When my colleague Tom Nichols, who taught on the Naval Battle Faculty for 25 years, warns those that Donald Trump is likely to be a menace to democracy, they typically ask him to show it. Sure, Trump has mentioned dictator-like issues, but when he received a second time period, aren’t there boundaries in place to stop him from performing on his rhetoric? Would he actually be capable of persuade senior command within the army to make use of pressure towards Americans? Would he be capable of get previous the Geneva Conventions? Wouldn’t Congress or the courts intervene to cease him from performing on his worst impulses?

Nichols has by no means served within the army, however he is aware of its guidelines and its tradition nicely. And he has watched over time as a few of his college students turned extra brazenly partisan. On this episode of Radio Atlantic, Nichols explains how a reelected President Trump might bend the army to his will and the way political schisms within the army might occur. He emphasizes how shut Trump got here to reaching a few of his targets in his final time period, how unwell ready we’re as a democracy that assumes a “minimal degree of decency within the people who find themselves elected to public workplace.” And he breaks down his private nightmare situation.

Hearken to the dialog right here:

The next is a transcript of the episode:

Hanna Rosin: Final Tuesday, throughout a city corridor on Fox Information, Sean Hannity requested Donald Trump the query, straightforwardly.

Rosin: Now, Hannity is pleasant to Trump. So this appeared like a query that was imagined to quiet some worries. As a result of recently, Trump and his allies have been sending a whole lot of sturdy dictator-like indicators, saying they’d “come after” or “crush” people who find themselves unfriendly to them or disloyal. However Trump didn’t deal with it like a softball. And the trade continued:

Rosin: However Trump was not carried out.

Rosin: In the event you ask individuals who examine how dictators rise, they’ll typically say that would-be dictators don’t disguise their intentions. It’s simply that the folks they’re speaking to fail to take them severely till it’s too late, which actually makes a complete lot of sense to me.

As a result of I’ve learn in regards to the many latest dictator-like statements by candidate Trump. And but, I expertise them like I’m watching a film in regards to the rise of a dictator elsewhere or, like, in another time, not proper now within the nation I truly dwell in. However I need to take this extra severely.

I’m Hanna Rosin. And on this episode of Radio Atlantic, we discuss to Tom Nichols. He’s a workers author at The Atlantic, the place he typically writes in regards to the U.S. army.

Now, Tom wasn’t within the army himself, however he spent 25 years instructing officers on the Naval Battle Faculty, and an enormous a part of his job was to speak to them in regards to the Structure and their function in American democracy.

Tom Nichols: You understand, over time when folks like me have mentioned, Donald Trump is a menace to democracy, well-meaning folks, folks of goodwill, have mentioned, Okay, I get that you simply’re involved, however what would that really appear to be?

[Music]

Rosin: Tom not too long ago wrote a narrative with the headline: “A Army Loyal to Trump.” And in our dialog, he fills in a vital a part of the Trump-as-dictator situation, which is how a reelected Trump might bend the army to his will.

[Music]

Nichols: It’s straightforward to only get your hair on hearth and say, Oh, Trump’s a fascist. He’s a menace to democracy. He would do horrible issues. I feel it was vital to say, Right here’s the way it might occur in a concrete approach. Listed here are the steps he must take. Listed here are the issues he’s carried out that may get him nearer to that objective of being an authoritarian chief.

Rosin: You’ve mentioned that if he’s elected, Donald Trump will try and make the U.S. armed forces loyal to him, and to not the Structure. That’s a really huge factor to say. Why are you so certain about that?

Nichols: Effectively, if you happen to have a look at Donald Trump’s first time period, he seen the senior command of the U.S. army and the senior civil servants of the Protection Division as obstacles and opponents to issues that he wished to do, together with utilizing pressure towards Americans within the streets. So I’ve little question that he views the army, and significantly senior commanders, as obstacles to his train of energy.

He’s talked about wanting Mark Milley, the previous chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Workers, executed. You understand, we don’t should assume very exhausting about Trump’s intentions as a result of he says the quiet half out loud on a regular basis.

