Judging by progress made this week, it looks increasingly like Don't Ask, Don't Tell could be repealed this year as part of the defense authorization bill. On Tuesday, Sam Stein reported that White House officials and Democratic members of Congress are already drumming up support for legislation that would allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military. Now, the Pentagon is seriously discussing the repeal in anticipation of a potential Senate hearing on the subject later this month. The simple fact that talks are even happening is encouraging, but there's still some foot-dragging on the Pentagon's behalf:
In the year since Mr. Obama's inauguration, the Pentagon has moved slowly on the issue and even now internal dissent remains over how fast any change should be instituted. At a meeting last week of Admiral Mullen and the chiefs of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, the officers debated the timing of any repeal and how much stress it would place on the forces.
A one-page memorandum drafted by staff members as a discussion point for the meeting said that the chiefs could adopt the view that "now is not the time" because of the continuing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and that the military would be better off delaying the start of the repeal process until 2011.
The concern over "appropriate timing" really appears to be the only argument the military has left against DADT, and it's hardly a strong one. It's worth going back to a paper by Col. Om Prakash published this fall in the Pentagon journal Joint Force Quarterly, which determined that "after a careful examination, there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that unit cohesion will be negatively affected if homosexuals serve openly. ... Based on this research, it is not time for the administration to reexamine the issue; rather it is time for the administration to examine how to implement the repeal of the ban." The article, which was reviewed by Mullen, also acknowledged:
If one considers strictly the lost manpower and expense, DADT is a costly failure. Proponents of lifting the ban on homosexuals serving openly can easily appeal to emotion given the large number of people lost and treasure spent—an entire division of soldiers and two F-22s.
Given that troop withdrawal from Afghanistan won't begin for another year and a half (and is hardly guaranteed to be speedy), and that DADT serves no purpose other than to keep capable soldiers from serving, the worry that a repeal would be disruptive seems like little more than another attempt to kick the can down the road. Fortunately, it seems like there's enough momentum in Congress to keep that from happening.
--Alexandra Gutierrez
