One Army, One Standard

Defense Secretary William Cohen showed sound judgment in March when he ordered the Pentagon’s inspector general to review the case of Army Maj. Gen. David R.E. Hale, who had been allowed to retire a few weeks earlier even though a criminal complaint had been lodged against him. The review, by Inspector General Eleanor Hill, has now been leaked. It finds that Hale engaged in a pattern of “inappropriate behavior” with the wives of subordinate officers while he was deputy commanding general for NATO land forces in southeastern Europe in1996 and 1997. Further, Hale is accused of making “false and misleading statements” about his conduct. The Army has now opened a criminal investigation into his behavior.

Hale denies all allegations of misconduct, while conceding that he had a sexual relationship with the former spouse of an officer who served under him. The inspector general’s report apparently agrees that the woman who first charged Hale with sexual coercion had in fact engaged in a consensual relationship. But the investigation also found that Hale had “improper relationships” with three other officers’ wives and that he used government funds to pay for international travel by one of the women and then lied about it. These allegations are serious enough to warrant recalling Hale to active duty to face a possible court-martial.

Whatever the outcome of the Hale case, the Army’s initial handling of it stands condemned. It’s impossible to escape the conclusion that Hale, had he been an enlisted man or an officer of lesser rank, would have been subjected to an exhaustive legal investigation and probable criminal proceedings.

For a general to have sex with the wives of subordinates is as much a crime as for a noncommissioned officer to coerce sex from women under his command. The Army denied Tuesday that it operates under a double standard, but it has yet to explain why Hale was allowed to retire quietly and honorably. Also on Tuesday, the Defense Department announced that because of the Hale case the Army has changed its procedure for allowing generals to retire; a spokesman said that “from now on, there has to be full disclosure of any problems or allegations that a person may be facing at the time he or she requests retirement.” That’s a start, but only a start.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice is meant to apply equally throughout the armed forces. For higher authority to use it selectively to punish enlisted personnel while turning a blind eye to the alleged transgressions of senior officers invites disrespect if not contempt for the law. The armed services and the nation have the right to expect more.