As if the Pentagon’s process for reviewing the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) policy wasn’t convoluted enough already, the Army just stepped up to the plate and seems to be trying to change the game. According to a September 2nd, 2010 Army News Service release, the Army now has an online inbox soliciting comments about the possible repeal of DADT. While many people questioned the Department of Defense‘s (DoD) intentions and methods in preparing for possible repeal, at least there was a level of transparency from Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen. Gates established the Comprehensive Review Working Group (CRWG) to look at the policy implications of repeal and the DoD set about on the estimated $4.4 million process of surveying the troops and their families about repeal of DADT. Many people were rightfully skeptical about the CRWG process and even more concerned over the specific questions and the general tone of the surveys. The CRWG faced some stiff criticism but, at least their actions were tied to a process that correlated to the stipulations of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2011- the law that could end up repealing DADT. The Army’s latest effort by creating their own version of the online inbox hints at ulterior motives of others in the Pentagon and raises some serious concerns about repeal of DADT.
Having looked at the Army’s new inbox today, it is almost identical to the DoD online inbox that went live in early May 2010. Neither the Army nor the DoD’s inbox for DADT-related comments provides any anonymity and in fact, users have to use their Common Access Card, which clearly identifies the user through a secure, DoD-issued certificate. What is different with the Army inbox, other than being limited to input by Army personnel, is that it doesn’t appear to allow any confidential chat with members who prefer not to be identified. In other words, gay and lesbian military personnel have no mechanism to voice their concerns to the Army leadership without the risk of being outed and therefore discharged. The DoD inbox allowed users, who did not want their comments attributed, to provide anonymous input to the Westat contractors through a confidential chat (AKA- confidential communication mechanism (CCM)). The CCM was nice in that it allowed an open discussion between gay and lesbian servicemembers or others who wanted some anonymity in their input to the CRWG; however, the CCM was clearly subject to manipulation, as noted by John Aravosis. It may appear like the Army is just complementing the DoD process in reviewing DADT but, recent events this year question that possible intent.
In February 2010, Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen testified before Congress of their intent, under Presidential guidance, to bring about the end of DADT. Shortly thereafter, the opponents of repeal began mustering their forces. On several occasions, Army Chief of Staff General George Casey indicated his serious concerns about repeal of DADT. On February 23rd, 2010, Casey said, “I do have serious concerns about the impact of a repeal of the law on a force that is fully engaged in two wars and has been at war for eight-and-a-half years. We just don’t know the impacts on readiness and military effectiveness.” According to a March 2010 article on Politics Daily, Gen. Casey said, “The majority of soldiers appear to oppose repeal.” According to a Wall Street Journal article on the topic, “Gen. George Casey, the chief of staff of the Army, believes the ban shouldn’t be lifted until the U.S. completes its withdrawal from Iraq at the end of 2011.” When further Congressional testimony was held in May 2010, it was clear that all the service chiefs (heads of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines) had stepped out of line from Gates and Mullen’s position on DADT. The service chiefs’ testimony and letters solicited by Senator John McCain, according to the New York Times, clearly indicated they sought to delay repeal of DADT.
When the Pentagon, through it’s CRWG, has already allowed all uniformed servicemembers and their spouses to provide input on possible repeal through surveys, the online inbox and through town-hall forums around the world, the Army’s new inbox seems redundant at best. As noted by General Carter Ham, the uniformed head of the CRWG, the DoD online inbox gathered over 72,000 comments before closing at the end of August 2010. While the percentage of respondents was relatively low, the CRWG survey of uniformed military personnel resulted in approximately 110,000 responses out of 400,000 surveys sent out (27.5%). Despite the work of the CRWG, according to the Army’s press release, “The inbox will remain open until Sept. 30, 2010, or until leadership decides the inbox has fulfilled its purpose.” Since the NDAA clearly spells out that any Congressional action on repeal is tied to the work of the CRWG and the Pentagon’s survey process, one has to wonder the true ‘purpose’ of the Army’s new inbox. The Army press release does say the results will be shared with the CRWG to develop an implementation plan, “if repeal of current law occurs.”
The Army’s inbox does not allow open, frank discussions with gay or lesbian soldiers, the Army Chief of Staff opposes repeal of DADT, or wants to delay it as long as possible, and the CRWG has already engaged in surveying the military and their spouses on repeal. It is not a stretch to say that the Army appears to be posturing itself to provide service-level opposition to repeal of DADT. Senator John McCain and other Congressional opponents of repeal are more than willing to give a voice to any opposition out there, regardless of those voices being based in fear and hate, rather than fact. Based on the low percentage of CRWG survey respondents, the general consensus of scientific polls that the majority of veterans and the public support repeal of DADT, and from talking to fellow servicemembers, I suspect the Pentagon sees the writing on the wall- repeal of DADT is not an issue for the men and women defending this nation. Unfortunately, repeal of DADT remains an unfounded concern of some senior Pentagon leaders and they will try anything they can to derail it.
Recent Comments