Contributor: Hegseth's war on diversity is eroding America's military edge - Los Angeles Times

Los Angeles Times

by Jon Duffy

February 19, 2026

AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has repeatedly criticized the military’s emphasis on diversity, calling it "the dumbest phrase in military history" and questioning its relevance to modern warfare. His comments reflect a concerning misunderstanding of how diversity contributes to strategic decision-making and combat effectiveness. Senior military leaders, who rise through years of operational experience and strategic study, have consistently highlighted that diversity is not just a buzzword but a critical factor in ensuring better judgment and adaptability on the battlefield. The article argues that in today’s increasingly complex global landscape, the U.S. can no longer rely solely on overwhelming military superiority to achieve victory. Modern conflicts require nuanced decision-making, particularly against advanced adversaries like China, which demands diverse perspectives to identify weaknesses in analysis and adapt quickly under pressure. Research from organizations such as McKinsey & Co. and Stanford University supports this, showing that diverse teams consistently outperform homogeneous ones when facing complex problems. Hegseth’s criticisms extend beyond rhetoric; his policies, framed as a return to traditional warfighting priorities, include restricting transgender service members and reevaluating gender roles in combat. While policy changes should be evaluated based on their impact on readiness, the article warns that such measures risk eroding the U.S. military’s unique structural advantage: an all-volunteer force drawn from one of the most diverse societies in the world. This diversity of backgrounds and experiences is crucial for spotting blind spots and making better decisions under pressure. The stakes are high. In a conflict with China or other advanced adversaries, shared blind spots in homogenous planning rooms could prove deadly. While efficiency and order may come from uniformity, predictable thinking leads to predictable—and exploitable—behavior on the battlefield. The article emphasizes that the U.S. must leverage its diversity to maintain its strategic edge, not dismantle it. Ultimately, this debate is about more than culture wars; it’s about whether the U.S. can remain a dominant global power in an era of rising competition. Readers interested in national

Verticals

newscalifornia

Originally published on Los Angeles Times on 2/19/2026