One of the most interesting social achievements in the United States has been the experience of the military services in achieving a high measure of integration in the Armed Forces.
An historical overview of the presence of people of different races, nationalities, ethnic backgrounds, and religious beliefs in the Armed Forces, suggests that there have been three definable periods to date: (1) The period of a segregated Armed Forces; (2) The period of desegregation, 1948-1955; and (3) The period of functional integration, 1950-1969.
Prior to 1948, the Armed Forces, with the exception of the Navy, were wholly segregated. In July of that year, Executive Order 9981 abolished segregation in the Armed Forces and required the elimination of discrimination based on race, creed, color, or national origin.
The dynamics of the social process did not at once move the Armed Services from segregation to optimum integration. In the first few years, we underwent a process of desegregation. The black and white organizational units were broken up.
The next step was from desegregation to integration. But what kind of integration? It was, for the most part, integration on a functional or operational level. That is to say that there were many blacks and whites working side by side, who nevertheless retained segregationist attitudes which were a part of their psychological being.
Today we do have functional integration. But we have not yet achieved fraternal and spiritual integration, which, in my view, is the ultimate objective and would become the fourth historical period. In addition, it is imperative that the military be united, that it achieve harmonious relationships among its personnel so that at all times it is militarily efficient and combat ready.
We first observed a significant rise in racial tensions and conflict in July and August 1967, a period which coincided with the racial conflagrations in Newark, New Jersey, and Detroit, Michigan. At first there were tensions, then isolated unrest, and more significantly a considerable amount of undesirable violence between blacks and whites. Shortly after the Tet offensive was repulsed in Vietnam in 1968, we noticed a disturbing deterioration in black-white relationships and a marked increase in violent conflict between them.
The civil disorders and riots in the United States were events which had to have had some impact on American military personnel worldwide on black troops and white troops. Being on the alert and sensitive to developments, we began to detect that problems were beginning to surface which constituted evidence that validated our concern.
When these conditions were called to the attention of the then Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manpower, Thomas D. Morris, he took the matter up with Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara and the Secretaries of the military departments. The military services, taking cognizance of the situation, initiated steps and actions to preclude and prevent further racial unrest and violence.
On visits to Europe in May 1968 and Southeast Asia in October of 1968, I again began to discern, as a result of our talks with black and white military personnel in Germany, England, Italy, Spain, Vietnam, and Thailand, that racial tensions were dangerously increasing. I believed then, and so recommended, that we would have to institute affirmative action programs to arrest the spread of racial violence among military personnel.
From my wide travels and many conversations with blacks and whites, I am convinced that the youth who come into the Armed Forces want to learn how to live, work, and play together effectively and harmoniously. But this can be achieved only if those of us in positions of leadership and command provide the kind of dynamic and inspiring guidance to maintain harmonious relationships where they have been developed, and to create them where they have not yet satisfactorily evolved.
In achieving and maintaining harmonious human relations, commanders play the key role. There are some things that all of us can do, that the military departments can do, that the men in the Armed Forces of every rank and grade can do to ensure that the security of this nation is not diminished as a result of racial differences expressed in terms of disharmony, unrest, tension, and racial violence.
The recent outbursts of racial violence between black and white military personnel, at several Defense installations, tell us that we must, with expedition and dispatch, and by creative innovations and firm command leadership, come to grips with this problem now.
To be sure, the military, immediately after these outbreaks, increased the number of guards patrolling at night. They increased the lighting in the dark and secluded places, and they had the underbrush cut back so as to remove the physical conditions which could harbor predators or attackers. These were necessary and prudent actions. They were appropriate security measures but, standing alone, they are neither adequate nor sufficient. Much more has to be done. The reduction of racial tensions and unrest and the avoidance of racial violence require many approaches and programs. In addition to instituting effective security measures, the following recommendations are offered:
Education in human relations. At every level of education and training we should provide education in the area of race, intergroup, and human relations so as to equip every man from the highest military commander down to the most recently inducted recruit with an understanding of, and an appreciation for, this very complex matter of intergroup relations.
We should have appropriate, well developed educational programs at all of our officer commissioning institutions and schools. We should have them also at all of our senior service and subordinate schools, so as to make sure that the men who are going to provide the mature, adult leadership needed in these difficult times are equipped with the necessary understanding, approaches, techniques, and methodology to deal with the very complex and difficult area of race and minority group problems.
In addition to education of the officer corps, we should also provide education and training for the entire complement of the military hierarchy. We bring in from civilian communities throughout America thousands of youths every month—black and white—protestant and Catholic, Jew and gentile, rich and poor, from north, east, south, and west. This diverse group we must weld into an effective military organization to secure the nation from enemies without and to ensure domestic tranquility within.
