Pentagon Moves Ahead on Changing 'Don't Ask'

WASHINGTON (March 2) -- The Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy may be changing faster than some top generals would like, thanks to a plan released today by Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

In a memo and two-page "terms of reference" document, Gates ordered a comprehensive review of the "Policy Concerning Homosexuality in the Armed Forces" to be delivered to him no later than Dec. 1.

Gates testified last month that he wanted recommendations by "the end of this calendar year." That jibes with President Obama's vow that "this year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are."

In recent weeks, the chiefs of the military services sounded off in opposition to the timetable, with the heads of the Army and Air Force urging a slower approach and the commandant of the Marine Corps expressing opposition to any change in the status quo. All favor a thorough review and oppose a moratorium on discharges under the policy until a review is complete.

Yet the language in the document released today makes clear it's a matter of when, not if, a change will be made. "The review will provide a plan of action to support the implementation of a repeal of the law," it said.

The terms of reference were released one day before five senators, including independent Joseph Lieberman and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, introduce legislation to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. A similar bill in the House has 188 co-sponsors.

Also on Wednesday, the co-chairs of the Pentagon's Don't Ask, Don't Tell Working Group, Defense Department Counsel Jeh Johnson and Gen. Carter Ham, commander of U.S. Army Europe, will appear before a panel of the House Armed Services Committee.

"It is critical that this effort be carried out in a professional, thorough and dispassionate manner," Gates wrote in his memo to Johnson and Ham. "Given the political dimension of this issue, it is equally critical that in carrying out this review, every effort be made to shield our men and women in uniform and their families from those aspects of this debate."

Included in the working group's marching orders if the law is repealed:

• Determine any impacts to military readiness, unit cohesion, recruiting and retention, and "family readiness."

• Determine appropriate changes to existing policies and regulations, including but not limited to issues regarding personnel management, leadership and training, facilities, investigations and benefits.

• Recommend appropriate changes, if any, to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, as well as evaluate how a policy change would affect ongoing cases.

• Find appropriate ways to monitor the workforce climate and military effectiveness once a change is made.

The working group was tasked with talking to military officers and enlisted members; personnel and benefits specialists; family support group leaders; boot camp and other training leaders; the military academies; and medical, legal and religious support staff.

Opponents of changing the law question whether the Pentagon's review will take an honest look at the implications. In an elaborate chart, Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness raises five pages of questions and alleged consequences of allowing gays to serve openly.

For gay rights groups that have urged quick repeal and noted previous Pentagon studies showing little impact on military readiness of having them serve, nine months is too long. And they worry that the military isn't talking to everyone it should.

"The scope of this review appears to be unnecessarily broad and drawn out," said Alex Nicholson of Servicemembers United, which advocates for gay troops. "The White House needs to make sure that the gay military community or its representatives are substantively included in this process. Those who are going to be most affected should not be treated as outside 'stakeholders' in this process."