COLUMN | Who Should Be the Future Commanders in Chief of the Army and the Air Force?

Let us seek the general who is best qualified to carry out the above, and if we make a mistake, we can change them. Presidents can change the commanders in chief. It is true that they do not usually do so, but they can. They are not immutable.

As is customary, announcements regarding the high commands of the various National Defense institutions occur in October and November each year. The Navy already published its changes at the beginning of the month, after review and approval by the Minister of National Defense and the President of the Republic. Nothing particularly significant for the naval forces: two vice admirals retired, and four rear admirals were promoted, due to vacant positions since the change of command in June. Most of the current vice admirals will be retiring for the next rotation, so the future naval chief will come from the current rear admirals.

In the case of the Army and the Air Force, the process is more complex, as what is at stake in both cases is the appointment of the future commander in chief. Before addressing the Army’s case, allow me to quickly cover that of the Air Force.

General Hugo Rodríguez will hand over command in November 2026, and the question is whether the pool from which his successor will be chosen is formed now or if it will be made next year, closer to the date of the change of command. In this institution, the big unknown is whether they will keep the current Chief of the Air Force, the distinguished General Leonardo Romanini, in service. That said, the high command of the FACH has many good generals from whom to select the future head of that institution, who—like the leaders of the other institutions—will have to deal with budgetary issues and the maintenance and/or renewal of the capabilities of the Chilean Air Force.

The replacement of General Javier Iturriaga is a rather political matter. The commanders in chief are political actors, especially in current times. The commander in chief serves as the link between the Ministry of Defense and the institution, so the goal is to find a person who can fulfill that role effectively. This person does not act alone and has many generals with whom to lead the institution. As important as choosing the commander in chief is appointing a good Chief of Staff and those who make up that senior leadership team.

General Iturriaga will hand over command just before the presidential change of command in March 2026, a practice that dates back to when Pinochet did so on that date years ago. His replacement process is managed between the Ministry of Defense, the Presidency, and General Iturriaga himself. It is customary, in this particular case, to consult with senators and deputies, which is already happening.

There are two ways to handle this: one in which General Iturriaga holds the selection meeting now and presents a recommendation for the pool to Defense, or he proposes to the Government to appoint his replacement from the current pool, followed by the selection meeting. Both scenarios can occur, but they have different consequences, as they may lead to different configurations. The good news is that there are generals to choose from.

However, what is important is not so much the above, but understanding the role and purpose of the position of commander in chief of the Chilean Army, as well as the current political context, the budgetary reality, the roles and missions of the Army, what is expected of them both in the south and in the north, and the maintenance of strategic capabilities that ensure deterrence and action in the event of needing to defend sovereignty, territory, and national interests.

Let us seek the general who is best qualified to carry out the above, and if we make a mistake, we can change them. Presidents can change the commanders in chief. It is true that they do not usually do so, but they can. They are not immutable.