homosexuality and the armed forces
Homosexuality and the armed forces has not been an issue for much of history. It was tolerated and in the case of Ancient Greece actively encouraged, with the younger hoplites at the back of the phalanx and with the best opportunity to flee being held in place by the knowledge that their older lovers were in the front ranks. What men without women might get up to was certainly not regarded as the commander's business unless it gave rise to behaviour likely to undermine order, such as between officers and men. The idea that homosexuality is in some way related to cowardice is a comparatively new one and has a great deal more to do with concepts of gender than with pragmatic evidence. Churchill once famously observed that the Royal Navy had three traditions, ‘rum, sodomy and the lash’, and one could go on indefinitely citing examples of notable warriors, Alexander ‘the Great’ and Richard ‘the Lionheart’ surely chief among them, who preferred male sexual partners.
What made it the issue that it is today was first the general tweeness about sex that gradually enveloped even previously uninhibited and bawdy societies such as the British during the 19th century, and more recently the drive by homosexual activists to win not simply tolerance but outright approval by political means. This involved trying to emulate the success of the women's movement in areas subject to government hiring and firing criteria. Hence, as with the issue of women in the military, the armed forces have found themselves in the front line of a battle which is not really about them and their professional needs at all. But they should be used to that: they exist for a quintessentially political purpose and have always reflected the social prejudices of the regimes they serve.
In 1987, Sweden introduced legislation that prohibited discrimination in the military on the basis of sexual orientation. This was followed in 1992 by the courts in Canada ruling that the Armed Forces had to remove all restrictions based on sexual orientation, and in 1993 the IDF implemented a far-reaching policy of non-discrimination, not only in recruitment but assignments and promotion. Australia subsequently also introduced a similar policy. Initial evidence from these four nations does not substantiate claims that such action tends to undermine the cohesion, effectiveness, and morale of military units.
The situation in the UK remained different until early 2000. Thereto homosexuals were barred from serving in the armed forces, and there was little support from within the forces to relax the ban. However, a pressure group called ‘Rank Outsiders’ was set up to help overturn this policy and helped a number of discharged homosexuals to present their case to the European Court of Human Rights. This ruled that the ban contravened European law; it was lifted in January 2000. A Code of Conduct, issued at the same time, wisely emphasized that sexual behaviour, rather than sexual orientation, was the real issue. One regular brigadier resigned over the issue, basing his action not on intolerance of homosexuality in itself, but on concern over the fact that an important national military matter had been decided by European legislation and reservations about the ‘moral equivalence’ between heterosexual and homosexual relationships that the change implied. Although his action was isolated, the new policy attracts suspicion from many servicemen who would have cheerfully accepted ‘don't ask, don't tell’.
In the USA there has been a lot more noise. During the 1992 American presidential campaign, candidate Clinton pledged to lift the ban on homosexuals serving in the armed forces, but Pres Clinton has not delivered on the pledge. The compromise policy of ‘don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue’ has been denounced as hypocritical, but it does have some historical justification.
Bibliography
- Frost, Gerald (ed.), Not Fit To fight (London, 1998).
- Kier, Elizabeth, ‘Homosexuals in the US Military’, International Security, 23 (1998).
- Natzio, Georgina, ‘Homosexuality: Can The Armed Services Survive It?’, RUSI Journal (Dec. 1995)
— Alex Alexandrou/Hugh Bicheno/Richard Holmes
