Posted on Sep 2, 2022
Army cracks down on foreign foot march badges, sparking backlash
1.62K
8
2
2
2
0
Army is cracking down on foreign foot March badges. Link to article posted below. What is the consensus on this from the group?
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/09/01/army-cracks-down-on-foreign-foot-march-badges-sparking-backlash/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=fb_militarytimesonline&fbclid=IwAR128pNdtkybFU4htGnRH5T78eLdq_HZ10_Wu_LOi9MjRJxqimbNBYY6zhE
https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/09/01/army-cracks-down-on-foreign-foot-march-badges-sparking-backlash/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=fb_militarytimesonline&fbclid=IwAR128pNdtkybFU4htGnRH5T78eLdq_HZ10_Wu_LOi9MjRJxqimbNBYY6zhE
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 1
Just being nit-picky, IMHO. We did a Norwegian Foot March in Honduras back in '18. It was virtually proctored by an official that could sign off on it. I also remember some time ago, my BDE was going to host a GAFB, and I do not recall them saying that there was going to be an official rep from the German Army present. I think the officials at HRC are butthurt over the $20.00 shipping and handling fee. But then, why are they not butthurt over the $89.00 fee for the Army 10 Miler?
(4)
(0)
COL Randall C.
No axe to grind on this one way or another. I think the "admin fee = offer of reward" is a red herring. As pointed out the Army charges an admin fee for the Army 10 miler (although you don't earn an award that would fall under this discussion).
Reading the exact language of the Army's awards regulation (600-8-22), the specific language on foreign badges is, " Qualification and special skill badges may be accepted if awarded in recognition of meeting the criteria, as established by the foreign government concerned, for the specific award. Only those badges that are awarded in recognition of military activities and by the military department of the host country are authorized for acceptance and permanent wear."
The directive changes the last sentence to "Only those badges that are awarded in recognition of military activities conducted by the military department of the host country are authorized for acceptance and permanent wear." - slight change where "... military activities AND by the ..." is changed to "... military activities CONDUCTED by the ...". The first makes it sound that the badge can be accepted if awarded for doing specific stuff and if the military department of the host country presents it. The second says that the badge can be accepted if awarded for doing specific stuff and if the event is directed/managed by the military department of the host country.
On one hand the first part seems to support virtual events - "... criteria, as established by the foreign government concerned ...". If the criteria by the foreign government included virtual events, then that's the criteria they are setting forth. On the other hand, the second part (which the directive addresses) is that virtual events are not "conducted by the military department of the host country".
It would be very enlightening for the Army G-1 to given the rational behind the directive. Did Army leadership take issue with events not being conducted by the host nation's military because they viewed it as a partner building event and that's why awards were allowed to be earned/worn? Dunno.
Reading the exact language of the Army's awards regulation (600-8-22), the specific language on foreign badges is, " Qualification and special skill badges may be accepted if awarded in recognition of meeting the criteria, as established by the foreign government concerned, for the specific award. Only those badges that are awarded in recognition of military activities and by the military department of the host country are authorized for acceptance and permanent wear."
The directive changes the last sentence to "Only those badges that are awarded in recognition of military activities conducted by the military department of the host country are authorized for acceptance and permanent wear." - slight change where "... military activities AND by the ..." is changed to "... military activities CONDUCTED by the ...". The first makes it sound that the badge can be accepted if awarded for doing specific stuff and if the military department of the host country presents it. The second says that the badge can be accepted if awarded for doing specific stuff and if the event is directed/managed by the military department of the host country.
On one hand the first part seems to support virtual events - "... criteria, as established by the foreign government concerned ...". If the criteria by the foreign government included virtual events, then that's the criteria they are setting forth. On the other hand, the second part (which the directive addresses) is that virtual events are not "conducted by the military department of the host country".
It would be very enlightening for the Army G-1 to given the rational behind the directive. Did Army leadership take issue with events not being conducted by the host nation's military because they viewed it as a partner building event and that's why awards were allowed to be earned/worn? Dunno.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google