The Pentagon recently released new guidelines concerning transgender troops serving in the military. Despite President Trump’s directive banning their service, the Pentagon clarified in a memo that any transgender troops currently in the military can re-enlist in the next several months. Several weeks ago Trump tweeted that he didn’t think transgender people should be allowed to serve in the military; at the end of August, he signed a directive to that effect. If the Trump administration is going to make a bold statement, such as banning transgender people in the military, they should have a plan, preferably with the military’s knowledge and input, about how (and why) this should unfold.
Not doing so looks impulsive, and it hurts the continuity of our military’s operation, as well as its reputation.
In a memo, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said a panel will decide how to implement Trump’s ban on transgender individuals in the military. Since that hasn’t happened yet, they’re staying.
Mattis clarified in the memo the current policies, not Trump’s latest directive, on transgender troops remain in place and will until Feb. 21, 2018, when final decisions will be made.
Not everyone is happy with Trump’s ban. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee and military hawk, is opposing Trump’s ban with a bill to that effect. In a statement, he said “We should welcome all those who are willing and able to serve our country. Any member of the military who meets the medical and readiness standards should be allowed to serve — including those who are transgender.”
It seems like there are two issues here. First, whether or not transgender troops should be banned at all. Second, if so, how should this action unfold? Should transgender troops serving be immediately kicked out?
Though I see McCain’s point, as I’ve written in this space before, I don’t think transgender troops should serve in the military. As much as I admire their desire, it seems dangerous — for the military, and even for them. The transgender issue as a whole is a new one, one both they and American society are unsure of how to deal with and respond to.
The military is a unique body, separate from American civilians, designed for a specific purpose and with an exact mission — it is not a petri dish of societal and politically-correct experimentation.
But how should a ban unfold? Short answer: Not this way.
Trump shows a lack of planning, leadership, and respect for military officials when he not only impulsively tweeted about it but then simply signed a directive, as it might appear, before hashing over details with his own secretary of defense. By the time final decisions are made, it will have been six months. It’s fine to plan and take time on a sensitive topic such as this, but Trump should have waited to sign his directive until after planning the details with Mattis and other military officials.
Utilizing a qualified commander such as Mattis by communicating to him ahead of time (respecting how his military operates) shows respect and leadership qualities much-needed in the president.
Tweets don’t Make America Great Again. Thoughtful leadership, thorough communication, and a willingness to ask questions and receive input do.
Nicole Russell is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. She is a journalist in Washington, D.C., who previously worked in Republican politics in Minnesota. She was the 2010 recipient of the American Spectator’s Young Journalist Award.
If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions here.
