The Dearth of Black Combat Leaders

Last week, several papers carried stories about sociologists in the Army worried about the low percentage of black leaders, particularly at the battalion and brigade combat team level. U.S. Army sociologists are worried that a lack of black officers leading its combat troops will have detrimental effect on minorities and lead to fewer black officers…

Last week, several papers carried stories about sociologists in the Army worried about the low percentage of black leaders, particularly at the battalion and brigade combat team level.

U.S. Army sociologists are worried that a lack of black officers leading its combat troops will have detrimental effect on minorities and lead to fewer black officers in top leadership posts.

“The issue exists. The leadership is aware of it,” Brig. Gen. Ronald Lewis told USA Today on Thursday. “The leadership does have an action plan in place. And it’s complicated.”

———–

The paper also noted that of the 238 West Point graduates commissioned to be infantry officers in 2012, only seven were black. One of the Army’s plans for addressing the issue will be to put more emphasis on recruiting and mentoring minority officers.

Let us set aside for the moment the question of whether the Army needs to have senior leadership ethnically proportionate to the population of either the Army or the nation at large.

Why is it that there are so few black field grade commanders?

Well, one author, writing under a pen name to avoid career suicide, addresses the topic.

In trying to resolve this issue the Army has gone through excruciating efforts to recruit more black officers into the combat arms. The Army has not failed, but has not made much progress. Previously, while I was in a position to observe the branch assignments of one of the Army’s largest commissioning sources, it was apparent to me that there was little interest from the majority of minority men in going into the combat arms. In particular, black me were significantly underrepresented in the infantry, armor and field artillery branches. Correspondingly, the ADA, signal and logistics branches were overrepresented. As for explanations, none could be found.

In a previous life I was in a position to observe the intake of initial-entry soldiers into the Army. It became apparent rapidly that minorities of all types and black soldiers, in particular, were underrepresented in combat arms. We instituted an analysis of why and obtained no cogent results. Often we asked members of high-school academia how we could get more black men to enlist for the combat arms. They had no answer. We asked them why they thought young black men were not coming into the combat arms and their best guess, and only a guess, was that the community was sending them to where they could best obtain a skill transferrable to civilian life. Being a member of rifle squad, an M1 tank gunner, or a gunner on an M198 crew did not transfer well to civilian life, according to them.

Read the whole thing, and the comments.

The skew in demographics is far less for senior NCOs. There’s plenty of black Command Sergeants Major. But even so, my anecdotal experience as  recruiter showed me that, while many young blacks were interested in service, they were mostly interested in improving their lot in life, via technical training in the service, or through the educational benefits. Many who did enlist in the combat arms did so mostly because low test scores precluded them from more skill oriented specialties.  Some of those soldiers found they enjoyed the combat arms, and decided to make a career of it. Many did their job for the term of their enlistment, and went on to use the GI Bill to pay for education. At any event, once they were in a unit, there wasn’t much to choose from between one soldier and another.  Was there racial tension in the units I served in? Some. Sometimes. But less than I see in the population as a whole.

On the officer side, as Petronius Arbiter notes, not many blacks commissioning in the Army want to be in the combat arms, in spite of a great deal of effort to convince them to go Infantry.

Combat Arms is the path to stars in the Army. It’s not the only path, but it is the most likely. But the journey from 2LT to GEN is a long one, and only a vanishingly small number of officers will rise that far. If you don’t start with a significant percentage of black officers in the combat arms, your chances of having any rise to the very top are miniscule. Not non-existent, just miniscule. That’s not racism. It’s statistics.

The Army could simply force larger numbers of black officers to accept commissions in the Infantry or other combat arms branches. That is likely to have serious consequences in the officer management system on two fronts within just a few short years. First, the obvious one. It’s extremely likely that many young black  officers, forced into a branch they didn’t seek, will leave at the earliest possible opportunity. And do we really want combat leaders who don’t want to be combat leaders? Second, there are plenty of young officers who do want to be in combat arms, and fight like heck to get the crossed rifles of the Infantry. If we force black officers to take slots in the Infantry, obviously, some officers who had sought that branch will be forced elsewhere. And they too will likely seek to leave at the end of their obligation, rather than continue as career officers. Both groups would likely show as a dip in the numbers of mid grade officers in their respective branches. Given the difficulties the Army is already having in that group of grades in retaining quality officers, exacerbating the problem is not wise.

Likely, the Army will stress diversity, attempt to increase recruiting among blacks (at an increased cost- lower propensity to join means higher recruiting costs), and, at worst, a unspoken quota system for those few black officers that do choose combat arms; in effect, if you’re black and breathing, you get promoted.

Ironically, as mentioned in the comments at FP, there was a time when the Army virtually excluded black officers from the combat arms, even for black regiments. To be black and in the Army in World War II was one thing, to be black and in the combat arms in the Army in World War II was a source of great pride. And ultimately, I’d argue that it was one of the germs of the civil rights movement. A man who will fight and shed blood just as red as a white man’s was obviously as due respect and equal treatment as the rest of the population.

  1. crazyhorse13

    Ron Lewis the BG quoted in the article is black, and he was my BN CDR during OIF2. Two deployments later we had another BN CDR of color. Of course this was in an Aviation unit…but it is considered (at least by the Army) as a Combat Arms branch.

