Bishop Garrison’s Push for Change: Tackling Extremism in Military Policy

Soldiers in uniform saluting with American flag patch

Bishop Garrison’s push for reformed military policy aims to counter extremism as growing threats loom.

At a Glance

Bishop Garrison calls for reform due to rising extremism among U.S. military personnel.
Critics of counter-extremism initiatives include political figures like Pete Hegseth.
Recent violent incidents involving military personnel highlight the urgency.
Defense Department acknowledges extremism as a growing hazard in the ranks.

Military Extremism: A Growing Concern

Bishop Garrison, former leader in combating military extremism, raises alarms about radicalization in the U.S. armed forces. Following incidents involving service members, including a deadly New Year’s Day attack by a veteran and a suicide bombing by an active-duty soldier, Garrison emphasizes the need for examining policies. He stresses the dangers of ignoring extremism and calls for comprehensive measures to curb potential threats from within military ranks.

Guidelines released by the Pentagon addressed extremism after military members participated in the January 6 Capitol attack, resulting in a 60-day stand down ordered by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. These moves reflect the seriousness of radical activities in the military, with disciplinary actions proposed for any association with extremism online. Despite existing efforts, low-level disciplinary measures have been their primary response, indicating the need for a more robust strategy.

Challenges and Criticisms

Bishop Garrison’s measures have faced criticism, notably from Trump nominee Pete Hegseth. Critics argue that counter-extremism programs target conservative views, blurring lines between genuine threats and free expression. Meanwhile, reports by the Defense Department suggest rising extremism levels, especially among veterans, challenging the assertion that the problem is minimal. Recommendations call for standardizing checks to address extremism-specific issues effectively.

A report found 10 court martials related to extremism but a large number of cases were resolved administratively. Although extremism is statistically rare, the participation of military personnel in extremist acts poses a danger that necessitates attention. Defense Secretary Austin’s initiatives underline a growing risk, calling for preventative measures to avoid further radicalization.

A Path Forward

Bishop Garrison proposes reforming approaches to mental health and radicalization among service members. He underscores that untreated mental health issues, as seen in recent crimes involving military personnel, may exacerbate vulnerabilities to extremist beliefs. Garrison’s efforts, documented through his investigations and reports, emphasize the need for clear and effective policies in the military to address such threats comprehensively.

“I am worried that we will see more of this type of action taking place, that it will become more bombastic and stronger, and that more people will be injured or killed.” – Bishop Garrison

It is vital for the military and government to collaborate toward proactive strategies that account for newer threats while safeguarding personnel’s well-being. Fostering an environment that encourages seeking help, alongside fortifying security policies against extremism, remains essential in preserving military integrity and national security.