FINAL REPORT
MILITARY PERSONNEL STATIONED OVERSEAS
AND
MEMBERSHIP AND PARTICIPATIONâ¨IN THE NATIONAL GUARD
November 1964
Equal Treatment and Opportunity
INDEX
TABLE I: Assignment To Overseas Areas By Service And Race
TABLE II: Assignment To Overseas Areas By Service And Race (Attache, Mission & MAAG Duty Only)
The Gesell Committee
The Initial Report of this Committee, submitted in June 1963, was concerned with equality of opportunity for Negro servicemen both on base and off base within the United States. At that time the Committee stated it would submit a Final Report dealing with two special phases of its general assignment, which were still under study, namely, problems of equal opportunity affecting (1) Negro servicemen stationed overseas, and (2) membership and participation of Negroes in the National Guard. The Committee has now completed its work and respectfully submits herewith this concluding report with recommendations on these two subjects.
MILITARY PERSONNEL STATIONED OVERSEAS
The policies of the Armed Services designed to assure equal treatment and to prevent discrimination based on race, creed or color apply to military personnel on duty overseas. This group represents approximately 22% of all men in uniform. The important role these forces play as representatives of the United States abroad, the large number of servicemen involved and the number of complaints registered about overseas conditions led the Committee to include foreign bases in its study of on-base and off-base conditions.
EQUAL TREATMENT AND OPPORTUNITY
Information was obtained in a number of ways. Several overseas bases were visited by individual Committee members and problems of equal treatment and opportunity were there discussed with officers and enlisted men of all ranks, as well as with the base commanders and their staffs and local citizens. In additions-considerable information was gathered in interviews with military personnel in this country who were familiar with overseas areas and by consultation with the Secretaries of the various services and their staffs.
American troops are presently assigned to approximately 205 major bases overseas. The accompanying Table reflects the number of Negro and white officers and enlisted personnel involved and compares the Negro representation abroad with Negro representation in the various categories servicewide. There are approximately 1,800 Negro officers and 69,000 Negro enlisted personnel stationed overseas.
The percentage of Negroes among overseas personnel closely approximates the percentage of Negroes in the services stationed at home.
There is every reason to believe that assignments overseas now occur in a routine way and that in this regard no special selection process operates either for or against the Negro in uniform. In the recent past, some branches of the service had policies of varying kinds which limited or
prohibited assignment of Negro personnel to particular areas. At the present time, the Committee is advised that no such policies exist in any of the services, and with very rare and understandable exceptions such as, for example, South. Africa, Negro military personnel are assigned in the normal course to all parts of the world. Every effort should be made to prevent recurrence of geographic assignment restrictions with respect to Negro personnel.
On Base
The Committee has concluded that problems of on-base equal opportunity for Negro servicemen overseas are wholly comparable to the problems encountered on base within the United States. The Negro serviceman abroad, like his counterpart in the States, eats, sleeps and works with white servicemen and shares the limited recreational facilities on base during off-duty hours. Segregation has been reduced to a minimum. Negroes stationed overseas often have responsible assignments, including command of units. Many have records of long and very effective service.
As in the United States, one of the principal problems affecting equal opportunity for Negro servicemen stationed overseas appears to be the absence of channels of communication with base commanders and their immediate
staffs which are sufficiently open to enable individual instances of discrimination or questions concerning equality of treatment to be promptly noted, and, where appropriate, corrected. At the time of the Committee's inquiries channels of communication were wholly inadequate on several bases visited. This inadequacy has an increased adverse effect on morale in overseas areas because the men affected are far from home and have neither family nor friends nearby to consult or call on for help.
Many Negro servicemen abroad feel that assignment and promotion procedures are not wholly free of discriminatory influences, but there is no basis for concluding that the situation in this regard differs markedly from that found on base in the United States. Our comments and recommendations on these questions in the Initial Report would appear to be equally applicable abroad.
It is understood that the Secretary of Defense has included overseas bases within the purview of new regulations and other corrective steps taken following our Initial Report. Thebe actions, if vigorously carried through abroad, should go a long way toward eliminating certain aspects of discrimination and inequality of treatment which still exist on overseas bases.
Off Base
A very special type of discrimination affects Negro servicemen in off-base areas proximate to some of our bases overseas.