Since many of these young people are coming from turbulent civilian communities, we must deal with the experiences which they have had; with the attitudes they bring with them; with the hostilities, antipathies, and animosities which they have acquired from their civilian communities.
It is an interesting fact, though little known, that today’s civil disorders on the American scene have moved from the streets, in terms of frequency and escalation, into the senior and junior high schools of the nation. Educators and school principals are alarmed at this increasing unrest in the schools. You and I should be. More disturbing than the overall unrest is the fact that black-white racial conflict is being reported as the major cause of disorder and violence in the schools in the large urban centers. One study of 361 cases of disruption and disorder showed that in 132 incidents of unrest in 27 states the conflict was racial in nature. Racial violence has crept into senior and junior high schools. This should be of special concern to the military because it is from youth of high school age that we get the vast majority of young men coming into the military services.
Against this background of turmoil and tension in the civilian community, it is imperative for the military services to institute and incorporate at all of their basic training installations something which might be called Threshold Orientation. By that I mean that on the very first day a young man comes into the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Air Force, it should be made crystal clear from the highest levels of command that neither his color, his race, his religion, his regional background, nor the place from which he comes is going to have any bearing whatsoever on how well he gets along in the service—that all men are going to be treated equally; that they will be treated fairly and without favor; and that on the basis of their performance and the meritorious manner of their work, they will be advanced and promoted. In addition, they should be told that it is the determination of the armed forces to effect a complete and total removal of biased and prejudical [sic] conduct among military personnel.
My contacts and experience with the young men in the Armed Services lead me to believe that the vast majority of them are desirous of achieving that goal. Commanders and subordinate leaders must make sure that these young people have that opportunity.
Improved communications. A factor contributing to racial tensions and unrest in the armed forces is a serious problem of defective communications. The process and system by which the policies and programs of the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the military departments are transmitted from the higher levels down to the lowest troop levels and, in reverse, the means by which any serviceman’s individual right to move his concern or complaint upwards without dilution or obstruction, without fear of reprisal by or retaliation from his superiors, is not working as well as it should.
The armed forces must not allow the complaint and communications system to become so bogged down that to the serviceman it represents frustration and callous indifference.
Our base visits to military installations indicated some serious difficulty in getting transmission, up and down, beyond the NCO levels and, to a lesser degree, the levels of the young second and first lieutenants. It appears that if they cannot resolve a problem at their level they are afraid to transmit it upwards, feeling that their supervisors might consider it evidence of their inability to lead or command effectively. They are reluctant to report unsolved problems to their superiors, saying, “Here is a matter that I have not been able to resolve; it is worthy of and requires your attention.”
There might not be any validity or truth to a man’s grievances, but the fact that he feels that something is going wrong should by itself be sufficient to say to all of us that this man must be listened to and given “a fair shake,” and an equitable resolution of his problem or concern.
Signs and symbols: a new language. Another area to which command leadership must pay attention in the area of communications is the field of symbolism and sign language. That is to say we must make sure that black and white military personnel understand the meaning of the signs and symbols they are using and | displaying so profusely today, both on and off-base: the Black Power sign, the Black Power salute, the A-O.K. signal, and the Love and Peace symbol.
A large number of white military personnel have said that they felt that the Black Power salute signalled and meant they would be violently attacked. It was a threatening sign. But what the salute really means is that it is time for black brothers and sisters to unite, to work together cooperatively to achieve their goals and objectives, and that it is their intention to get into the mainstream of American life at this time.
We should have blacks and whites understand what each is saying to himself and to each other, and not continue to let military personnel talk in “foreign tongues” and unknown signs.
Open forum discussions. Reference has been made to the importance in the Armed Forces of vertical communication from top to bottom—from the highest command authority down to the newest inductee.
Of comparable importance is horizontal communication—from side to side—between the men themselves. Viable communications are a doorway to understanding. Military commanders should encourage and institute media for open and free discussion of all problems, racial and otherwise, between the men themselves, and especially between them and their junior commissioned officers and the senior non-commissioned officers, where and with whom the day to day interface takes place. Panel and roundtable discussions should be encouraged and instituted at military installations, ships, and stations so as to dispel misunderstanding, resolve irritating issues, and achieve, whenever possible, understanding and consensus. Communication through discussion can be a positive force in combating and reversing undesirable racial polarization and separatism, while on the other hand, a forum in which there is a free, candid, and responsible exchange of views, can foster racial harmony and good human relations. Such forums should have competent, mature moderators, skilled in stimulating and managing discussions of these things.
Human relations councils. Among the effective approaches to the solution of the problems of equality of opportunity and treatment, racial tensions and unrest, observed during world-wide visits to many military bases, has been the operation of human relations councils or committees. These councils have been organized, staffed, and convened by and subject to the jurisdictional authority of the local base commander. The councils’ membership has consisted of a representative cross-section of officer and enlisted personnel selected from the commands’ racial, ethnic, and religious population, including individuals from throughout the services’ grade structure. As one of the instrumentalities available to the commander, it is suggested that, where circumstances and conditions warrant, human relations councils be established at military installations, ships, and stations having 100 or more personnel.
