Sex, guns and human rights

The International Labour Organisation also recognises its Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention to be "one of the eight fundamental ILO Conventions that all members must respect, promote and realise". This convention declares that governments are to adopt national policy designed to promote equality in the workplace, and eliminate discrimination.

Even in the context of international refugee law, Australia and the UK now recognise claims for refugee status from homosexual men in countries that deny them the right to express their identity (such as Iran).

Australia's political and military leaders ought to be unambiguous about where Australia stands on this policy. Although a public denouncement of the policy by  Australia's Ambassador in Washington is unlikely to move the those who are now blocking progress, it is important for us, as friends of American, to put our disagreement on the record. 

Even if you disagree with the discriminatory policy, at his point you might be thinking, "whoah just hang on", why should Australia risk its primary strategic alliance for the sake of a few confused "fags"?

The answer comes in the form of a well-worn (but true) cliché: It's a matter of principle. The brazen hypocrisy involved on the part of the US military has become ridiculous. The misery which some closeted homosexual soldiers in the US forces must go through is comparable to the pain caused to some women who were oppressed and suffered under the Taliban in Afghanistan. Why should closeted soldiers be fighting for the rights and freedoms of foreigners, when their own country does not even afford them those same rights and freedoms?

Closeted societies are unhealthy and destructive. Anyone who has seen Brokeback Mountain would understand the… wait…. I can hear Miss Palin interrupting with her chirpy tea-party smile: "Son! We ain't gonna lynch em! We just gonna fire em!" Ok Sarah, you're right, lynching is extreme, but firing a man or woman because of the person they love still seems pretty cruel to me.

It's not as if, in armies where gays are allowed, gay soldiers come to work each morning with a rainbow scarf and a copy to the latest Kylie CD to share with the boys. Trust me. You have to work twice hard as the next guy to gain the respect of peers. (To anyone who's seen the YouTube sensation "If the Army Goes Gay" –lol).

Military service is a profession, and those who do it best treat it as such. Sex is not part of the job. It has nothing to do with it. So, if sex is irrelevant, why does the "Don't Tell" part even matter? Well, I think a person who is willing to fight and die for his country shouldn't have to lie about why his wife isn't at the Regiment Ball, or why his best mate keeps sending him a letter each month when on deployment.

Ambassador Beazley (our man in Washington), with the support of Foreign Minister Rudd and Defence Minister Smith, needs to communicate a simple message to the Washington elite: This kind of policy sits uneasily with the Aussies.

Even if the issue remains unresolved for some time at the political/judicial level, Australia should at least communicate an expectation that the policy be left unenforced on the operational level.

The stock-standard pollie reply to this suggestion would be, "we don't expect other countries to tell us how to run our business, and we can't tell other sovereign nations how to run theirs".  So why should Australia's representatives expend political capital on making a moral point? After all, it is unorthodox diplomacy to make public normative judgments about other governments. Getting conservative Congressmen off-side might even work against Australia's interests the next time Australian representatives are lobbying the Hill for more favourable treatment in trade or weapons sharing, for example. Furthermore, there are any number of other countries we could be criticising for more serious human rights abuses. Why this one?

It is the close relationship between our two military forces that distinguishes this particular issue. ANZUS has become fully manifest in Iraq and Afghanistan. In those war-zones the ADF and the US military are fused. They are one, in both the eyes of the public, and in real terms. US and Australian soldiers have served under the same command structures in many instances. If our nation is prepared to accept the many benefits that come with such a close relationship, it should also be prepared to take-up some of its moral burdens. By our silence on this issue, Australia becomes vicariously responsible for the damage caused by this state-sanctioned discrimination.