Restoring America's Fighting Force

Overview

Purpose and Intent

Executive Order 14185, issued by President Donald Trump on January 27, 2025, seeks to abolish the practice of instituting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs within the Armed Forces of the United States. The Order takes a stance against what it perceives as race- and sex-based discrimination, which it claims have undermined the armed forces' meritocracy and unit cohesion, diluting overall military effectiveness. By eliminating DEI offices, the Executive Order aims to establish a more merit-based operational environment within the military.

Strategic Focus

In its execution, the Order commands the purging of DEI offices within the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security regarding the U.S. Coast Guard, seen as vestiges that promote race- or sex-based preferences. Furthermore, it mandates an internal review by the Department of Defense to document past actions related to DEI initiatives that may have led to discrimination. Reports on these actions are to be provided to the Secretary of Defense within 90 days.

Educational and Institutional Changes

Moreover, the Executive Order directs military educational institutions, such as the United States Service Academies, to align their curricula and leadership with the parameters set by this Order, emphasizing America's founding documents as the most powerful force for good. It explicitly prohibits the promotion of theories and ideologies classified as 'un-American,' 'divisive,' or 'radical,' such as divisive concepts related to race and sex stereotyping, without acknowledging specific definitions or contexts of such concepts.

Legal and Policy Implications

Constitutional and Statutory Framework

The Order sits within a legally complex landscape, rooted in the principles of non-discrimination as enshrined in federal employment law and constitutional provisions that promote equal treatment under the law. This Executive Order effectively rewrites the operational code for military hiring and promotion processes by insisting on purely color-blind, sex-neutral criteria, thereby eschewing any affirmative actions designed to improve the representation of minority groups.

Policy Shifts

In clear defiance of previously established federal diversity mandates, Executive Order 14185 requires a reversal of DEI practices, pressing the military toward a singular merit-based framework. This institutional shift raises questions about its compatibility with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's guidelines which aim to prevent workplace discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin.

Implications for Government Agencies

The Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security are tasked under this Order with redefining their institutional policies to eradicate diversity-driven initiatives. Given their existing structures and the time frames required for the reports and reviews stipulated, these departments face administrative burdens in swiftly transitioning into compliance with the Order's directives.

Who Benefits

Merit-Based Advocates

Individuals and groups advocating for pure meritocracy within government institutions will likely find in this Order an embodiment of their perspective. Those who argue that an unadulterated merit-based approach best serves the interests of military efficiency and unit cohesion may view this shift as a restoration of traditional military values.

Opponents of Gender Ideology

Conservatives who challenge the influence of gender ideology in military training and operations will perceive this Order as an important corrective measure. By eradicating DEI concepts, they likely see it aligning military values with their ideological beliefs about gender roles and inherent differences.

Privileged Groups

Predominantly white male members of the armed forces may experience fewer barriers in career progression under a merit-only paradigm that does not recognize systemic biases or barriers that minorities might face. Without DEI policies, the existing power dynamics oftentimes remain unchanged, potentially benefiting those historically occupying leadership roles.

Traditional Policy Advocates

The Order rewards those who have traditionally argued against affirmative action and similar policies in public service. By eliminating DEI offices, it appeases political elements that equate fairness with identical treatment without adjusting for historical disparities.

Budget-Conscious Policymakers

From a fiscal perspective, policymakers advocating for a leaner government may interpret the dismantling of DEI offices as a cost-saving measure. By reducing these departments, they may argue for reallocation of resources toward core military functions.

Who Suffers

Minority Groups

The most immediate impact will be felt by minority groups within the armed forces, who might encounter diminished support for addressing systemic challenges they face. Without DEI initiatives, the mechanisms that actively work to correct imbalances and promote diversity may no longer exist, potentially stymieing progress toward greater inclusion.

Proponents of Diversity and Inclusion

Those who advocate for diversity and inclusion in the workplace as a means of fostering a more equitable environment will see their efforts curtailed. Their arguments that diverse teams lead to improved problem-solving and innovation may fall on deaf ears under the purview of this Order.

Military Officers Trained in DEI

Military personnel who have been trained within a DEI framework might find themselves at a disadvantage or facing obsolescence. The skills and training they developed under these programs may no longer align with the new merit-only model of operational readiness and leadership.

Educational Institutions Adhering to DEI

The Order dictates changes to military educational institutions' curricula, likely diminishing or removing programs aimed at broadening students' understanding of diverse social and cultural dynamics. These institutions could suffer from a narrowed scope in their teaching and learning environments.

Women in the Military

Women in the military may face challenges as the support networks and policies designed to level the playing field by acknowledging and addressing gender-specific challenges are dismantled. The implications are far-reaching, potentially affecting recruitment, retention, and advancement rates across military branches.

Historical Context

Previous Policy Directions

Since the mid-20th century, the United States military has often been a vanguard for progressive social change, notably with the desegregation of the Armed Forces in 1948 and the gradual incorporation of women into combat roles in more recent years. Executive Order 14185 presents a stark deviation from these trends by rolling back policies that had expanded inclusivity over the decades.

Comparison to Previous Administrations

Executive Order 14185 appears to be a continuation of efforts by the Trump administration to dismantle policies considered progressive, as evidenced by its capitalizing on elements of the earlier Executive Order 13950. This pattern of governance resonates with ideological shifts favoring less governmental intervention in social matters.

Long-term Impacts on Policy

The Order may herald a broader trend among policymakers advocating for a reduction in federal involvement in regulation related to diversity and inclusion. This direction challenges the notion of systemic biases within governmental infrastructure, prioritizing individual merit over collectivist solutions to institutional challenges.

Political Ideology and Governance

Ideologically, this Executive Order aligns with principles of traditional conservatism, where governmental roles in social engineering are minimized. It reinforces a governance style that privileges individualism and personal accountability over collectivist strategies aimed at redressing historical inequalities.

Public Perception and Partisan Reactions

The issuance of Executive Order 14185 might intensify partisan divisions. Supporters of the Order might view such acts as necessary corrections against government overreach, while opponents may see it as a step backward from hard-fought civil rights advancements. Therefore, the Order embodies not just policy changes but also a microcosm of the broader American political discourse.

Potential Controversies or Challenges

Legal Disputes

The Executive Order is likely to provoke legal challenges, particularly surrounding constitutional questions about equal protection and non-discrimination. The removal of DEI offices and practices could be interpreted as contravening Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits employment discrimination.

Congressional Pushback

Congress, particularly its more progressive members, might oppose or seek to counteract the Order. Legislative processes might be marshaled to introduce bills that protect diversity-focused policies, engaging the battle for DEI in another arena of governance.

Public and Political Response

The public response to this Order can be polarizing, potentially mobilizing civil rights organizations and advocacy groups to challenge the administration's moves. Public protests, as well as social media campaigns, might surface as dynamic responses to the perceived threats to progress in diversity and inclusion efforts.

Compliance and Implementation Challenges

As the Armed Forces and related agencies align themselves with the new mandates, implementation challenges will likely arise, particularly regarding internal reviews and complete retraction of DEI initiatives. Institutional inertia and embedded practices may slow the pace of compliance, necessitating constant oversight.

International Reception

Globally, America's choice to minimize DEI initiatives could impact its international standing, as many allied nations have embraced diversity as a strategic asset. Questions about the U.S.'s commitment to inclusive principles may affect diplomatic relations, altering perceptions of American values abroad.