On its surface, the Department of Defense’s decision to reinstate service members discharged over the COVID-19 vaccine mandate may appear to be a gesture of goodwill and reconciliation. I respect the service of those returning and understand, having worked in COVID-19 testing myself, why so many people felt hesitant or distrustful during the pandemic. It was a time of uncertainty, fear, and rapidly changing information.
But despite those human complexities, we must view this policy reversal through a military lens, where readiness, discipline, and unit cohesion come first. And when viewed that way, this is not a victory. It is a strategic mistake.
The military is a profession where individual freedoms are necessarily limited in service of the collective mission. Service members cannot simply pick and choose which orders to follow. They don’t get to decide which uniform to wear, which chain of command to acknowledge, or which battlefield to engage in. Public health mandates are no different. Vaccinations are not personal lifestyle choices in the armed forces but operational necessities.
Introducing unvaccinated personnel back into the ranks jeopardizes the health and efficiency of the entire force. Infectious diseases thrive in the close-quarters environments that define military life: barracks, ships, submarines, and forward operating bases. One infected soldier can turn off an entire unit’s combat effectiveness within days. The U.S. Navy saw this firsthand in 2020 when a COVID outbreak aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt sidelined over 1,000 sailors and rendered a $4.5 billion nuclear-powered aircraft carrier temporarily inoperable. That wasn’t just a medical problem but a national security one.
By reinstating unvaccinated service members and doing so while signaling that prior health protocols were “unfair” or “unnecessary,” the Department of Defense undercuts its authority. It sends the message that disobedience to health mandates is excusable and potentially rewarding. That erodes discipline. It devalues the sacrifices of those who complied with the mandate, some at significant personal cost. And it opens the door to future insubordination disguised as “individual choice.”
Moreover, this reversal sows uncertainty into future public health crises. If COVID-19 taught us anything, the next pandemic may not give us time to debate policy. The military must be able to implement mass vaccination programs quickly, without fear of political backlash or ideological resistance. If troops now believe that mandates can be ignored without consequence, what happens when the next virus arrives, more contagious, more deadly, or weaponized by a hostile actor?
It also creates unnecessary logistical headaches for military families. Now, they must navigate a divided force that may be partially immunized, susceptible to outbreaks, and more difficult to deploy rapidly. Medical clearance procedures have become more complex. Quarantine contingencies must be reintroduced. Field hospitals and combat medics must again prepare to treat preventable illnesses instead of battle wounds. In a military already stretched thin, these are the kinds of distractions that cost lives and add stress to military families.
Then, there is the issue of international cooperation. U.S. troops routinely train, deploy, and live alongside allied forces. Many of those allies maintain strict vaccination protocols. What happens when unvaccinated American service members can’t enter foreign bases or participate in joint operations? Our military’s credibility and interoperability are weakened, not just at home but on the global stage. This could potentially hinder or delay critical operations, putting lives at risk and compromising mission success.
None of this is theoretical. History shows that disease has been among the deadliest threats to the armed forces. In the Civil War, two-thirds of deaths were due to illness, not combat. During the Spanish-American War, more troops died of yellow fever and malaria than bullets. In the 20th century, vaccines for polio, influenza, typhoid, and tetanus became standard, not because they were politically convenient, but because they kept soldiers alive and ready. If those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it, why are we failing to understand?
COVID-19, for all the noise surrounding it, was no exception. It killed over one million Americans and hospitalized millions more. The vaccine mandate introduced in 2021 was rooted in centuries of military health doctrine. Its repeal in 2022, pressured more by culture wars than public health, was already a questionable decision. Actively inviting back those who defied it, with apologies and back pay, doubles down on that error. This decision goes against the lessons of history, where strict health policies have been crucial in keeping our armed forces ready and operational.
This is not about punishing dissent. It is about preserving a functioning military with cohesion, clarity, and trust. It is about protecting the integrity of a force that may one day be called upon to operate in contaminated zones, biological warfare scenarios, or future pandemics. It is also about remembering that while the COVID-19 vaccine may no longer be mandatory, the threat of infectious disease has not gone away.
The United States military cannot afford to be reactive regarding health. It must be proactive, unified, and uncompromising in its standards. If we let political expediency erode public health preparedness, we may win a few headlines today, but we risk catastrophe tomorrow.
Add comment
Comments