I see from today's news that the Obama administration is
apparently going to reverse the "don't ask don't tell" policy that has
prevented openly gay Americans from serving their country in the armed
forces. I
can only applaud this
decision; not only does it eliminate an obvious source of
discrimination, but it makes it easier for the military to get the best
people
to fill the ranks. Realists should support this move, because
the name of the game in international politics is to maintain national
power at the least cost and risk. Anytime you
restrict the pool from which you are recruiting on arbitrary grounds that are
unrelated to the task at hand (i.e., on grounds of race, religion, sexual
orientation, etc.) you end up excluding some outstanding people whose presence would
improve an organization's performance.
Baseball got better after it integrated, the Ivy League improved once it
dropped barriers to Jews and other minorities, and the same basic principle applies to gays in the
military. As I wrote earlier this year:
The point is that in any competitive endeavor, you want to be able to
recruit and employ the most talented and highly motivated people you
can find, and you don't want to limit the talent pool from which you
can draw unless there is something about them (such as a physical
disability) that makes them obviously unfit for military service. By
not allowing gay Americans to serve openly, we are imposing an
artificial limit on the number of loyal Americans that our military can
draw upon to fill its ranks. Some gay Americans would undoubtedly not
be very good soldiers or sailors, but the same is true of plenty of
straight people too. Many others undoubtedly would serve with
distinction, however, and we know that because many already have, like
Dan Choi.
For realists who appreciate the international
politics is a rough business, therefore, the only possible argument
against allowing gays to serve openly in the armed services is to claim
that this policy would have a detrimental effect on actual military
performance. The problem with this line of argument is that there is no
good evidence to support that claim, and considerable evidence against
it. For an excellent examination of the issue, see Elizabeth Kier's "Homosexuals in the American Military: Open Integration and Combat Effectiveness," from the Fall 1998 issue of International Security. Or check out a series of recent reports from the Palm Center
at the University of California, Santa Barbara, which offer survey
evidence from the U.S. military and comparative studies of foreign
armies (including Britain and Israel), where gay people serve openly,
bravely, and effectively."
This is not to say that abandoning this policy won't create
a few temporary disruptions, but the U.S. military has generally been quite successful at
managing this sort of change in the past. As a senior officer commented during my visit to the Truman last week, it is a good thing for
the U.S. military to be a fairly accurate reflection of American society rather than an
artificial caste, and repealing "don't ask, don't tell" is a positive step in
that direction. And contrary
to what narrow-minded bigots might think, we'll get a better fighting force out
of it too.
Read More
(11)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE