Military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy Thrown Into Confusion
28 days ago
Defense Secretary Robert Gates' attempt to carefully ease the military beyond "Don't ask, Don't tell" (DADT) is collapsing in a shambles, as a verdict on the constitutionality of the ban on military gays seesaws uncertainly through the federal courts. A previous attempt in Congress to repeal the law ended, in effect, in a hung jury. Meantime the military, which prides itself on strict rules and tight discipline, is awash in confusion.
As things stand, the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military is still in place. But Gates has ordered that recruiters no longer ask potential enlistees about their sexual orientation. And late Thursday, he ordered that no one be discharged from the armed forces for sexual orientation without the approval of three top Pentagon civilian officials, effectively making such discharges less likely.
All this could be overturned as early as Monday, when a court ruling is expected that could order the Pentagon to effectively stop enforcing the ban on gays in the military.
"We are clearly in a legally uncertain environment,'' a senior Pentagon official acknowledged to reporters. He said Gates' latest order puts discharge authority "in the hands of fewer people who are on top of the situation legally.''Until now, under Pentagon rules that were tightened last March, only the service secretaries -- the most senior civilians in each of the military services -- and general officers could approve the discharge of gay and lesbian military personnel. Now the service secretaries must make that decision in consultation with the Pentagon General Counsel Jey Johnson and Clifford L. Stanley, under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness.
But Gates' order hardly clears up the confusion. Another Pentagon official acknowledged that as of now someone could reveal his gay sexual orientation to a military recruiter and proceed with the enlistment process -- and if he was accepted and sworn into service could then face investigation and discharge for being gay.
That's because the Defense Department told its recruiters to no longer ask people interested in enlisting about their sexual orientation. The law doesn't say you can't recruit gays and lesbians. But the law does ban them from serving openly, and under that law the Pentagon is still allowed to discharge those who disobey.
"That's where we are,'' the official said with an unhappy shrug.
A military officer involved in personnel administration told me Thursday, "We just don't know which way is up.''
Stanley, the Pentagon's personnel chief, told gays and lesbians in the military that "altering their personal conduct'' while the issue is in the courts "may have adverse consequences for themselves or others, depending on the state of the law.'' He emphasized, in a memo circulated within the Defense Department, that "it remains the policy of the Department of Defense not to ask servicemembers or applicants about their sexual orientation (and) to treat all members with dignity and respect.''
The legal wrangling could take years. On Wednesday the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted a Justice Department request to temporarily halt a lower court's order that the Pentagon stop enforcing the ban. On Monday the court will decide whether to make the stay granted to the government permanent while the Justice Department's appeal goes forward. Appeals in the 9thCircuit on average take 16 months to be adjudicated.
This is precisely the outcome that Gates sought to avoid earlier this year when he declared that the legal ban on gays serving openly should be lifted, in accordance with the direction issued by President Obama. Gates asked for time -- until December -- for the Pentagon to figure out how to gracefully implement a lifting of the ban. "A guiding principle of our efforts will be to minimize disruption and polarization within the ranks . . . and to mitigate and mange any negative impacts,'' he told the Senate Armed Services Committee back in February.
Good luck with that.
Last week, as the courts were busily undoing this careful strategy, a visibly grumpy Gates told reporters that he still feels "very strongly that this is an action that needs to be taken by the Congress.'' Lifting the ban, he said, "requires careful preparation and a lot of training. A lot of revision of regulations. . . . [has] to be done in addition to the training.''
That work, currently underway by a Defense Department task force, won't be completed for another five weeks. Its recommendations will be taken to Capitol Hill where another attempt will be made for legislative repeal of the law, Pentagon officials said.
Some optimists are saying a lame-duck Congress could take up DADT when it reconvenes after the Nov. 2 elections. That seems unlikely, however the elections turn out, given that Senate Republicans already were able to block a vote on the issue last month.
Yet the transition away from "Don't ask, Don't tell," when and as it comes, may not be as difficult as Gates believes.
Harassment of gays in the military peaked in 1999 with the murder of Pfc. Barry Winchell, who was beaten to death with a baseball bat as he slept in his barracks at Fort Campbell, Ky. The slaying by a fellow soldier followed months of harassment of Private Winchell.
Military leaders, from the sergeants who lead squads and platoons to company and squadron commanders and the chief petty officers who run shipboard units, already are authorized and given responsibility to maintain "good order and discipline'' in ways they see fit.
Military units under stress -- whether an infantry platoon under fire in Afghanistan or a deck gang working flight ops on a carrier -- mostly are manned by younger service members who grew up with openly gay friends and acquaintances and already know gays in the ranks.
"Not a big deal,'' is the refrain I heard pretty consistently this summer from soldiers deployed in Afghanistan, when I asked about repealing the ban on gays.
That's clearly the feeling of most Americans. According to a new CBS news poll, a majority of Americans -- 56 percent -- support repealing the ban on gays in the military.
But zealots on both sides are angry at the courts. The conservative Center for Military Readiness, which opposes gays and even straight women in the armed services, accuses federal district judge Virginia Phillips, who ordered the ban overturned, of presuming to appoint herself "supreme judicial commander of the U.S. military.''
On the other side, the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, a gay-rights group, sounded fed up with the legal ping-pong. In a statement issued Wednesday night, it said that "gay and lesbian service members deserve better treatment than they are getting with this ruling [by the appeals court]. We now must look to the Senate next month in the lame duck session to bring about the swift certainty needed here and to repeal this unjust law that serves no useful purpose.''
A key point in the argument over DADT may concern an eight-day period earlier this month when Judge Phillips' order striking down the policy was in effect. While the Justice Department had argued that a sudden lifting of the ban would cause "significant immediate harm to the military,'' nothing of the sort seemed to happen during that period.
With no ban on gays in place, life in the ranks seemed to go on as usual, without the widespread disruption that DADT critical have predicted.
--------------------------------------------
A Pakistani court sentenced a mother to
death because of something she said.
Prosecutors say Asia Bibi, who is a
Christian, broke Pakistan's strict
blasphemy law by insulting Islam and the
prophet Mohammed.
is this okay??? should every place in
the world have freedom of speech?
well i think that it doesnt matter if your gay and in the army as long as you dont cause trouble and if you take your job seriously. and i think freedom of speech these days are getting taken away little by little everyday.
ReplyDeleteTO your first art.
ReplyDeleteI think its unfair. doesnt matter who they like there there for a job
I think that they should be able to join the military, they are just as capable as anybody else.
ReplyDeleteI think it doesnt matter unless that person is sexalily harrassing people.
ReplyDelete+ i think freedom of speech should be every where.