Donald Trump's transgender ban criticised by 56 former generals and admirals

Almost five dozen retired generals and admirals have criticised Donald Trump’s vow to ban transgender people serving in the military - saying it would make the armed forces less battle ready.

Last week, the President, who himself obtained five deferments to avoid the military draft, tweeted he would “not accept or allow” transgender people to serve in the armed forces in any capacity. He claimed it would lead to tremendous medical costs and create widespread disruption.

His comments were widely condemned and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen Joseph Dunford, said the move would not be implemented until he received an official directive from the President.

Now, 56 former generals and admirals have added their voices to the criticism, saying the move will have the opposite impact Mr Trump claimed it would.

“This proposed ban, if implemented, would cause significant disruptions, deprive the military of mission-critical talent, and compromise the integrity of transgender troops who would be forced to live a lie, as well as non-transgender peers who would be forced to choose between reporting their comrades or disobeying policy,” they said in statement released by the California-based Palm Centre, which researches gender and sexuality issues in the military.

“As a result, the proposed ban would degrade readiness even more than the failed ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy. Patriotic transgender Americans who are serving - and who want to serve - must not be dismissed, deprived of medically necessary health care, or forced to compromise their integrity or hide their identity.”

Among those to sign the letter, whose publication was first reported by The Hill, was retired Gen John Allen, who served as deputy commander of US Central Command and special presidential envoy for the anti-Islamic State in Iraq and Syria coalition, retired Gen Robert Sennewald, who led US and UN forces in South Korea in the 1980s and retired Vice Adm Donald Arthur, who served as surgeon general of the Navy.

In their letter, the retired officers point to two statements from former Joint Chiefs chairmen in support of transgender troops. Retired Gen Martin Dempsey said on Twitter their service was a “blessing, not a burden,” while retired Adm Mike Mullen said in a statement “there is no reason to single out” transgender troops.

“Thousands of transgender Americans are currently serving in uniform and there is no reason to single out these brave men and women and deny them the medical care that they require,” said Mr Mullen.

The retired officers also said Trump’s claims of high costs have already been disproven by the RAND Corporation, as well as a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Those studies found medical costs for transgender troops would be at most $8.4m annually - about 0.01 per cent of the military’s annual medical budget.

“As for ostensible disruptions, transgender troops have been serving honourably and openly for the past year, and have been widely praised by commanders,” the ex-officers added.

“Eighteen foreign nations, including the UK and Israel, allow transgender troops to serve, and none has reported any detriment to readiness.”