Stop Air Force lockdown of public discussion: Column Selective censorship, not personal opinions undermine military

Maribel H. Jarzabek | USATODAY

Last month, the Arizona Daily Independent broke a story that should have Congress holding hearings about the Air Force's efforts to keep its airmen from talking to Congress. Major General James Post, an Air Force general, attempted to prevent subordinates from talking with their elected officials about a weapons system that many in Air Force leadership think should be shut down.

The Air Force initially dismissed any concerns of wrongdoing in this case. Instead, warning airmen that their role "is not to engage in public debate or advocacy for policy." Nothing could be further from the truth. Military members are not prohibited from expressing their personal views. In fact the Air Force's own internal instructions tell airmen they are permitted to express their "personal views concerning public issues." Moreover, military members have an absolute right, guaranteed by federal law, to communicate with their elected officials.

Unfortunately, the effort to silence views contrary to leadership goes well beyond whether an airplane should be retired. While Congress and the Air Force have been considering the future of the A-10 attack aircraft, they have also engaged in a debate of how best to address the sexual assault crisis in the military. The military leadership has chosen to aggressively fight to protect its biased, opaque and ineffective military justice system, inherited from Britain's King George III, which is undermining good order and discipline, unit cohesion and costing our nation the services of many of its best and brightest.

The Air Force has made every effort to squelch opposing views when it comes to the issue of sexual assault in the military. Military leadership has taken the same approach as Maj. Gen. Post when it comes to silencing those who speak out for victims.

I experienced this firsthand just last year.

In December 2014, I was on terminal leave status after being forced out of the Air Force due to "downsizing" and New Year's Eve would be my last day on active duty. In other words, I was no longer wearing the uniform and was transitioning to my new civilian life. I had been a Special Victims' Counsel (SVC) for the last 18 months, having represented 42 victims of sexual assault during my time as a SVC. On December 2, I posted on Senator Kirsten Gillibrand's Facebook page expressing my support of the Senator's efforts to modernize military justice by removing commanders from an untenable situation of deciding whether or not a sexual assault allegation should be prosecuted. I also commented on the mistreatment my clients had received at the hands of the military. The Air Force responded by opening a criminal investigation into me. Their concern was not necessarily that I had forgotten to put a disclaimer on my post, but rather, that I was expressing "opinions online that could undermine public confidence in the Air Force."

The Air Force justified their response claiming I engaged in "partisan political activity." However, Air Force leadership demonstrated that weighing in on the bipartisan reform is not prohibited, so long as you agree with them.

Military brass encouraged subordinates to openly advocate against the military justice legislation supported by the majority of the American public and senators from both sides of the aisle.

While Senator Gillibrand's bill was being debated in Congress, Maj Gen Jeffrey Rockwell, a a member of the Judge Advocate General's Corps (JAG) and my former commander, actively worked to defeat the senator's bill. He met with members of Congress to express his opposition to the proposed reforms. He encouraged his subordinates (including me) to "write blogs and letters to the editor" opposing the bipartisan bill supported by the majority of the Senate. Lt. Gen Richard Harding, the Air Force's top lawyer, endorsed Rockwell's efforts in an email to every JAG, paralegal and civilian attorney in the service. Harding's official email emphatically encouraged the reader to engage the media in efforts to defeat reform.

If I was engaged in "partisan political activity" by supporting the Gillibrand bill, opposing the bill would also be partisan. However, an IG response to a complaint about Harding's and Rockwell's activities found no wrongdoing. Unlike me, Rockwell, was not charged. Instead, he was rewarded with a promotion.

When commanders pick and choose which "personal views" are allowed, they undermine good order and discipline, military readiness and threaten unit cohesion. It is critical that our brave men and women in uniform are able to trust their commanders. But that trust flies out the window when military leaders accuse airmen of treason for speaking with members of Congress, and criminal investigations are launched against military lawyers speaking up for sexual assault victims. All service members should be able to share their unique perspective, not just those with which the military brass agree. Americans deserve to hear the truth.

Maribel Jarzabek was an Air Force JAG for over 5 years before leaving the service in December 2014. She was one of the first of 24 full-time Special Victims' Counsels.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors . To read more columns like this, go to the Opinion front page or sign up for the daily Opinion e-mail newsletter .