By David S. Cloud

Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON —President Donald Trump’s effort to use a military response to nationwide protests led to an extraordinary rupture with both his current and former secretaries of defense Wednesday, with one rejecting use of active-duty troops against protesters and the other accusing Trump of ordering the military to “violate the constitutional rights of their fellow citizens.”

The statement by former Defense Secretary James N. Mattis was without precedent, and the effects on Trump are likely to be far-reaching.

Mattis, who resigned as defense secretary in late 2018, denounced Trump for his actions on Monday, in which the president walked through Lafayette Park near the White House to pose in front of a church after protesters had been driven from the park by police and military units, firing tear gas.

“I have watched this week’s unfolding events, angry and appalled,” Mattis writes. “The words ‘Equal Justice Under Law’ are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court. This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding. It is a wholesome and unifying demand—one that all of us should be able to get behind. We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers. The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values — our values as people and our values as a nation.” He goes on, “We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution.”

As a young Marine, Mattis wrote, he swore an oath to defend the Constitution.

“Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the constitutional rights of their fellow citizens — much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside,” he wrote in the statement, published by The Atlantic magazine.

“Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us,” Mattis writes. “We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society. This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.”

He goes on to contrast the American ethos of unity with Nazi ideology. “Instructions given by the military departments to our troops before the Normandy invasion reminded soldiers that ‘The Nazi slogan for destroying us … was “Divide and Conquer.” Our American answer is “In Union there is Strength.”’ We must summon that unity to surmount this crisis—confident that we are better than our politics.”

Mattis’ words came just hours after current Defense Secretary Mark Esper told a Pentagon news conference that he opposed using active-duty troops against protesters, saying it should be done “only in the most urgent and dire of situations.”

“We are not in one of those situations now,” Esper said. “I do not support invoking the Insurrection Act,” which Trump had threatened to use to send troops into cities where state and local officials have not quelled unrest.

White House officials emphasized Tuesday that Trump still may call on active-duty troops to patrol the streets of Washington, D.C., and other cities if the protests continue.

Esper’s comments could also leave him on shaky ground with Trump, who often forces out officials who disagree with him publicly.

Trump and other top White House officials were “not happy” with Esper’s comments, a senior Trump aide said, saying they “added to the frustration with him.”

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany offered a notably lukewarm response Wednesday when asked if Trump still has confidence in Esper. “As of right now, Secretary Esper is still Secretary Esper,” she said, noting that should things change the press would be “the first to know.”

She also said the president has the “sole authority” to invoke the Insurrection Act and that the move is still being considered.

Until Wednesday, Esper had seemed closely in sync with Trump. When he joined the president’s Monday call with governors, he urged them to “dominate the battlespace,” using a military term that many governors said was unsuited to a law enforcement task.

Esper’s move prompted quick and harsh criticism from many former Defense Department officials and retired senior officers who said that the Pentagon chief was straying into politics. Such a move might also draw the military more deeply into a controversial domestic law enforcement role.

He and Army Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, later joined Trump on a walk through Lafayette Park that evening to a church near the White House after police and Guard soldiers used pepper spray and other forceful tactics to push back what appeared to be nonviolent protesters.

But a senior defense official said Esper found himself in a “no-win situation” after trying to navigate between the need to publicly support Trump and to lead a department that prefers to keep clear of domestic involvement and politics.

“Are there officers who were uncomfortable with the prospect that their soldiers would be ordered onto the streets with orders to crack down on the Americans protesting racial injustice? Very much so,” said a senior military commander, who spoke on the condition he not be identified. “Did some express their views up the chain that sending in troops was a bad idea. Yes.”

Lt. Col. Daniel Davis, a retired Army officer and a fellow at Defense Priorities, a Washington think tank that favors limited use of the armed forces, said, “Law enforcement and the National Guard receive training for domestic crowd-control operations and are experienced in the local conditions necessary to keep protesters safe while preventing the proliferation of violence. Active duty troops, however, are trained primarily to kill the enemy in war zones.”

Esper also faced criticism from retired senior military officers and former Defense Department officials, some of whom said he had stepped over the proper line for a defense secretary in his earlier backing of Trump advocacy of a military response.

“You may not have been able to stop President Trump from directing this appalling use of force, but you could have chosen to oppose it. Instead you visibly supported it,” James N. Miller, a former senior Pentagon official wrote to Esper Tuesday in a letter resigning from a Defense Department advisory board. “I must now ask: if last night’s blatant violations do not cross the line for you, what will?”

Esper also faces quiet but mounting opposition from retired senior officers, who say they are uncomfortable with the more prominent role the U.S. military is playing in tamping down protests.

“I remain confident in the professionalism of our men and women in uniform,” retired Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, who served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs under Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush wrote this week in The Atlantic. “But I am less confident in the soundness of the orders they will be given by this commander in chief.”

So far only National Guard troops have been deployed against protesters in cities and states across the country, which is permitted under federal law as long as they are under state control.

Trump quickly turned to the military after riots erupted in Minnesota and many other states after Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin pressed his knee into Floyd’s neck for nearly nine minutes, resulting in his death.

In a call between Trump and governors on Monday, Esper urged states to “dominate the battlespace” to put down protests. Among other steps, Esper also ordered approximately 1,600 active-duty troops near Washington, so they would be in place in case Trump invoked the Insurrection Act.

The fallout from those moves led Esper and Pentagon aides to backtrack as criticism of his role mounted in recent days.

In an interview with NBC News on Tuesday night, Esper said he was given no notice before Trump led him and other senior administration officials to the church near Lafayette Park for a widely criticized photo opportunity.

Esper told reporters he believed they were going to observe the vandalized public bathroom in Lafayette Square.

“I did know that, following the president’s remarks on Monday evening, that many of us were going to join President Trump and review the damage in Lafayette Park, and at St. John’s Episcopal Church,” Esper said Wednesday. “What I was not aware of was exactly where we were going, when we arrived at the church, and what the plans were once we got there.

Esper said he also regretted using the term “battlespace” this week to describe areas gripped by protests.

“In retrospect, I would use different wording so as not to distract from the more important matters at hand or allow some to suggest that we are militarizing the issue,” he said.

Esper strongly criticized the actions of Minneapolis police, in whose custody George Floyd died after an officer held his knee to Floyd’s neck for several minutes. Esper called the act “murder” and “a horrible crime.”

—————

PHOTO (for help with images, contact 312-222-4194): MINN-POLICE-DEATH-ESPER