March 15, 2001

They Wore a Black Army Beret - The Kind You Find At The Ranger Joe Store
by Carl S. Ey

The beret hasn't received this much attention since Monica Lewinsky's beret-wearing mug was plastered all over the media in that infamous photo of her hugging President Clinton.

When Chief of Staff of the Army, General Eric K. Shinseki announced that the Army would replace the battle dress uniform (BDU) cap with the Ranger's black beret, it came as a minor shock to soldiers.  Today, it has turned into a political mess that has gained the attention of Congress and found its way into the headlines.

"Starting next June, the black beret will be symbolic of our commitment to transform the magnificent Army into a new force - a strategically responsive force for the 21st century," Shinseki said in October, 2000.

Little did the Army's Chief of Staff know that that decision would render negative attention from Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura to former Rangers that decided a 700-mile road march was in order to protest against stripping the Rangers of their coveted beret.  As a matter of fact, Sen. John M. Warner, Va.- R, has requested a "stand down" to the implementation of the black beret.

However, as this debate unravels, it becomes apparent that the attention it is drawing is ill founded.  Those supporting the protests claim that the beret is part of a long-standing Ranger tradition.

It really isn't.

Initially, U.S. Army tankers adopted the black beret because they were constantly working in and around tanks.  The black color hid grease stains and the lack of a brim made it easier to maneuver around tank fire control sights.

Furthermore, Army policy encouraged unit commanders to build morale.  As an extension of that policy, Armor and Armored Calvary units wore the black berets until the Army banned all unofficial headgear in 1979.  The units that were permitted to keep their beret were the Army Rangers in accordance with Army Regulation 670-5,  January 30, 1975 i.e. the Ranger "black beret tradition" is less than 26 years old.  To put that tradition into perspective, Nolan Ryan pitched in professional baseball longer than the U.S. Army Rangers have been authorized to wear the beret.

Secondly, supporters of the Rangers having sole possession of the black beret indicate that the Rangers are an elite unit.

"Making the beret the headgear of the common soldier will make the beret common, no longer the symbol of uncommon skills, abilities, courage, dedication and tough training that the common soldier does not have and could not survive," said LTG J.G. MacMillan.

Bascially, according to MacMillan if you aren't part of the "elite" and haven't earned the beret, the soldier is common.  Tell that to the 19-year-old G.I. pulling the 4 a.m to 6 a.m. guard-duty shift in Bosnia this morning or the young officer that is leading a combat patrol on the DMZ in Korea tonight without a beret.

Arguably, Ranger school is the toughest leadership school in the United States Army.  To endure and complete Ranger school is an accomplishment worthy of distinction.  Upon graduation, those soldiers are awarded the Ranger tab that is sewn on the left shoulder above their unit patch.  It will be with them for the remainder of their careers.  But, they do not receive the black beret.  The beret is issued to those soldiers assigned to the Ranger Regiment, which is very basically a light infantry unit.  There are just under 3,000 soldiers in the Ranger Regiment and Ranger Training Brigade today i.e. less than 3,000 "elite" soldiers are among the Army ranks.

If Rangers are the only Army "elite," how do you qualify the remaining troops that care to serve their country? Are they "common" as per MacMillan? How many wars has the "elite" won by themselves without the "common?"

The Army's vision on its home page says, "The Army will be a professionally rewarding and personally enriching environment within which people take pride in being part of the Nation's most highly esteemed institution."

As the Nation's most highly esteemed institution, there isn't much room for the "common." All Army soldiers are among the country's elite and not one soldier should ever resign himself or herself to thinking otherwise.

Thirdly, isn't it inconceivable to consider an Army unit "elite" that does not allow women among its ranks?  Although that is an entirely different debate, it merits consideration when delineating the "elite."  Soldiers come in both genders and together they make up that "highly esteemed institution."  It is a bit arrogant of those that support the "black berets for Rangers only" to consider that unit special without female soldiers in their formation.  In main stream society that is known as sexism, which can further be defined as ignorant.

To add insult to injury to this entire ordeal, the Washington Times reported that in order to issue black berets to all soldiers on the Army's next birthday on June 14th, the Army went outside of the procurement guidelines.  Consequently, the Army contracted with a company in communist China to produce the black beret.

This couldn't be more of an exaggeration from the truth if it were written above a urinal.  The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) made an exception to the "Berry Amendment," which compels them to purchase from American manufacturing companies.  This wasn't the first time an exception was ever made and it was not done solely to support Gen. Shinseki.  It was done to meet the timeline of issuing soldiers a beret.

Also, because the contract was given to a British firm that sub-contracted with foreign companies to include one in communist China is no reflection on the Chief of Staff of the United States Army nor the soldiers that serve today.  It may reflect poorly on that firm but as a British firm, they operate within labor laws that are very similar to those in the United States.

Finally, those protesting the transformation to the black beret haven't realized that this was a window of opportunity for the Ranger Regiment.

"The Army's elite Ranger units may select a different color for their beret," said Sgt. Maj. of the Army, Jack L. Tilley.  "We're going to do what is right for him [75th Ranger Regiment's Sgt. Maj. Walter Rakow] and what's good for the rest of the Army."

The Rangers had a golden opportunity to capitalize and begin a tradition that, hopefully, could have lasted longer than a baseball career.  SMA Tilley, very basically, offered the Ranger Regiment a chance to design something that would make them more distinctive; a beret with another noble color such as gray or perhaps, a boot designed for its light weight and rugged wear and tear for issue at the Ranger Regiment only.

Thinking "outside of the box," Rangers or their supporters might have researched history and found distinctive apparel that affiliated them with some historically feared and lethal group of soldiers.  Simply, they were in a position to convince the Army's hierarchy of almost anything with regard to making their uniforms unique in light of the Army's decision to make the black beret standard head gear.

Instead, the issue exploded, and the President asked the Secretary of Defense to take time away from other service member's concerns to look into the black beret decision.  Former Rangers and some veterans road-marched to Capitol Hill, wrote their representatives and generally voiced their opinion against this directive.

Their voice was heard and the black beret initiative was put on hold.

"It is, however, tougher to explain why seemingly simple things such as leaky roofs, broken air conditioners, old plumbing, peeling paint and threadbare carpeting cannot be fixed or replaced in a time of budget surplus," said SMA Tilley to Congress last week.

If only a few former Rangers would embark on a road march to draw attention to the needs of today's soldiers, significant and important change might be the outcome.

Just think what a group of veterans that left the Army because TRICARE was sub-par and pay and benefits weren't any better than those offered at Starbucks, could do if they collectively wrote to Congress

© 2001 Carl S. Ey

Join the Debate!
Click here to enter the discussion!