Scholars Concerned For Civilian Control of DADT

A group of military scholars and experts signed a joint statement urging lawmakers to use their own judgment in the debate concerning repealing the ban on gays in the military.

The 25 experts warned that relying solely on the advice of service chiefs would not provide a full picture of the issue. The statement was put together by the Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara.

"Those who oppose making this change because the nation is at war were the same people who opposed it in 1993, when we were at peace," said Northwestern University's Michael Sherry, one of the experts who signed the statement.

On Tuesday, Defense secretary Robert Gates issued instructions to U.S. Army Europe Commander Gen. Carter Ham and Defense Department lawyer Jeh Johnson on how to properly conduct a study into how to repeal the policy. Gates said they should consult with any "key influencers" who can speak about "military readiness, military effectiveness and unit cohesion, recruiting/retention, and family readiness." The results are due December 1.

The full statement is on the following page.

As scholars and experts on American civil-military relations, we are keenly aware of the critical balance that it is necessary to maintain between military and civilian leadership. We are concerned about a precedent reflected in the current debate about gays and lesbians in the military involving consultations by U.S. lawmakers of top uniformed personnel.

Civilian leaders must, of course, consult with the military before making decisions that affect the men and women who serve in our armed forces and which might affect the national security of the United States. The recent invitation by the Senate and House for the Service Chiefs to offer their best judgment about whether it is time to end the current ban on openly gay troops was therefore appropriate.

We are concerned, however, that political leaders seem poised to accept advice provided by the Service Chiefs uncritically, advice which does not seem to take into account considerable research that has emerged over the past fifty years about the impact of openly gay service on military effectiveness. Much of that research was conducted by the U.S. military's own experts.

In particular, we are perplexed by the Chiefs' claim that they have insufficient data to assess the impact of openly gay service; by their argument that the transition to inclusive policy will be an upheaval that will be difficult to manage; and by their suggestion that because the military is engaged in a two-front war, it is unable to manage that transition. (We note, for example, the recent recommendation to allow women on submarines).

Acting on advice which is not grounded in data would be inconsistent with the tradition of civilian control of the armed forces. We hope that the ongoing conversation surrounding this issue will take these concerns into account and that civilian leaders will properly exercise their Constitutional authority to govern the military, rather than the other way around.


BG Hugh Aitken, USMC (ret.)
Professor Deborah Avant, University of California Irvine
Professor Aaron Belkin, University of California Santa Barbara
Lt. Col. Allen Bishop, USA (ret.), former professor, U.S. Military Academy at West Point
Professor James Burk, Texax A&M University
Professor Neta C. Crawford, Boston University
Dr. Carol Cohn, Consortium on Gender, Security and Human Rights
Professor Martin L. Cook, Admiral James Bond Stockdale Chair of Professional Military Ethics, United States Naval War College*
Lt. Col. Edie A. Disler, USAF (ret.), former professor, U.S. Air Force Academy
Dr. Lynn Eden, Stanford University
Professor Mark Eitelberg, Naval Postgraduate School*
Professor Cynthia Enloe, Clark University
Eugene R. Fidell, Senior Researcher in Law and Florence Rogatz Lecture in Law, Yale Law School
Professor Gregory D. Foster, National Defense University*
Professor Hugh Gusterson, George Mason University
Professor Elizabeth Hillman, University of California Hastings
John D. Hutson, RADM, JAGC, USN (ret.), President and Dean, Franklin Pierce Law Center
Professor Richard H. Kohn, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Professor Janice Laurence, Temple University
Professor Catherine Lutz, Brown University
Professor Diane H. Mazur, University of Florida College of Law
Professor George Reed, University of San Diego, former Director of Command and Leadership Studies, U.S. Army War College
Professor Steven M. Samuels, United States Air Force Academy*
Professor David R. Segal, University of Maryland
Professor Mady Segal, University of Maryland
Professor Michael S. Sherry, Northwestern University
Professor David Vine, American University [USA]

* The views expressed by faculty at US Government Agencies are those of the individuals and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of their Service, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.