WASHINGTON (FN) — The top lawyer for the Joint Chiefs of Staff has advised that U.S. military officers should quietly request retirement if confronted with an unlawful order, rather than resign in protest or risk dismissal — guidance that has stirred debate about civil‑military relations at home and abroad.
Brig. Gen. Eric Widmar, chief legal adviser to the Joint Chiefs, delivered the advice to Chairman Gen. Dan Caine last month after six Democratic lawmakers publicly urged troops to resist illegal commands. Widmar said retirement is the “cleanest way” to step aside without politicizing the military.
Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, service members are required to obey lawful orders but must refuse unlawful ones. Widmar’s memo emphasized that resignation in protest could be seen as a political act, while confrontation leading to dismissal might drag the institution into partisan conflict.
The Pentagon has not publicly commented, but officials privately acknowledged the guidance reflects concern about how the military would handle potential clashes between presidential directives and constitutional limits.
The issue has historical echoes. During the Vietnam War, officers debated the legality of certain bombing campaigns. More recently, after the 2020 election, questions arose about whether troops might be ordered to intervene in domestic disputes. Widmar’s advice seeks to avoid repeating such controversies.
Political reaction has been mixed. Democrats welcomed the emphasis on refusing unlawful orders, while some Republicans warned that even discussing such scenarios risks undermining civilian control of the military.
International observers noted that other democracies, including Britain and France, also stress military neutrality and refusal of unlawful commands. Analysts said the U.S. guidance will be closely watched by allies who rely on American stability.
“The military is trying to protect its apolitical standing,” said one expert. “Retirement is a professional, apolitical step, not a protest.”
For allies, the advice is reassuring. NATO officials said it underscores the U.S. commitment to constitutional norms, even amid political turbulence. But critics argue it could normalize the idea that unlawful orders are a real possibility, raising questions about trust in civilian leadership.
For now, Widmar’s memo stands as a reminder of the delicate balance between civilian authority and military duty — and the quiet, disciplined ways officers may be expected to navigate that balance if tested.