These councils should neither be an alternative to, a substitute for, nor a diminishing of the commander’s authority. They should be advisory to the commander to assist him in maintaining effective communications and relationships among all personnel under his command. Their activities would promote equality of opportunity and treatment, effective communication, high morale, military effectiveness, and combat readiness.
In addition to the general purposes stated above, the functions of human relations councils should:
► Serve as a forum for presenting and discussing matters of concern and grievance to military personnel.
► Deal constructively and effectively with interpersonal, intergroup, and interracial relationships pertaining to both on- and off-base matters.
► Prevent and remove racial tensions, unrest and conflict, and avert interracial violence among military personnel.
► Contribute to the achievement and maintenance of intergroup and interracial harmony, good will, and unity.
► Submit to the commander for review the recommendations to which it requests him to give consideration and take corrective action.
Reducing tensions and unrest. We must develop recreational programs and group activities, involving black and white military personnel, that reach down to all levels, encompassing widespread participation. This does not mean having just the varsity team of the base integrated. I refer to a kind of intramural activity in contrast to varsity participation; an amateur level of athletic participation in contradistinction to first team professionalism. A whole array of recreational group activities suggest themselves: group singing; choral recitation; group dancing; cross country teams; group exploratory hikes; barracks cook-outs; educational tours to nearby and distant places of historical and other significance; and arrangements, when away from the base in other communities, for social hospitality to the men from USO and other groups. Through such activities a new awareness and appreciation develops for the cultural differences of others. And yet, in the long run, the result of these “social confrontations” will reveal the inherent commonalty of all Americans. Indeed, we are more alike than we are different.
“Things are getting better." The vast majority of Negro youth in the Armed Forces today are bereft of information and knowledge of the progress which has been made since segregation was abolished in the Armed Forces in July 1948. They are unaware of the growth in the number of Negro officers, the steady advances that have been made by black enlisted personnel in obtaining middle management and supervisory positions in a wide variety of military occupational specialties. They have no information about the achievements of individual black officers who hold positions of high trust and responsibility in the armed services and serve as representatives of the U. S. government throughout the world. They have not been told of the heroic deeds of black combat leaders, if their valor were displayed under circumstances and conditions other than in their immediate fighting units. Nor are they aware of the opportunities available to them for personal development and growth while serving their country. All of this is to say that we need to communicate to the black military personnel that “things are getting better,” that progress has been and is being made. While doing this, however, we must utilize that balance of presentation which provides both black and white with a sense of appreciation for the contributions which they have made to effectuate this progress.
Relevance in sound and reading. Another area to which the command must address its attention is the making available of relevant literature and the relevant sound—that is, books, magazines, movies, records and musical entertainment—which go to the heart of the search and thrust for identity which blacks now seek. The quest for his Black Heritage—which is good and meaningful not only to blacks, but highly informative and educational for all personnel—is the “Thing” with the new breed black. The Office of Manpower and Reserve Affairs has made available a comprehensive bibliography in this area for officers and enlisted men.
And, of course, the girls! Every man on a base will applaud the commander who recognizes the highly beneficial impact which the presence of attractive young females have when they are available for social activities. When girls are not available, the men often “swoop” to cities 500 to 1,000 miles away on a 72- or 96-hour pass. This is understandable, but there are physical hazards inherent in such high-speed trips to distant places. When I was the Associate Director for the USO during World War II, I instituted a program whereby we brought to defense installations and USO clubs in somewhat isolated places, young ladies under good chaperonage from the schools, churches, and YWCAs in nearby communities to attend the social functions on the base or at the club. I think this is one of the things we must do now for our youth in military organizations.
“Black is beautiful." The new appreciation for blackness as expressed in the commonly used phrase “black is beautiful” has as much psychological meaning as color identity. But there are tangible, concrete factors involved in this thrusting for identity. The new Afro haircuts which have been made allowable within the parameters of military regulations for good grooming have, among other things, resulted in a new call for black cosmetics, for barbers who have the techniques and know-how of cutting the hair of blacks and shaping it and trimming it to the modified Afro versions.
