Because letting gays serve openly in the military must be “studied” — for national security reasons — an Air Force colonel who studied Don’t Ask Don’t tell at the National Defense University in Washington did just that. And concluded it makes no difference if gays are soldiers. And he said so, in Joint Force Quarterly, a publication for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Huh.
The Boston Globe got their hands on an advanced copy:
The views do not necessarily reflect those of Pentagon leaders, but their appearance in a publication billed as the Joint Chiefs’ “flagship’’ security studies journal signals that the top brass now welcomes a debate in the military over repealing the 1993 law that requires gays to hide their sexual orientation, according to several longtime observers of the charged debate over gays in the military.
While decisions on which articles to publish are made by the journal’s editorial board, located at the defense university, a senior military official said yesterday that the office of Admiral Mike Mullen, the Joint Chiefs chairman who is the nation’s top military officer, reviewed the article before it was published.
“After a careful examination, there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that unit cohesion will be negatively affected if homosexuals serve openly,’’ writes Colonel Om Prakash, who is now working in the office of Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates. “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.’’
And if there’s any question Co. Prakash means business, he writes: “In an attempt to allow homosexual service members to serve quietly, a law was created that forces a compromise in integrity, conflicts with the American creed of ‘equality for all,’ places commanders in difficult moral dilemmas, and is ultimately more damaging to the unit cohesion its stated purpose is to preserve.”
But naturally, if there’s any reaction from the White House, it will be that this article’s findings need to be … studied.