Silence. That’s the military’s solution to
addressing discrimination and diversity within its own ranks
““ and it’s costing the U.S. in more ways than one.
A study released Tuesday by a University of California group
found that the cost of the military’s “don’t ask,
don’t tell” policy ““ which prohibits openly gay
men and women from serving in the military ““ was at least
$364 million, almost double what the government estimated when it
looked at the issue last year.
The researchers took into account the millions of dollars used
to recruit new soldiers when openly gay soldiers are discharged, as
well as the money wasted on training those gay soldiers who were
later discharged.
Of course, a few hundred million is chump change in context of
the military’s budget. Last week, President Bush proposed
giving the military a whopping $439 billion in 2007 ““ and
that’s not including the cost of the wars in Iraq or
Afghanistan.
A greater concern is the harmful “don’t ask,
don’t tell” policy itself, introduced by President
Clinton in 1993 as an alternative to a complete ban on gays serving
in the military.
Those who defended the policy from critics Tuesday say if gays
were allowed to serve openly in the military, it would make
soldiers uncomfortable and discourage other recruits from signing
up. Others also say the image of America’s armed forces
““ the U.S. government institution with the greatest machismo
““ would be shattered.
“The real cost is the cost in human dignity, in
self-respect and in the image of the military held by the American
public, the world community and itself. … The dignity of the
armed forces is at stake,” retired Rear Adm. John Hutson told
the Washington Post.
He didn’t mention what else was at stake: the civil rights
of U.S. citizens.
Americans who fight and die for their country deserve the right
to be free and open with their sexuality ““ a core element of
their identity. The military should be more worried about its
oppression of some of its citizens than the possible effects of
changing a discriminatory policy.
The parallels to the civil rights movement are clear. When Brown
v. Board of Education ended school segregation in 1954, people were
up in arms, claiming parents would stop sending their kids to
school with black students. One Southern newspaper ““ the
Jackson (Miss.) Daily News ““ gloomily predicted that the
mixing of whites and blacks would lead to “mongrelization of
the human race.”
The reality is that people have been and probably will always be
afraid of change, at least to some extent. We’re not naive.
There might be repercussions if gays are allowed to serve openly.
Homophobia in the military has been well documented, and if gays
are to serve openly in the military, it’s possible ““
perhaps likely ““ there would be ridicule or even violence
directed at them.
But if that happens (as it probably already does), at least it
would be in a forum where homophobia is discussed openly. Right
now, the military is content with keeping that tension bottled
up.
All this is in light of multiple wars overseas that continue to
demand resources and an inflow of new troops, and we don’t
see “don’t ask, don’t tell” as an effective
recruiting strategy.
Gay men and women already have to fight for acceptance in the
face of homophobia and discrimination in everyday society. The
military should not be perpetuating that hate in the ranks of some
of our country’s greatest heroes.