Some communities overseas have bars, eating houses, dance halls and comparable facilities close to our bases which solicit the patronage of American servicemen. Frequently a pattern of complete segregation has been permitted to develop in such facilities. Some less desirable bars and dance halls particularly will serve only white enlisted men; others serve only Negro personnel. There is no interchange between these facilities. Negro and white servicemen who patronize establishments of this sort must separate as they leave the base.
The nationals of these countries themselves do not practice discrimination or segregation. At points distant from the bases Negro and white servicemen are treated alike. The local proprietors are mainly led to follow a pattern of segregation near our bases by what they understand to be the attitudes of our own service personnel. The proprietors are not aware of the general, fully integrated situation which exists on base and because of social pressures from our own troops conclude that segregation and discrimination
are the pattern of our society. They have every reason to fear violence if they do not conform because violence often occurs. If a Negro serviceman seeks to enter one of the white off-base facilities for recreational purposes he may be forcefully ejected or told to leave by white servicemen, or refused service by the proprietor. Further efforts on his part to gain admittance can quickly lead to a brawl. A spirit of retaliatory hostility has also developed toward white personnel who attempt to enter facilities patronized mainly by Negroes. Military police, who are responsible for keeping order, tend to enforce these patterns of segregation in order to avoid difficulties, encouraging white personnel to stay out of Negro areas and Negro personnel to stay out of white areas. Where trouble arises both white and Negro personnel involved are disciplined with no effort to differentiate and inflict the most severe punishment on those attempting to enforce segregation.
The Committee has also had sharply called to its attention repeated cases where Negro servicemen and their families stationed at some bases overseas have confronted problems in housing where equal opportunity to obtain available housing has been refused by reason of race. Here again the situation appears to be largely created by the attitude of our own service personnel rather than by the attitude of the nationals of the countries involved.
In some instances conditions affecting housing and recreation off base have become so serious that attempted sit-ins or more violent types of protests have occurred involving clashes between Negro and white servicemen. While these flare-ups dramatize the seriousness of the off-base problem, they have done little to improve conditions. Overseas base commanders, with some notable exceptions, have paid insufficient attention to these problems and have allowed discriminatory conditions to become more severe and more rigid, and the resulting disorders to become more widely publicized.
Problems of discrimination in public accommodations and housing are particularly acute in Germany and near certain bases in the Far East. Numerous complaints were received from servicemen in these areas. The situation injures troop morale and presents a false image of our country to the nationals of the host countries. Immediate and, if necessary, drastic action by commanders is required.
Recently the Department of Defense has become more concerned with off-base discrimination and some preliminary directives have been issued. On July 26, 1963, alter making clear that commanders have a responsibility to oppose discriminatory practices affecting servicemen and their dependents off base at home and overseas, it
expressly authorized military commanders overseas to utilize off-limits sanctions in dealing with discriminatory practices affecting servicemen and their dependents in communities where they live or gather in off-duty hours. Conditions off base have not improved. This authority has not been exercised.
Prompt, decisive action in accord with the spirit of this general regulation is required. It may not be necessary to use the off-limits sanction except in extreme cases. It is essential, however, that the commander be in close touch with conditions affecting equality of opportunity off base, that he attempt to correct conditions where abuses are found, that he be closely monitored as to his performance in carrying out his responsibilities under the Directive and that he have full support from the Department of Defense as well as appropriate officials of the Department of State in carrying out these duties. All personnel in his command must be made particularly aware of the adverse effect discriminatory practices off base may have not only upon morale but on our relations with the countries where our bases are located.
The most serious conditions off base, in many cases, are largely inspired by the attitude of a minority of white servicemen. Effective use of military police, coupled with pointed severe discipline of individuals in
the command who may attempt to perpetuate discriminatory conditions should go a long way toward correcting inequality of treatment which has been allowed to develop off base without intervention by the command. There is every reason td e:.pect a responsive attitude on the part of the nationals of the countries involved once our official policy is stated in concrete terms and backed by effective measures.
