Civics 101 lessons were, I suppose, theoretical. The lessons of those days taught that governance of the United States would be entrusted in three separate but equal branches: the Executive, the Congress and the Supreme Court. Nice theory. Current practice, however, demonstrates the fallacy of those theoretical concepts, especially when it comes to the armed forces.
Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution stipulates that "The Congress shall have power … To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces." This inconvenient stipulation may come as a surprise to some occupants of the Pentagon: those who have been resolute in establishing the armed forces as a petri dish for social experimentation and, in the process, making rules for the government and regulation of the armed forces. In the absence of congressional activity, the social crusaders are making rules that will forever alter our national defense, and whether you agree with their manifesto or not, you should be gravely concerned that our government is no longer balanced. The Civics 101 analogy conveyed a three-legged stool.
Well, observe the effects of trying to balance on only two legs.
The latest usurpation of congressional prerogatives begins with this background:
A longtime politician who served briefly as secretary of defense, Leon Panetta, declared a month before his departure that the armed forces of the United States would open all direct ground combat specialties to women. Gen. Martin Dempsey, sitting beside him during the announcement, endorsed the notion. With a whisper, though, there was a caveat: "If we find that the assignment of women in a specific position or occupation is in conflict with our stated principles, we will request an exception to policy." The stated principles included: "Ensuring the success of our Nation's warfighting forces by preserving unit readiness, cohesion, and morale." A seemingly fair stipulation, as most, but not all, believe the armed forces exist to deter the nation's foes and win the nation's wars.
The Marine Corps, faithfully assuming that this was sincere guidance from above, conducted a scientific study and field test of the effects of integrating direct ground combat units. (The question of women serving in combat units was not at issue, as women have served well and often with distinction in that role.) Based on the news articles that have described the events of the Corps' tests and mentioned the outside agencies involved, it would not be an exaggeration to conclude that the Marine Corps' evaluation was the most thorough and scientific study ever conducted regarding this issue. The participants in the study were volunteers, all carefully screened and well led. The field tests also were a realistic representation of combat conditions and requirements, and the evaluation lasted nine months. In interviews, all the participants expressed pride in the scrupulous fairness of how the experiment was conducted. Although the detailed results are not yet publicly known, the four-page summary that is available makes clear the Marine Corps was meticulous in its evaluation and professional in its approach.
In contrast to the high professionalism of the examination, it didn't take long for some political appointees to reject "inconvenient truths." In one example, the secretary of the Navy has made clear that he intends to ignore any results from the experiment, and indeed his thinking seems to mirror that of the Queen of Hearts from "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland." Perhaps he should have paraphrased the naval hero Adm. David Farragut: "Damn the facts! Full speed ahead!"
While the secretary of the Navy's decision has already been announced, a few of the 535 members of Congress seem offended that their constitutional prerogatives have been ignored. Hope springs eternal. After all, our Congress also has sole authority to declare war and make treaties … or so they say. Maybe, just maybe, the Congress will determine that the issue has such consequences for the security of the United States that Article I, Section 8 ought to apply. Perhaps its members will rely on judgments founded on scientific research, field tests and thousands of years of history.
So the game becomes "curiouser and curiouser." But it's not really a game after all, is it? This contest has been life and death in places like Fallujah, An Najaf, Normandy, Pork Chop Hill and Bloody Nose Ridge — places the social engineers can't even imagine, and don't want to. In the safety of the protection afforded by the rough men who serve them, "diversity is strength" may indeed be a true and noble ideal. In the cauldron of sustained combat, "fairness" is harmful delusion.
Maybe, just maybe, the people's representatives will step in and act to protect their constitutional prerogatives and inject some reality missing so far in this critical contest of ideas. If not, the "Off with their heads!" approach will prevail. A "wonderland" indeed.
Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Greg Newbold (ret.) spent his career commanding infantry units and led Marines into Somalia. He served as director of operations on the Joint Chiefs of Staff before retiring in 2002.
