Democrats and some former members of the military reacted with anger and sadness to the dismissal of Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, arguing it was part of a political purge of military officers by President Trump.
On Friday evening, Mr. Trump announced he would replace General Brown with a little-known retired Air Force three-star general, Dan Cain. Mr. Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have promised to fire “woke” officers and instead promote officers steeped in a “warrior culture.” Five other Pentagon officials were also fired that evening.
“Trump wants to make sure that the Joint Chiefs of Staff are 100 percent loyal to him,” Representative Adam Smith, Democrat of Washington State and the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, said in an interview. “I don’t think there is any question that is why he did it. There is no argument that General Brown isn’t an incredibly capable leader.”
General Brown’s dismissal took effect immediately. Pentagon officials said on Saturday that Adm. Christopher W. Grady, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs, is now acting chairman until the Senate confirms a permanent replacement.
Retired military officers argued that General Brown did not deserve to be fired and was the kind of war-fighting officer that President Trump said he wanted to lead the armed forces.
Mark Montgomery, a retired rear admiral and a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy, said General Brown was a “proven war-fighter.”
“His dismissal is a loss to the military,” Admiral Montgomery said. “Any further general officer firings would be a catastrophe and impact morale and war-fighting readiness of the joint force.”
Senator Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island and the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, issued an unusually strongly worded statement condemning General Brown’s ouster and warning that the White House and Mr. Hegseth could push out other officers.
“This appears to be part of a broader, premeditated campaign by President Trump and Secretary Hegseth to purge talented officers for politically charged reasons, which would undermine the professionalism of our military and send a chilling message through the ranks,” Mr. Reed said.
National Security Leaders for America, a bipartisan volunteer organization of former military and civilian leaders, released a statement saying that the group condemned the removal of senior military officers without just cause, and echoed the concerns about politicizing the military. “Removing experienced leaders with meritorious records weakens the force and emboldens America’s enemies,” the statement said.
Representative Smith said Congress had set up the term of the chairman of the Joint Chiefs to extend across presidential administrations to preserve institutional knowledge. The purge of the Joint Chiefs, he said, will make the military less ready.
The firings, Mr. Smith said, were about ensuring there would be no checks on the power of Mr. Trump and Elon Musk, who is leading efforts to shrink the government.
“It is about control and power. That is the whole thing about what Musk and Trump are doing,” Mr. Smith said. “What Musk and Trump want more than anything is to be able to do what they want to do, whenever they want to do it, without any check on that power.”
Other Democrats joined in. Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut said the firings were based on politics, not merit, and that “our adversaries in Russia and China are celebrating.” Senator Adam B. Schiff of California said that amid larger efforts by the Trump administration across the government, “the purge of people of stature and independence goes on.” And Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona said the firings were “disrespectful to the service and sacrifice of everyone who’s put their life on the line for our country.”
Senator Elissa Slotkin, Democrat of Michigan and a former senior Pentagon official in the Obama administration, said Mr. Trump’s purge “should send a shiver down the spine of any American who cares about an apolitical military.”
“For most of our history, leaders from both parties have largely kept their political activities separate from how they handle the military,” Ms. Slotkin said in a social media message. “But not this president and not this SecDef. No matter how they try and spin it, they have brought their political retribution to the very war-fighters they claim to care about. And we are no safer for it.”
Throughout the Biden administration, Republicans railed against what they saw as the Pentagon’s bending to liberal policy priorities, accusing the military of putting too much effort into promoting diversity.
But many Republicans respected General Brown. After his ouster, Republican lawmakers who support Mr. Trump were circumspect. Some praised General Brown’s service, but none criticized the president’s action directly.
While Senator Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said he was confident Mr. Trump would choose a “qualified and capable successor,” he offered no specific praise of General Cain, and said General Brown had served honorably.
John R. Bolton, a national security adviser to Mr. Trump in his first term who himself became a target of the president’s retribution, said the firing had been a mistake and would serve to politicize the American armed forces.
“This is the retribution campaign at work,” Mr. Bolton said in a telephone interview on Saturday. “To presume military officers will fail to carry out lawful orders presumes they’re politicized, and that’s very harmful to the military. I’m worried about the long-term consequences for the military.”
Mr. Smith said he was also worried about the long-term consequences. He said that up and down the chain of command, officers would be less willing to speak up and that that would degrade the quality of the advice the military gives its civilian leadership.
“Trump has made it clear that if you don’t do what Trump likes, you are going to get fired,” Mr. Smith said. “You’re going to have a bunch of ‘yes men’ around there who aren’t going to use their best judgment or their intelligence.”
Greg Jaffe in Washington contributed reporting.
