Implementing DEI Officials at the Squad Level: A Scrutiny of Potential Impact on Army and Marines

Within the United States military, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) have become key focal points. This is particularly relevant given the demographic composition of the armed forces, with over 40 percent of its members identifying as minorities and thus forming a significant portion of the US military. Mandatory DEI training across all ranks is already in place, indicating a recognition of the importance of these values within the military hierarchy.

However, questions surrounding the implementation of DEI officials at the squad level continue to evoke mixed reactions. A common argument is that the current structure of military leadership, rooted in the principle of command authority, effectively addresses such issues. Commanders are trusted to lead their units with the guidance of established protocols, ensuring fair and impartial treatment of service members.

Proactive Measures versus Command Hierarchy

The introduction of DEI officials at the squad level might be seen as an attempt to bring a more individualized focus to diversity and inclusion initiatives within smaller units. This shift could potentially lead to more immediate responses to grievances and a creation of a more sensitive and responsive environment. However, such implementation raises several concerns, particularly in the context of the military's existing structures.

One of the primary concerns is the potential for overly political interference in direct command authority. The American military prides itself on its chain of command, where leaders are accountable to their superiors and responsible for the well-being and discipline of their subordinates. Introducing officials whose sole purpose is to interpret and enforce DEI policies could potentially blur the lines of authority, leading to confusion and inefficiency.

Focusing on Combat Arms Staff Sergeants

One potential alternative approach is to leverage the expertise of existing military personnel. Combat Arms Staff Sergeants are seasoned leaders with a wealth of experience in unit management, which could be tapped to foster a more inclusive and equitable environment. These sergeants are positioned to provide guidance and mentorship to junior members, helping to create a culture where diversity and inclusion are valued and practiced.

The wisdom and practical experience of these individuals could be a more effective and less disruptive way to enhance DEI within military units. By encouraging them to take on a leading role in promoting these values, the military could maintain its emphasis on discipline and unity while still addressing the need for more inclusive practices.

The Downside of Political Commisars

Historically, political commissars have played a role in some hardline Communist military structures, often leading to chaos and the erosion of unit cohesion. The military leadership in the United States veers away from this model, recognizing the importance of a clear chain of command and the need for leaders to have the autonomy to make decisions based on the best interests of their units.

The idea of substituting leadership judgment with political guidance is often met with derision. Service members value the trust placed in their leaders to navigate complex situations, and the introduction of political commisars could undermine this trust, leading to a loss of morale and a degraded unit environment.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while the intent behind bringing DEI officials to the squad level is well-motivated, the potential risks and challenges cannot be ignored. Leveraging the existing wisdom and expertise of combat arms staff sergeants could offer a more sustainable and effective approach to fostering a truly diverse and inclusive military environment. The critical question remains: how can we enhance DEI within the military without compromising the essential command structures that have served the nation well for generations?