The emphasis on “black is beautiful” extends to the family and dependents of black military personnel and, of course, includes the female components of the services, for the black ladies in the military families are insisting that in foreign lands and at domestic military installations there be available persons who can shape, trim, and provide stylish hairdressing for black females-
Redirecting non-military concerns. There is a new dimension today to the expressed concerns of black military personnel. They are not only steamed up about the grievances and slights which they as individuals suffer or the indignities to which they are unhappily subjected, but are now also concerned about what is happening to their black brothers and sisters back in the urban ghettos and the poor rural areas. It must be made clear to these youths that even though their concerns are valid and justifiable, there is nothing they can do by direct action now while still in the military to come to grips with these problems a hundred or a thousand miles away. This situation requires the reorientation and redirection of their social concern and sympathy for their black sisters and brothers. While in the armed forces, commanders should urge them to help make the services the model for equality of opportunity and treatment, an example to be exported to civilian communities for all America to follow.
Command responsibility. There are a variety of dissents and disorders which can and do create problems in the armed forces that could interfere with the successful execution of its mission. The realization of true equality of opportunity and treatment would immediately banish one source of potential and realized difficulty—interracial tensions and violent racial conflict.
The formulation and promulgation of policy in the area of equal opportunity and equal treatment occur at the highest levels of civilian executive responsibility. And often, in cooperation with the military in the planning and developing of pilot projects, implementation is initially generated at the same source. The critical level, however, at which policy is translated into operational reality is that of the commander. Unless there is vigorous leadership by the commander, there is the high probability that a substantial portion (if any at all) of the policy and intended program will fail to be realized. Upon the commander rests the responsibility to transmit the full vitality of departmental policy and to give it meaningful implementation.
The responsibility with which the commander is charged is great. The problems with which he must deal in this area are complex and vexatious. The publics to which he must respond are varied and many. In the issuance of the Secretary of Defense Directive No. 5120.36 on 26 July 1963, there was reaffirmation of the policy of equality of opportunity and treatment for all military personnel. It required that:
Every military commander has the responsibility to oppose discriminatory practices affecting his men and their dependents and to foster equal opportunity for them, not only in areas under his immediate control, but also in nearby communities where they may live or gather in off-duty hours. In discharging that responsibility a commander shall not, except with the prior approval of the Secretary of his Military Department, use the off-limits sanction in discrimination cases arising within the United States.
In providing exemplary and vigorous leadership, the hallmark of a good commander, and by demonstrating his personal commitment to the goals and objectives of the policy, the individual commander has the opportunity to continue to make the armed forces that sector of American life most truly representative of the American ideal. This should not be an insuperable achievement for a commander, because for a long time commanders have worked in communities on such problems as health and sanitation, housing and dependents education, morals and vice, and have revealed a tremendous capacity and resourcefulness in achieving their solution. Military commanders have already demonstrated their ability to come to grips with the off-base complexities of segregation and discrimination in housing, in public accommodations, in police-minority group relations, and in the free access to and use of public facilities by minorities.
A commander, anxious to provide leadership in an affirmative action program, once asked me, “What does the black serviceman want?” My reply was that he wants exactly the same things a white serviceman wants:
► Respect for his personality as a man.
► Fairness in selection for duty detail.
► Fairness in selection for educational and training opportunities.
► Fairness in assignment to positions of supervision, high trust and responsibility.
► Fairness in evaluation of work and duty performance.
► Fairness in promotion.
► Appreciation of and recognition for meritorious performance.
By encouraging men of all races, faiths, backgrounds, and stations in life to understand each other and have mutual appreciation and respect for their differences as well as their human and cultural commonalities, commanders will lead their troops into a new era of military fellowship. They can achieve this by urging their men to extend into the barracks and when on liberty the same interdependence and mutual reliance that exists in combat.
From the highest levels of the Department of Defense have already come shining examples of command leadership as seen in Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird’s Memorandum of 2 March 1969 on Equality of Opportunity for Military Personnel; Secretary of the Army Stanley Resor’s Speech at the 1969 Annual Meeting of the Association of the United States Army; General Leonard F. Chapman’s ALMAR of 3 September 1969, and the Message on Equal Opportunity of 2 October 1969 from Army Chief of Staff General William C. Westmoreland.
My six years of experience with military leaders convinces me that they can reach new heights of success in achieving the optimum in the human engineering and social management of equality of opportunity and treatment. The present crisis of racial disorder which threatens morale and the effectiveness of our military organization and which imperils the steady advances in equal opportunity will be effectively met by command leadership.
The Armed Forces of America must now enter its fourth historical period—integration: functional and fraternal—in which there will abide a true brotherhood among comrades in arms.
__________
Mr. Bennett was graduated from Fisk University in 1935. As a Julius Rosenwald Fellow, he studied at Northwestern University’s Institute for International Relations, did graduate work at the University of Chicago, and earned a Doctor of Law degree from the University of Chicago. During World War II, he served as an Associate Regional Director of the USO. Prior to his appointment to the Bench in 1957, he was a partner in a law firm. In November 1963, Judge Bennett was appointed Principal Assistant to the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Civil Rights and, in December 1965, he was appointed to his present position as Director for Civil Rights.