States to prepare to combat an “internal enemy”, evoking a rhetoric reminiscent of Latin American military regimes in the 1970s and 1980s.
However, the reaction of the auditorium at the base of Marines in Quantico, Virginia, was mostly cold and contained, in an atmosphere of skepticism and confusion among the 800 high military positions from all over the world.
In a meeting convened by the Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegesh, Trump said that “fighting the internal enemy will be a great task” for the Armed Forces, noting that this domestic mission will be as important as any traditional foreign threat.
During an intervention that lasted more than an hour, the president detailed his vision of using the army not only for external defense, but also to “placate civil disturbances” and handle “the invasion from within” that, according to him, occurs without uniform, referring to sectors of society and critical movements of its administration.
The invocation of the internal enemy and the reaction of the audience
Trump’s words are registered under the framework of an administration that has promoted the deployment of federal troops in cities such as Washington DC, Los Angeles, Portland and Memphis, with the declared intention of maintaining public order against protests and disturbances.
When mentioning other cities such as San Francisco, Chicago and New York, the president threatened to “put them in order one”, suggesting a directly applied urban control strategy.
The presidential discourse took place just after the intervention of Hegseth, who pronounced a powerful allegation against the so -called “Wake” culture in the Armed Forces, holding it responsible for weakening the discipline and the spirit of struggle through diversity, equity and inclusion policies.
In such a rope, Hegseth announced dismissals, reforms in physical and personal presentation standards, and the end of what he called “toxic ideological garbage” inside the pentagon.
Despite these emphatic statements, the reception of speech by generals and admirals was remarkably cold and skeptical.
The high controls remained in a large part in silence, without responding to frequent partisan references of the president.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ftu1owoej6g
The Army in California: between deployments and doubts
A particular focus of the speech was California, where Trump has deployed the National Guard in Los Angeles and announced plans to send troops to Portland, a city that has lived demonstrations and protests against the immigration policies of his government.
Army performance on Californian soil has been a controversial issue. In Los Angeles, military deployment sought to protect federal facilities and control disturbances derived from social and migratory tensions.
However, external critics and some within the Armed Forces question the effectiveness and convenience of using military for public order functions in cities where social dynamics are complex and the civilian population is diverse and politically active.
Trump’s call to use “dangerous cities such as training fields for our military forces” has generated alarm in civil sectors and human rights analysts, who fear an authoritarian escalation and the growing militarization of American urban life.
The Shadow of Latin American Military Regimes
Trump’s reference to the need to combat an “internal enemy” reminds the speeches of military leaders of the time of military dictatorships in Latin America, where the so -called fight against internal subversion served to justify human rights violations, censorship, and open political repression.
The insistence on controlling “the physical territory” and in establishing a “war from within” suggests a vision of public order based on military force and internal surveillance, which generates concern even within the US army, accustomed to operating in conventional and external defense scenarios.
Reforms, dismissals and cancellation of diversity in the Armed Forces
The Trump administration, through the Secretary Hegseth, also promotes a fierce austerity and changes in army values.
In his speech, Hegseth criticized the presence of sexual diversities, attention to gender and environmental theme, and eliminated the offices of diversity and inclusion, presenting these policies as distractions that weaken morality.
Hegseth also announced massive dismissals of high -ranking officers, the reinstatement of strict physical and aesthetic controls, and rules to limit the growth of the number of four -star generals.
The head of the Pentagon whipped, as “completely unacceptable”, to the senior “fat” officers and ordered physical exams and measurements “twice a year, every year of service”, in addition to “personal toilet standards” to end the “beards, long hair and superficial and individual expressions” within the armed forces.
