Trump's transgender military ban 'not worked out yet'
The White House has not yet decided how it will implement
the president's ban on transgender people serving in the US military.
Mr Trump's surprise Twitter announcement on Wednesday has
been met with criticism from rights groups.
Spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said the administration would work
alongside the Pentagon to decide how to proceed.
It is not yet clear how the announcement will affect current
transgender service personnel.
Why was the ban introduced?
"The United States government will not accept or allow
transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the US military,"
Donald Trump tweeted.
"Our military must be focused on decisive and
overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs
and disruption that transgender in the military would entail."
Asked at a press briefing if troops on battlefields would be
immediately sent back, White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said the policy
had yet to be worked out.
"The decision is based on a military decision. It's not
meant to be anything more than that," she said.
However, some US media outlets questioned the spending
justification. The Washington Post drew attention to
an analysis that the US military spends almost $42m (£32m) a year
on the erectile dysfunction medication Viagra - several times the total
estimated cost of transgender medical support.
Meanwhile, Politico
reports that the move was prompted by threats from Republican
hardliners over a spending bill which would provide funding for Mr Trump's
promised military spending and border wall plans.
One Republican lawmaker had already tabled an amendment to
the spending bill to prevent the military paying for transgender surgical
procedures.
Why has the president decided on this now?
Anthony Zurcher, BBC North America Reporter
 |
| Different stance - on the campaign trail last year |
The timing of this transgender ban is almost as interesting
as the move itself.
Why now? With the Trump administration being buffeted by the
Jeff Sessions political death watch, the ongoing multi-prong investigation into
the Trump campaign, the healthcare drama in the Senate and the impending
Russian sanctions bill, perhaps the administration decided this was a good time
to change the subject and rally conservative forces to his side.
Republicans have long used cultural issues as a wedge to
divide Democrats and energise evangelicals. As one White House insider
acknowledged, this is straight out of that playbook.
While Mr Trump campaigned as sympathetic to LGBT rights, he
needs the traditional religious conservatives to stay loyal to him now, more
than ever.
The president's action will create a furore among liberals
and the media commentators whose disdain for the current administration is not
a new development. This is a fight the White House will welcome.
What is the status of transgender service personnel?
The decision to allow transgender people to serve openly in
the military was made by the Obama administration last year, with a one-year
review period allowed for its implementation.
The policy included a provision for the military to provide
medical help for service members wanting to change gender.
But in June, Defence Secretary James Mattis agreed to a
further six-month delay.
In 2016, the independent Rand Corporation estimated that
about 4,000 US active-duty and reserve service members are transgender,
although some campaigners put the figure higher than 10,000.
Rand also predicted that the inclusion of transgender people
in the military would lead to a 0.13% increase in healthcare spending
(approximately $8.4m).
What do affected personnel say?
Kristin Beck, a retired elite Navy SEAL, issued a challenge
to President Trump in
an interview with Business Insider: "Let's meet face to face and
you tell me I'm not worthy."
She said that during her decorated military career, she had
been "defending individual liberty".
"Being transgender doesn't affect anyone else,"
she said. "We are liberty's light. If you can't defend that for everyone
that's an American citizen, that's not right."
 |
| Chelsea Manning, a transgender former US soldier, tweeted her reaction to the news |
Army reservist Rudy Akbarian, in Los Angeles, said: "My
heart dropped a little bit, you know. It hurt."
"Not everyone responded well after learning I was
transitioning," he said. "But after spending time on missions and
realising we all share the same love for the country, we worked together and
got the job done.
"The discrimination I'm facing now is from those
outside the military - not the people who work with me."
What is the reaction from defence professionals?
Mr Trump said his decision was based on consultation with
his generals, but there has been a mixed reaction.
Former Defence Secretary Ash Carter, who lifted the ban last
year under President Obama, said: "To choose service members on other
grounds than military qualifications is social policy and has no place in our
military."
Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Republican
John McCain, said major policy announcements should not be made via Twitter.
"Any American who meets current medical and readiness
standards should be allowed to continue serving," he added.
Several British military generals also condemned Mr Trump's
decision, including the commander of the UK Maritime Forces, Rear Admiral Alex Burton,
who said "I am so glad we are not going this way."
What about those in favour?
"Each dollar needs to be spent to address threats
facing our nation," Congresswoman Vicky Hartzler, a long-time opponent of
the Obama administration's position, said in a statement.
"The costs incurred by funding transgender surgeries
and the required additional care it demands should not be the focus of our
military resources," she said.
Trump supporter and political commentator Scott Presler is
among those who disagree with the military carrying the cost of such
interventions.
While disagreeing with the ban, he added that "generals
know more about war than I do."
"I don't think this is an attack on the LGBT community
... I'm mixed, but I have confidence in the guidance that President Trump is
receiving," he said.
"I don't think for a second he's prejudiced."
No comments