Military.com wrote, "The Army's top enlisted leader has removed key guidance that required diversity to be considered when selecting individuals to serve in upper-level noncommissioned officer positions, according to a memo reviewed by Military.com."
First of all, we are not going after Sergeant Major of the Army Michael Weimer. What we want to understand is how he arrived at the decision to remove diversity considerations from the selection criteria for top noncommissioned officer roles and how he plans to reassure parts of the military community that might now feel betrayed. This shift in policy raises significant questions about the Army’s commitment to inclusivity and the message being sent to current and future soldiers, especially those from underrepresented backgrounds.
In the Army, where every stripe earned reflects courage, dedication, and service, diversity has long been seen as a key strength. It echoes in the refrain from the song We Earned Our Stripes: "We marched side by side, no matter the fight, 'cause in unity, we thrive." Yet, recent decisions have called into question the Army's commitment to reflecting the diverse makeup of the nation it serves. The removal of diversity considerations from the selection criteria for top noncommissioned officer roles, which seem to be spearheaded by Sergeant Major of the Army Michael Weimer, marks a significant shift away from the values that have shaped a more inclusive force.
Sergeant Major Weimer’s decision to eliminate the directive to "consider diversity to ensure leaders represent our formations" sends a message that cannot be ignored. For years, the military has worked hard to recruit talent from all walks of life, emphasizing the importance of a force that mirrors America itself. The courts and institutions may be rethinking DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) and affirmative action policies, but for the Army and its recruitment efforts, this is a dangerous path.
Critics argue that prioritizing diversity somehow detracts from the Army’s core mission of warfighting. However, the concept of diversity in the military is far more nuanced than focusing on race or gender. It encompasses different professional, economic, and educational backgrounds that contribute to a force capable of adapting to the dynamic challenges of modern warfare. "Leveraging the diversity of experiences, values, and talents will ensure the Army maintains a competitive advantage in the war for talent," said former Army Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville. His words reflected a deep commitment to diversity, not just in policy but in practice. Gen. McConville was notably active with the BEYA Stars and Stripes program, a career development initiative focused on fostering diversity in military leadership. He even appeared on the cover of US Black Engineer magazine, signaling the importance of representation at all levels of command.
This rollback comes at a time when recruitment is already a challenge. Removing diversity as a criterion for selecting leaders sends the wrong signal to potential recruits from underrepresented communities. Recruitment is not just about physical fitness or combat readiness—it’s about appealing to young men and women who want to see themselves represented in leadership, who want to feel included in the mission. By stepping away from diversity, the Army risks alienating a vital talent pool.
While courts and political leaders might be reconsidering policies like affirmative action, this shift in military leadership is particularly disheartening. It suggests that inclusivity may be seen as less important than it was just a few years ago, at a time when the Army should be championing diversity to attract the best and brightest recruits. After all, diversity is not a hindrance to merit; it is an enhancement. A force that draws on diverse experiences is better equipped to address the complex challenges it faces in the field.
We should not scapegoat leaders like Sergeant Major Weimer, who may believe that focusing on diversity detracts from merit. However, it’s time to educate, not retreat. Educating the military, lawmakers, and the public on the value of diversity in the Army is crucial. Instead of cutting it from the criteria for leadership, we should embrace it as a tool for excellence. The military’s history of inclusion, from integrating African American soldiers to welcoming women into combat roles, demonstrates the strength that diversity brings.
To dismantle this now risks sending a damaging message, not just internally, but to future generations of soldiers. The song says it best: "We earned our stripes, through struggle and strife, together we fight, for what is right." Diversity is a part of what is right—it's a part of what makes the Army great. We must remember that unity and diversity are.
This may be a beer moment for all of us to sit down over a beer and steak and see how we must keep America first. Sir, can we do that at BEYA Stars and Stripes in Baltimore this February?