Rosin: I do know. That’s the exhausting half about Trump, I really feel like. It’s like, it’s exhausting to grasp what’s discuss, how believable something is. And every time he says issues like this, I instantly assume, Effectively, that is America. We have now a system in place. That system retains any person like that, a president even, in examine.

Nichols: Besides that on the very finish of his first time period, he truly did attempt to purge the senior ranks of the Protection Division by dumping the secretary of protection. He tried to put in Anthony Tata, this retired one-star normal who’s type of a kook and a conspiracy theorist, into the number-three slot within the Protection Division.

He’s made fairly plain that he’s truly keen to interact in these sorts of personnel adjustments to get what he desires. The distinction is the primary time round, he didn’t actually know what he was doing and there have been folks round him who have been decided to cease him.

This time round, there simply received’t be anyone decided to cease it.

Rosin: Tom, much more about army tradition and operations than most individuals. Inside that tradition, how does politics or partisanship—how does it get expressed?

Nichols: After I started instructing on the Naval Battle Faculty, I used to be there lengthy sufficient in the past that I truly had individuals who have been prior-enlisted of us in Vietnam. And the factor I’ve seen is that our officers are resolutely nonpartisan. They serve the Structure. However the willingness to assume in very partisan phrases was rising over time. By the point I retired, in 2022, I used to be listening to officers saying issues nearly verbatim from, , speaking factors from Fox the night time earlier than. You understand, officers, for instance, , have been asking me about why we’re not doing extra to disclose the Chinese language George Soros hoax about local weather change, type of stuff.

And that anxious me. I began listening to much more type of fever-swamp, conspiracy-theory stuff. As a result of, , the army, we’ve a citizen-soldier army. It’s one of many nice strengths of our democracy, however each army, to some extent, lives in one thing of a bubble. And I really feel like over time that I used to be instructing, that I might see that bubble getting thicker and thicker and extra indifferent from society normally, I feel—a minimum of amongst a comparatively small variety of officers, however way more than I’d have anticipated and positively greater than I used to be comfy with by the top of my profession.

Rosin: What was your sense of their understanding or your college students’ understanding of civic responsibility, how the Structure works, , issues like that?

Nichols: Yeah. I feel that’s an vital query. And I don’t need to be overly alarmist in regards to the women and men that I’ve been instructing and dealing with for some 30 years. They’re resolutely patriotic individuals who perceive that they don’t swear an oath to any particular person president.

However I feel there’s sufficient concern about that, that Mark Milley, when he retired, made it some extent to repeat that, to say, And keep in mind—he mentioned on his approach out the door—we don’t swear an oath to a specific president.

However I do fear that the dearth of civic training in the USA normally has additionally prolonged to the army. And I’ve a specific concern that it’ll change into too straightforward to smudge the distinction between loyalty to, or not loyalty, however obedience to the president’s orders and obedience to the Structure, as a result of Trump will say, as he has carried out up to now: I’m the final word authority on what’s constitutional. I’m the final word authority on what’s to be obeyed or to not be obeyed. He has mentioned, , If there are issues within the Structure I don’t like, I’ll simply terminate them.

Rosin: Mm-hmm.

Nichols: And, once more, you solely want a really small variety of folks on the high to agree with him about that.

After which what they may do is put hope in that the chain of command, that obedience, that if a sergeant will get an order, he assumes that the lieutenant who gave it’s giving the proper order and that the lieutenant who acquired it from the captain, that she is giving the proper order, and so forth, all the best way as much as the chain of command. If issues don’t get stopped on the very high, they’ll spiral uncontrolled as they go down via the chain of command since you don’t need a bunch of individuals within the army having to cease and say, No. Wait. I’ve to go seek the advice of the constitutional regulation books about whether or not or not I ought to perform that order.

That’s one thing that ought to occur very near the president, on the White Home, between him and his senior army leaders. Trump has made it clear he simply won’t care about anyone telling him that one thing is unlawful or unconstitutional.

Rosin: Proper, proper. Okay, so he doesn’t care. Can we get into some particular examples? Like, how would this truly play out? I simply want some particular eventualities to grasp it.

