What is the goal of the US Air Force (USAF) for filling out its officer corps? Recruiting the best and brightest with demonstrated skills and leadership potential, one would assume. That would be wrong. To find out the answer to the question, the Center to Advance Security in America (CASA) resorted to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in 2023 and, rebuffed, eventually filed a lawsuit against the USAF to obtain the air service’s officer accession demographic objectives. It turns out the goal is to slash the number of white males.
USAF Under Scrutiny
Liberty Nation News has frequently reported on the trend in the US Armed Forces to marginalize capability in deference to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) quotas. However, information published recently in the Daily Caller – based on the documentation CASA obtained – is concerning. The Air Force wants the percentage of white males to be reduced from 50% in 2023 to 43% by 2029, a 14% decrease. What makes the USAF program particularly disturbing is that the policy has been pushed by the assistant secretary of the Air Force for Force Management and Integration and the undersecretary of the Air Force.
And the USAF quota program bureaucracy is extensive. “Internal documents obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation include a slideshow from 2022 where the Air Force outlines racial and gender quotas and details how it hopes to ‘achieve’ a reduced number of white males in its Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) officer’s applicant program.” There are 454 pages of emails and briefing charts that drive the Biden-Harris administration’s DEI agenda. Looking beyond the mountain of acronyms, the sheer magnitude of USAF bureaucracy involved in this undertaking is astounding.
More than a hundred pages are devoted to some variation of the subject “Officer Source of Commission Applicant pool goals” and preparation for a briefing to the undersecretary of the Air Force with drafts and read-ahead documents. Consider that every time those who received an email took time to consider it and respond or take on a task. The taxpayers are paying for all the time expended by email recipients, civilians, contract employees, and military members involved.
Not All Military Members Embrace DEI
Not everyone in the US military is in lockstep with the DEI agenda. In some cases, new instruction eliminates diversity as a consideration for promotion to the senior enlisted officer positions. According to Military.com:
“Sergeant Major of the Army Michael Weimer, the top enlisted leader of the force, recently issued new guidance on selecting command sergeants major that was essentially copy-and-pasted from his predecessor — with one exception. It removes a line directing that a command sergeant major candidate’s diversity be considered.”
The US Army is not the only institution moving away from non-mission criteria for managing its personnel. Recently, major corporations have realized that decisions about hiring and promoting employees must center around merit to ensure successful performance. John Deere did an about-face from its DEI direction and announced in an X post:
“We will no longer participate in or support external social or cultural awareness parades, festivals, or events. Business Resource Groups will exclusively be focused on professional development, networking, mentoring, and supporting talent recruitment efforts … [D]iversity quotas … have never been and are not company policy.”
According to HR Dive, in addition to John Deere, other enterprises such as Harley Davidson, Jack Daniels Distillery, and the University of North Carolina Charlotte have reversed course on their DEI initiatives.
The Arizona State University Center for American Institutions recently completed a year-long study, “Civic Education in the Military.” One foundational finding asserted: “The massive DEI bureaucracy, its training, and its pseudo-scientific assessments are, at best, distractions that absorb valuable time and resources. At worst, they communicate the opposite of the military ethos: e.g., that individual demographic differences come before team and mission.”
For the US Air Force to continue championing the DEI agenda offers no valuable benefit to the nation’s defense. To blatantly single out for exclusion a predominant segment of society as an institutional policy ensures the Air Force will be less capable. The threats America faces demand an Air Force that can perform.
The views expressed are those of the author and not of any other affiliate.
