Pride Month 2020: 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy of 1993 prevented gay people from openly serving in US military
The United States armed forces is the strongest military in the world, comprising 1.3 million active-duty personnel and more than 800,000 reserve forces employed in the seven branches, per data from the Defence Department. Each year, at least 180,000 young Americans enlist in the military, irrespective of their background so long as they have not committed any serious offenses in the past. Hopeful youths enlist with the intention to serve their homeland with loyalty and admiration, so it is hard to imagine that the military was once governed by vexing statutes that filtered recruitments. The reality is that a discriminatory military policy with regard to homosexuals was introduced in the 1990s that prevented eager and well-qualified queer individuals from serving their country.
DADT policy
The 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' (DADT) policy of 1993, which was signed into law by then-President Bill Clinton, consisted of statutes, regulations and policy memoranda that stated that military personnel "don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue, and don’t harass.” While it was a revolutionary measure that annulled the complete ban on homosexual service in the military, which was instituted during World War II, it was only half a step forward in terms of contemporary progress. The implementation of the new compromise was not smooth sailing either, as the revision of the previously existing regulation came after many months of extensive study, debate and political controversy. DADT permitted people that identified as homosexuals to serve, but it came with a price. Gay and lesbian personnel were only allowed to enlist or serve in the armed forces as long as they remained closeted.
The new compromise in the US military policy held that “[t]he presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion which are the essence of military capability.” In other words, it asserted that service members should neither be questioned nor allowed to discuss their sexual orientation and for years until its repeal in 2010, it remained legally and politically controversial. For 17 years of its practice, the policy had been frowned up for the primary reason that it gave leeway for discrimination based on gender and sexuality and even sent a message that such discrimination is condoned in the military.
Clinton administration's declaration and implementation
Clinton announced his intentions to end the military's long-standing ban on homosexuals in the period between him winning his presidential candidacy in November 1992 and his official inauguration in January 1993. The move was well-received by majority Americans, particularly gay activists who whole-heartedly supported Clinton's campaign. Although he had done well on his promise, not many political analysts saw him tackling this explosive issue as quickly as he did, especially when coupled with the strong opposition he was faced with.
Clinton's declaration had put him in conflict with top military leaders and with many key civilians that had oversight responsibilities in the armed forces. Only after a heated debate and a compromise on the new statute did he manage to gain a support base, but it threw the homosexual servicemen under the bus. The revised legislation that was implemented, ie 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell', forbade them from openly expressing themselves as gay or lesbian, and still faced some retaliation from military officers who feared that the mere presence of homosexuals in the armed forces would taint the force's morale. Discrimination suits supplanted the policy and held that gay servicemen had the right to serve in the military without discrimination.
Under the DADT, military personnel could be discharged from the armed force if "(1) the member engaged in, attempted to engage in, or solicited another to engage in a homosexual act or acts; (2) the member stated that he or she was a “homosexual or bisexual”; or (3) the member married or attempted to marry someone of the same sex." The policy even attributed a definition for 'homosexual' as an individual who “engages in, attempts to engage in, has a propensity to engage in, or intends to engage in homosexual acts,” and for 'bisexual' as an individual who “engages in, attempts to engage in, has a propensity to engage in, or intends to engage in homosexual and heterosexual acts.”
The term 'homosexual' was also defined to include 'gay' and 'lesbian'. DADT didn't fully prohibit military higher-ups from questioning servicemen on their sexual orientation, although it did contain a clause that said such questioning should be ceased but could be instated if the Secretary of Defence deemed it fit to implement the policy. Ensuring that such questioning may be discouraged, the Department of Defence (DOD) Directive that had implemented the DADT ascertained that sexual orientation is a "personal and private matter and is not a bar to current military service... unless manifested by homosexual conduct.” Evidently, DADT regulations were mostly based on conduct.
While Clinton initially intended to introduce DADT as a liberalization of the existing policy that allowed previously excluded gays to serve in the military, many gay rights activists saw it as an oppressing regulation that forced military personnel into painting secret and failed to assure complete acceptance. Despite the change, the policy did not shake the commanders of their pre-existing notions, and several gay and lesbian soldiers continued to be unfairly discharged from service. During the Iraq War in 2003, the policy received backlash, as many gay Arab linguists had were discharged by the military.
Obama administration repeals DADT
By 2008, more than 12,000 officers had been expelled from the military for refusing to hide their sexual orientation. That year, Barack Obama pledged that he would completely do away with 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' and allow queer personnel to openly serve in the military while he was campaigning for his presidency. His stance was met with chants from supporters and backed by a majority of the public. The declaration was upheld amid Obama's transition, however, discharges continued while Obama was in his first year of transition.
In February 2010, the Pentagon announced that it would look into reevaluating the policy and began a study, working under a late 2010 deadline and determined how the repeal of the 17-year-old statute would affect the military. A month later, new measures to immediately relax the practice of DADT were implemented. It ultimately made it difficult for openly gay servicemen from being expelled, which included authorizing only high-ranking officers to oversee discharge proceedings and requiring strong evidence in such cases. In December 2010, a new chapter began for the US military when both the House of Representatives and the Senate voted to repeal the policy. President Obama signed the legislation on December 22 and the reign of the DADT policy official came to an end on September 20, 2011.
Modern scenario
On the day that President Obama signed the legislation is proudly declared, “As of today, patriotic Americans in uniform will no longer have to lie about who they are in order to serve the country they love.” Years after the repeal, thousands of LGBTQ+ personnel began enlisting in the American armed forces. Today, at least 70,000 personnel in the US army are those who identify as queer, and the blatant discrimination that underlined the DADT policy is a blatant display not only of the mindset of the times, but also of just how the nation has transformed in the last 27 years.
But in 2017, the Trump Administration endangered gay people's right to render their service to the country by banning transgender troops from the military. It resonated with the national debates that surrounded Clinton's declaration of DADT, in a deja vu narrative, with the administration releasing documents stating that transgender troops could “impair unit readiness,” “undermine unit cohesion,” and “lead to disproportionate costs”, arguments that are uncannily similar to those cited in 1993 by strong opposer in the national debates over DADT.