Nichols: Effectively, one factor to contemplate is that Trump will need to subject orders which can be most likely illegal, definitely an moral downside for the army.

So Trump might, for instance, order folks to commit warfare crimes, as a result of he clearly has no compunction about whether or not our forces truly commit warfare crimes. Take the instance of Eddie Gallagher. Eddie Gallagher was a Navy SEAL, proper. The perfect of the perfect. He was court-martialed for warfare crimes, for taking pictures at civilians, probably for homicide.

The one factor he was truly convicted of when it was over, after the testimony even of his personal comrades within the SEALs, was photographing himself with a useless physique. Trump intervened to ensure that Gallagher might preserve his Trident, his badge of being a Navy SEAL, which is a large type of trespass, as a result of usually solely the SEALs resolve who will get to maintain that Trident. So think about that sooner or later Trump says, You understand what? Let’s desecrate our bodies. Let’s commit warfare crimes. Let’s put the worry of God in these folks, whoever they’re, wherever we’re, by doing, , horrible issues and photographing it. And don’t fear—I’m the commander in chief. Your obedience to me removes the stain from you. I received’t allow you to be court-martialed for it.

Rosin: Yeah. However what’s the bigger significance of doing one thing like that, of the president permitting one thing like that to occur?

Nichols: As a result of the message from the president will likely be, particularly when it comes time, if we get to that horrible second the place if the president desires to make use of pressure towards Individuals (for instance, if there’s one other January 6), then he says, Hear, I’m going to ship within the Military, and none of my individuals are going to get arrested. You’re not going to disperse them. The Capitol police will not be going to arrest these folks. And in the event that they need to march into the Home, then they’re going to do it. And if there are protests towards me, I’ll inform them to shoot at folks.

You acclimate an establishment to getting used to that by issuing these horrible orders and getting them to satisfy them over and time and again over time. I fear that he’ll simply type of corrode the norms and traditions. The U.S. army—and I really feel that I have to say this once more—the folks for whom I’ve intense admiration, their tradition is constructed on honor and loyalty and responsibility. And if Trump chips away at that day by day with a small variety of folks on the high, I fear about what occurs on the final second when Trump says, You understand what? I didn’t lose an election, and we’re marching to the Capitol, or, I don’t really feel like having any protests towards me in Washington right this moment.

Bear in mind, he truly wished to name out troops towards the protesters in Washington, and his personal secretary of protection mentioned, That’s a very dangerous thought. Don’t do this.

He received’t make that mistake once more. The following secretary of protection goes to be any person who nods and says, That’s an incredible thought, sir. Let’s get ’em on the market.

[Music]

Rosin: We’re going to take a brief break. After we come again: What boundaries usually exist towards these nightmare eventualities?

[Music]

Rosin: Okay, we’re again. So Tom, in Trump’s first time period, we acquired used to the concept that sure establishments of presidency held off a few of his worst impulses. What would cease him in a second time period?

Nichols: There are two establishments which can be the probably to face in Trump’s approach, if he returns to energy, relating to attacking his opponents, undermining democracy, breaking the rule of regulation, and squelching any type of dissent or protest towards him. He wants to manage two establishments: the Justice Division and the U.S. army. And if he can get management of each of these, he’s a lot of the approach there to have the ability to do no matter he desires.

And I’m not hypothesizing. We noticed him attempt to do it. We got here inside a whisker of it simply earlier than January 6, the place his personal appointees of the Justice Division walked in and mentioned, In the event you do this stuff—together with appointing folks like Jeffrey Clark, , making him the performing lawyer normal—you’re going to have mass resignations. Now perhaps that may work, however Trump at this level, I feel, would say, Nice. Mass resignations, and I’ve acquired a complete record of individuals now who will step into these jobs. I feel lists of people that would take these jobs are already being compiled by Trump loyalists. And I feel the reply can be, if somebody walks in and says, Mr. President, if you happen to do that, I’ll resign, he’ll say, Don’t let the door hit you within the butt on the best way out.