    Last time I looked this is still a free country and we can’t really force someone to do a job they don’t want to do. I’m pretty sure we fought a war about something like that.

    Like

  2. Esli

    Please put up a prominent warning when linking to Ricks.

    Like

  3. xbradtc

    Ordinarily, yes, but this was, at least, a guest author.

    Like

  4. Bill

    Reading these articles, I could have sworn that back in the 90s there was a study done on this that confirmed your anecdotal observations. This all sounded so familiar.

    Like

  5. David Navarre

    I had a good email exchange with him about a review I posted on Amazon. My review was complimentary, but included that kind of warning. He was curious about it and we had a pleasant exchange.

    Like

  6. David Navarre

    Due to incredibly poor leadership in WWII, neither of the two African-American infantry divisions performed particularly well.

    The 92nd was commanded by Almond, who blamed his soldiers for his failures in this war. I think he blamed the Marines for his failures in Korea. The 93rd was generally given labor and security duties in the Pacific.

    Like any unit, when lead well and given opportunities, they performed well. The record of the Tuskegee Airmen, of African-American tank battalions and of the infantry platoons formed of volunteers late in the European war speaks volumes about the skill and bravery of those men.

    Like

  7. ultimaratioregis

    Don’t forget the black artillery regiment, the 555th. The famous “triple nickles”. They had a reputation as a superb outfit.

    Like

  8. MikeD

    I’ll say it… there’s a perception (incorrect) on the Left that the Army uses/used blacks as “cannon fodder” in war, and I believe that crap is swallowed hook, line, and sinker by many young men who are signing up for the military (and their families). As such, they think “they’re not going to do that to me!” and choose other branches of the Army. I’m not saying it’s the only reason, or even a huge part of it. But I believe it factors in strongly. In fact, I recall on college campus the Black Student Union protesting against Desert Storm (before it happened) because it was a “plot to kill black men”. Saw it with my own eyes.

    But what’s really funny about this whole topic, when you get down to it, is the Left is complaining we’re not sending ENOUGH young black men to fight in our wars. Can’t please em. Why try?

    Like

  9. Buck Buchanan

    I have a theory as to why this is.

    It’s because it’s a tradition for Black officers to serve in CSS units. This has its foundation in ROTC departments used to be branch specific by school. My alma mater, West Virginia University, had been a school primarily intended to produce Infantry Officers. Norwich & University of Kentucky commissioned Armor officers. MIT & University of Oklahoma produced Field Artillery Officers. And the historically black colleges & universities provided officers, by design, for Quartermaster & Transportation Corps (not Ordnance…it was too technical). Also a lot of the HBCUs are in close proximity to those branch school locations (Virginia State & Saint Paul’s are near FT Lee; FT Eustis is near Hampton University and Norfolk State). Recall also these were the only branches within the Army where a Black officer could serve in the pre-desegregation days. The Branch specialization ended in around the mid-1950s or so. But the seeds were sewn and it became a matter of tradition in a lot of cases.

    Consider another point…it may be a sterotype but Armor and Infantry were the last bastions of the Confederate army in the US Army. By that I mean the generations long tradition of serving in those 2 branches was seen as what a Southern Gentleman would do. A stereotype? Sure. But sterotypes have their grounding in facts. Contrary to that the Northeast usually saw men entering the Navy or Marine Corps.

    It was also seen as a way to earn a trade…a way to find a foothold in what we now call logistics in the business community after learning a marketable skill set.

    I have no idea of what the stats are but I would be intrigued to know of the Black officers who served in Combat Arms units in Viet Nam, how many were ROTC vice OCS grads? And I don’t count West Pointers because they are too small a sample size and demographic of our country.

    BTW, the best battalion commander I ever had? Yeah, he is a Blackman. 3/19 IN. And when I was a company comamnder in the mid-1980s ethnic breakdown of the company commanders in our battalion was 2 Black, 2 white, 1 Asian, 1 Native American (and I mean pure blood Apache!)

    Like

  10. David Navarre

    Were they the ones in Bastogne? Interesting that they shared the number with the 555 PIB….

    Like

  11. Pave Low John

    This article reminds me of someone I haven’t thought of in years.

     The best Army officer I ever saw was a black company commander in 1/75 that I worked with at an exercise at Hunter AAF back in 1998.  He seemed like the ideal infantry/SOF junior officer.  His name was "Van" Smiley and I could tell that he was a fast-burner, destined to make a least a couple of stars.  Unfortunately, something happened on the way to the top:
    

    http://www.stripes.com/news/europe/germany/affair-confirmed-as-reason-for-grafenw%C3%B6hr-commander-smiley-s-removal-1.166649

    So I think this study misses the fact that each career has its own story that can't be captured by the numbers.  Van was a Ranger and Special Forces stand-out who suddenly started exercising poor judgement when he became an O-6.  When you are discussing black officers in the combat arms, you're talking about a fairly small population of men who have their own unique reasons for why they stay and why they leave.
    
    And to echo the commenter above, I do think that old Leftist slander about minorities being used as cannon fodder (especially in Vietnam) has a lot to do with it.  Young black men are told that only a fool would join the infantry and put their lives into the hands of a bunch of racist white officers (probably all from Alabama and Mississippi).  That lie is still going strong and has to be addressed if this "problem" is to be faced in any serious way.
    

    Like

Leave a comment