Nunn, Dole See Perils in Lifting Military Gay Ban

Congressional leaders expressed apprehension Sunday about President-elect Bill Clinton’s plans to lift the military’s ban on homosexuals, urging him to move slowly or risk creating an uproar in Congress and the armed services.

“I think we ought to proceed very cautiously,” said Democratic Sen. Sam Nunn of Georgia, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, appearing on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

“If you did it overnight, I’d fear for the lives of people in the military themselves,” Nunn said, warning of possible violence against gays and lesbians in the service. “I think there could be some very emotional feelings. So I would prefer that it be stretched out over a period of time.

“We’ve got to consider not only the rights of homosexuals, but also the rights of those who are not homosexual and who give up a great deal of their privacy when they go in the military,” said Nunn, who added that he agrees with the military’s prohibition against homosexuals, which has been in effect in one form or another since World War II.

Speaking on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole of Kansas also expressed concern about Clinton’s intentions.

“I’d advise him to appoint a commission and study it. Mind you, he’s going to get in more trouble than he can add up right now if he starts with an executive order on that issue. It will cause real problems in the military and it seems to me that he’d be making a big mistake.”

“He ought to put it on the back burner,” Dole suggested. “Let somebody else take a hard look at it first, then make recommendations. . . . There are other things you can do by executive order that wouldn’t blow the lid off the Capitol. I think this one might come close.”

At the same time the President-elect is being pressured to move slowly or not at all on the issue, gays and lesbians have high expectations. Clinton’s campaign vow to rescind the ban was one of several key pledges he made in courting the gay vote. If he drags his feet on the matter, he risks alienating a voting bloc that contributed generously to his campaign and overwhelmingly voted for the Democratic ticket.

But Nunn is not the only influential Clinton supporter to oppose lifting the ban. Retired Navy Adm. William J. Crowe, who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for five years during the Ronald Reagan and Bush Administrations, has publicly and strongly expressed his disagreement with Clinton on the issue.

Crowe, who has said he would try to dissuade Clinton, was instrumental in garnering more than 20 endorsements for Clinton from high-ranking active and retired military commanders--at a time when President Bush, in the closing weeks of the campaign, questioned Clinton’s ability to serve as commander in chief.

Combined with that of existing top military brass, the opposition could inject further caution into Clinton’s move to overturn the anti-gay policies with an executive order--an act that gay advocates have likened to President Harry S. Truman’s order to end segregation in the armed forces.

At his first post-election press conference in Little Rock, Ark., last week, Clinton said for the first time that, although he still intends to follow through on his promise, he plans to “put together a group of people and let them advise me on how we might best do this.”

He indicated that the issue would be conduct rather than sexual orientation. “I don’t think (homosexual) status alone, in the absence of some destructive behavior, should disqualify people” from serving in the military, Clinton said.

George Stephanopoulos, Clinton’s assistant transition director for communications, characterized Nunn’s remarks Sunday as “very strong.”

He said Clinton intends to delay issuing an executive order because “we want to examine all the possible consequences of reversing the ban on homosexuals in the military. That is one reason the governor said he wants to consult with military leaders as he goes forward with this decision.”

Of Nunn’s concern about a possible violent backlash against gays and lesbians in the military, Stephanopoulos said: “We hope that would not be a problem at all, that we live in an enlightened society where that would not be a serious problem. It is something we will look at over the next several weeks.”

Whether Nunn’s strong opposition will hurt his chances of being named secretary of state remains to be seen. The Georgia Democrat, who left this week for a well-publicized tour of the former Soviet Union, has been conducting something of a semi-private lobbying effort for the job.

Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell (D-Me.), who also appeared on “Meet the Press,” was more encouraging about ending the ban, but he too urged caution. He said congressional action would be required to reconcile the Uniform Code of Military Justice with a Clinton executive order changing the policy.

“I think the governor will be supported (by Congress) . . . because I think he will do it in a sensible and prudent way,” Mitchell said.

“There has to be concern, of course, about the effect on morale in the military. But it is significant that most far-reaching changes in our society encounter similar opposition. According to accounts that I have read, when the effort was being made to integrate the military a half century ago, many arguments were being made identical to those being made now,” Mitchell said.

Dole disputed Mitchell’s prediction that Congress would support Clinton in amending the military code. “I’d be surprised if he won that vote,” Dole said.

Two former military chiefs interviewed on ABC’s “This Week With David Brinkley” offered differing views on the wisdom of allowing gays and lesbians in the military.

Adm. Thomas Moorer, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Richard M. Nixon, insisted that it would be a “major mistake” to lift the ban. “And as time goes on, this would become apparent to everyone. . . . Sooner or later, you’re going to have men kissing each other and hugging and whatever. . . . Then the first thing you know, there would be a fight.”

Former Navy Secretary John Lehman, on the other hand, said Clinton was right in stressing that it was conduct, rather than sexual orientation, that is the key issue.

One openly gay officer discounted the warnings about massive upheaval and damaged morale. Navy Petty Officer Keith Meinhold, who also appeared on ABC, had been thrown out of the service but was reinstated by a federal judge in Los Angeles last week. He is assigned to Moffett Field in the Bay Area.

“I think they’re absolutely wrong,” Meinhold said. “If they’re saying that heterosexuals cannot control themselves or conduct themselves professionally in the presence of homosexuals, I think that shows a complete lack of faith in the troops. And the generals and admirals that are saying this had better start showing a little bit of faith in the troops and stop blaming their own homophobia on the troops.”

His reinstatement came under a preliminary court order issued by U.S. District Judge Terry Hatter in a lawsuit Meinhold has filed against the military’s anti-gay policies. He was honorably discharged against his will after revealing his sexual orientation on national television.

Chen reported from Little Rock, Boxall from Los Angeles.