We all the time discuss, Effectively, the Senate received’t affirm these folks. That’s the bar. Effectively, what if Trump says, as he already has—it’s not a what-if; he’s truly carried out this—Okay, positive. You didn’t affirm him. I’m sending him over to the Pentagon to sit down subsequent to the man who’s in that job?

That’s a whole lot of strain on appointees to say, , to be the folks to face up and say, I’m not going to observe the orders of the president of the USA, and particularly in a army group the place that’s simply anathema. That’s heresy.

And in regular instances, that’s an excellent factor. In a traditional democracy, you don’t need army officers saying, I’ve your order and now I’ll give it some thought.

Rosin: Yeah.

Nichols: Donald Trump, he wished to kill Bashar al-Assad. He known as the Pentagon and mentioned, Let’s take this man out. And the then secretary of protection mentioned, We’ll get proper on that, Mr. President. After which he hung up the telephone and he turned to an aide and he mentioned, We’re not doing any of that.

And I feel there will likely be increasingly of these, type of, fork-in-the-road moments the place Trump, if Trump is president, he’ll say, I need to do that, and somebody behind a desk or in uniform goes to have to sit down again and say, Am I actually going to try this?

Rosin: Proper. I imply, I wish to assume that there are a whole lot of Jim Mattises, a whole lot of Mark Milleys on the market—these are individuals who had some energy, appealed to their very own conscience sooner or later, , understood who they have been serving, which was the Structure ultimately—and that there are extra of them.

Nichols: I want to assume there are extra of them too. And I feel a lot of the army is like—the those that I knew are definitely much more like Mark Milley and Jim Mattis than they’re going to be like a few of the different those that surrounded Trump. However as I’ve typically puzzled, , what number of extra of those individuals are like Anthony Tata, the man that Trump tried to, , stick into the third slot on the Protection Division? Or this retired colonel, Douglas MacGregor, that he tried to make an envoy to Germany after which, when that failed, despatched him over to the Pentagon?

Once more, there are much more Milleys and Mattises on the market, however there’s additionally a whole lot of Tatas and MacGregors on the market—not as many, I feel, however as I preserve wanting to emphasise, you solely want a handful. That’s the true downside, that if you happen to management a handful on the high, you’ll be able to acquire management of a whole lot of the establishment in a short time.

Rosin: So if Trump will get what he likes to name “my generals,” after which he desires to do one thing that feels blatantly unconstitutional, are there not checks in place that may cease him if he offers an illegal command?

Nichols: Effectively, the primary barrier to an illegal command is the officer to whom it’s given saying, I decline that order. Let’s simply take an instance: I don’t know, , Commit a warfare crime, proper? Kill POWs, which is flatly unlawful. (We’re signatories to the Geneva Conventions. You’ll be able to’t do this.) And Trump, as he typically did throughout his rallies, for instance, would say, Go forward and do it. I’ll cowl you. I’ll be your high cowl for this.

That first barrier is an officer or a secretary of protection, even, who says, I’m not going to transmit that order. And in a traditional nation, again when America was, , within the pre-Trump days, even the specter of that may be sufficient to cease a president from contemplating a few of these issues.

However what if Trump says, Effectively, okay. You’re relieved, as he did with so a lot of his nationwide safety advisors, or with Secretary Esper, who he fired. You understand, Nice. You’re not on board; you’re out. I’m gonna take the subsequent man behind you and the subsequent man behind him, till any person fulfills this order.

The following barrier to that may be, what? A court docket? The Senate? The Congress? However once more, what do you do if the president of the USA says, I’m the Article II energy. Article II, Part 2, says I’m the commander in chief of the armed forces, and I don’t acknowledge your authority. I don’t care?

Rosin: Is {that a} factor? Can we misunderstand one thing elementary?

Nichols: I don’t know. We’ll discover out, proper? If the president says, I don’t acknowledge your authority to do that, and so I’m going to maintain doing what I’m doing, what does Congress do at that time? Congress says, Effectively, we reduce off funding to the Protection Division? We use the facility of the purse?