Special Duty Assignments
In addition to base assignments military personnel are stationed abroad on special duty with embassies or special missions. A recent breakdown of personnel so assigned, with some indication of race by each service branch will be found in Table II. While the Committee has had complaints from Negro officers and enlisted men that members of their race are often considered “unavailable” for these assignments, this is certainly not generally the case. It is clear that discrimination has existed in the past. Many of these assignments involve coordination between the Department of Defense and the Department of State. Here complete cooperation between the Departments is essential to prevent discrimination. Both Departments profess not to have any policy which operates to prevent assignment of Negro personnel to these posts. There is
considerable evidence that the personal prejudices of individuals in one Department or another may have prevented Negroes in particular cases from receiving assignments of this character winch would otherwise fall to them in the normal course. There must be a careful review of assignment policies in this type of case.
Because of the need for special attention in this area and the more difficult problem of rectifying segregated conditions off base in certain countries it would appear desirable for the Department of State to centralize its responsibilities for these and similar problems in a specific official of ample authority. The Department has not been continuously concerned with these questions in the past and has become involved only sporadically. It should keep better abreast of local developments, lend assistance when requested and make sure that its responsible officers in the field are fully acquainted with DoD policies and procedures. Views of host countries concerning assignment of certain categories of personnel, if contrary to Defense Department policy, should be resisted and every effort made to gain acceptance for all personnel who qualify for assignments to the country in question.
Summary of Overseas Recommendations
In brief, the Committee recommends the following steps be taken to improve equality of treatment and opportunity for Negro servicemen overseas:
1. All recommendations contained in the Initial Report dealing with problems of equal opportunity on base within the United States are of equal importance abroad and DoD policies implementing these recommendations should be promptly applied abroad.
2. Vigorous efforts should be made by commanders of overseas bases to eliminate patterns of segregation and discrimination affecting troops off base. Special attention should be paid to taverns, bars and other places of amusement which cater to our servicemen, and to housing. It is particularly urgent to do this where the discrimination reflects attitudes of some of our own military personnel and is not generally practiced by nationals of the host country involved. It is essential that commanders remain in constant touch with conditions surrounding bases overseas and that commanders be closely monitored as to their performance in carrying out responsibilities in this area. If the problem cannot be solved by consultation with local authorities and well-directed use of military police, the development of improved recreational opportunities on base
and other similar steps, then the off-limits authority granted by existing DoD directives should be utilized.
3. A continuing review should be made of DoD policies affecting assignment of military personnel to Attache, Mission and Military Assistance Group duty to assure that race is not a factor in determining routine selection for such assignments.
4. The Department of State should take appropriate administrative steps to insure its full cooperation in carrying out the two preceding recommendations.
THE NATIONAL GUARD
The National Guard is the only branch of the Armed Forces which has not been fully integrated. Executive Order 9981 establishing the policy of equal treatment and opportunity in the Armed Services did not apply to the Guard.
In addition to the Reserves of the four services, the active Army and Air Force are supported by a substantial National Guard organization. The National Guard is organized into units allocated among the states. These units are an important part of our over-all organization for national defense. In past wars and periods of crisis, the Guard has played an important role and served with bravery and distinction.
CONCLUSION
The objective of equal opportunity and equal treatment of all persons serving in the Armed Forces, the Reserve and the National Guard without regard to race, creed or color cannot be achieved by regulations or expressions of good will alone. A continuing interest and sustained effort is required. The passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the major concern for equality of opportunity evidenced by the Department of Defense hold promise for the future. The goal of equal opportunity has not been achieved. It can be achieved only if the Department works persistently toward these objectives with zeal and energy. Its efforts in this field have in many ways been unique and pioneering. They deserve wide recognition and encouragement. To insure that the present momentum continues and that procedures designed to create and maintain equal opportunity are ever adapted to the changing needs of the times, the Committee urges that a periodic review of Department of Defense policies and procedures governing equality of opportunity be made by a civilian committee appointed by the President. It is clear from the findings of two committees performing the function to date that a different committee some years
hence will be of further assistance to the end that the national policy of equal opportunity and equal treatment may some day be fully achieved.
Respectfully submitted,
Abe Fortas
Gerhard A. Gesell, Chairman Louis J. Hector
Benjamin Muse
John H. Sengatacke
Whitney M. Young, Jr.
TABLE I
ASSIGNMENT TO OVERSEAS AREAS BY SERVICE AND RACE
Graphic included
TABLE II
ASSIGNMENT TO OVERSEAS AREAS BY SERVICE AND RACE
(Attache, Mission & MAAG Duty Only)
