That’s a sound connection, I’ll admit. However, in going to grudgingly agree that it’s probably just contrasting the difference Cheif and Locke. However on that however, it seems to be paradoxical.
Imagine the art as a whole is representative of multiple perspectives on the situation. Particularly, us: humanity as a whole. On first glance, we’ll see Locke and Chief. Chief is represented as orange. Orange usually represents danger, that’s how the mind interprets it. Since Chief is AWOL, and that seems to have gone public, humans as a whole will see Chief as a fallen hero, a threat. Locke, on the other hand, is in blue. Blue can represent trust, yet also sadness. Locke’s mission is a lot about trust, loyalty—yet we’re all grieving over having to terminate our greatest hero. Again, humans as a whole see it in that perspective.
However…
If you look closely, the basic contrast between Locke and Chief becomes more complicated. For one, you’ll notice that Chief and Blue Team appear under the blue side. Under close surveillance, I’m sure we’ll all find that even though they seem hostile in the public eye, Chief and Blue Team’s mission will benefit humanity in the end.
“Our duty, as soldiers, is to protect humanity. Whatever the cost.”
Now, look at Locke’s team. The public may see Locke as their new hero, but Locke’s intentions (or at least what he’s being ordered to do) aren’t going to pay off in the end.
Yes, a paradox (I think). What we think is Chief betraying us is actually Chief realizing that, as Scruggs put it, “what [humanity] you fight for isn’t always the same as who [UNSC/ONI] you fight for.”