This stuff take time. Bear in mind, Donald Trump tried to create a wholly separate international coverage concerning Ukraine than the one his personal administration was publicly dedicated to. Like, in public, he mentioned, In fact we assist Ukraine. They’re our associates. After which privately, he mentioned to a handful of individuals, Neglect all that. Name Ukraine. Inform them that until they examine Joe Biden, they’re out of luck. After which he denied it.

I imply, I assume the underside line for all of that is our system of presidency, and our Structure, will not be set as much as take care of deliberately and flagrantly felony conduct from the president of the USA. Our total Structure relies on a minimal degree of decency within the people who find themselves elected to public workplace. It’s not designed to deal with any person like Donald Trump.

And ultimately, the one weapon that you’d have towards Donald Trump can be impeachment and elimination, which, I suppose might get ugly if Trump mentioned, Effectively, I’m not leaving the White Home. You then actually should go in and drag him out. However as we’ve already seen, the Republicans will not be going to be a break on Donald Trump’s conduct.

He was impeached twice and the Republicans have acquitted him twice, and I simply don’t see any of these guardrails functioning this time round if Trump is returned to workplace, partially as a result of he’s going to make the case of: The nation is with me. The individuals are with me. The Military is with me. He used to say that, which, , is a reasonably uncomfortable factor to listen to. And I simply don’t—is it a factor? That’s an incredible query. I hope we by no means discover out.

Rosin: Can I ask you—it feels like you might be genuinely anxious—what’s your precise greatest worry? Like, if you happen to truly let your thoughts wander to the worst place, what’s your scariest situation?

Nichols: Two issues preserve me awake at night time. One is that Trump provokes a schism throughout the armed forces in the USA—that we’ve pro- and anti-Trump factions throughout the armed forces that don’t essentially come to open blows with one another however that paralyze our effectiveness as a army.

There could also be proficient and skilled officers who will merely resign or refuse to hold out orders which can be unconstitutional, after which operations that we truly might must be conducting get slowed down in inside fights about who’s giving which orders, and Who am I imagined to take heed to? Do I take heed to the man that was the appointee, or do I take heed to the man who’s clearly the president’s decide, who’s sitting proper subsequent to him? What do I do if the chief of workers within the White Home calls me, who has no energy, however says the president desires X?

And that may occur even in the perfect of instances simply via miscommunication. I actually fear about what occurs if that turns into one thing that occurs due to a partisan political divide throughout the army. I can’t even think about the phrases partisan political divide within the American army.

Like, I’ve by no means actually—I’ve spent years lecturing on the Naval Battle Faculty saying how lucky we have been to not have that downside.

Rosin: Mm- hmm.

Nichols: However Donald Trump will actively attempt to create that downside if he thinks it serves his functions.

Rosin: Mm-hmm.

Nichols: The opposite factor that retains me up at night time is Donald Trump answerable for nuclear weapons.

Rosin: Yeah.

Nichols: There’s no approach round that. Nuclear weapons, colloquially, are known as the president’s weapon. Solely the president of the USA can authorize using nuclear weapons. I simply fear about the truth that Donald Trump, who I feel is a deeply unstable individual, shouldn’t be wherever close to America’s nuclear arsenal. And if he’s commander in chief, he may have that every day code, that little biscuit in his pocket that lets him unleash nuclear catastrophe if he actually desires to.

We’re counting on individuals who have been skilled to observe the orders of the commander in chief. We’re counting on women and men in uniform to say, I’m not going to try this.

Rosin: Mm-hmm. And that’s not of their nature, typically.

Nichols: And it’s not of their nature, and it’s not honest to them.

[Music]

Rosin: Tom, thanks for laying that out in such nice element. I really feel like one of many points we’ve with this Trump-as-dictator dialogue is a failure of creativeness. Like, we simply can’t get our heads round what it might truly appear to be, and also you undoubtedly assist with that, and I respect it.

Nichols: Thanks.

[Music]

Rosin: This episode of Radio Atlantic was produced by Kevin Townsend. It was edited by Claudine Ebeid, fact-checked by Sara Krolewski, and engineered by Rob Smierciak. Claudine Ebeid is the chief producer for Atlantic Audio, and Andrea Valdez is our managing editor. I’m Hanna Rosin. Thanks for listening.