A Barrage Hits West Point's Code

Honor is a learning process, but it is being taught badly where it is the most esteemed: West Point. This was the harsh conclusion of two reports issued last week, offering some of the toughest criticism the 174-year-old academy has ever received. Shortly before the studies were made public, the commandant of cadets, Brigadier General Walter Ulmer Jr., was abruptly transferred.

The major report was drawn up by a six-man commission appointed by Army Secretary Martin Hoffmann to investigate last spring's cheating scandal (TIME cover, June 7). Wrote Commission Chairman Frank Borman, the former astronaut, in a letter to Hoffmann accompanying the 91-page study: "We believe that education concerning the honor code has been inadequate and the administration of the honor code has been inconsistent and, at times, corrupt. The cadets did cheat, but were not solely at fault. Their culpability must be viewed against the unrestrained growth of the 'cool-on-honor' subculture at the academy, the gross inadequacies in the honor system, the failure of the academy to act decisively with respect to known honor problems, and other academy shortcomings."

The commission did not find fault with the honor code in principle: "A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal or tolerate those who do." However, it urged some sharp modifications of the stern system. At present, it is all or nothing: if a cadet fibs about anything, however trivial, out he goes. But the system has broken down. The commission estimated that far more than the 152 juniors who were dismissed from West Point for cheating on an electrical engineering exam last spring were actually involved.

Said the report: "The commission is equally persuaded that scores of other violations of the honor code have gone undetected or unpunished and that during recent years, a substantial number of cadets have been involved in dishonesty, toleration and, on occasion, misconduct as honor representatives."

The commission recommended that West Point modify its policy of expulsion for code violations and impose lesser punishments for minor infractions--a practice followed by the naval and air force academies. It also suggested alternatives to tattling on erring cadets. Someone who catches a cadet violating the code might warn or counsel him. The commission urged both officers and cadets to participate in "honor education."

The report maintained that too much authority has been given to the cadets to supervise themselves, while the academy's staff has reneged on its responsibility. More emphasis, the report continued, should be placed on "high quality" education rather than on military training. The superintendent should be chosen for his educational as well as his military skills and should serve at least five years. Said Borman after the report was issued: "We should try to prevent a Fort Benning-on-the-Hudson attitude from creeping into the academy--which it already has."

Goddam Lawyers. The second report on the scandal was written by a general and a civilian lawyer who investigated charges that West Point defense attorneys for the accused cadets had been harassed and penalized for doing their job. Some of the charges proved to be true. General Ulmer complained: "The goddam lawyers are ruining the Army." The general, the report declared, "does not understand the role of the military lawyer. In our opinion, his remarks were unjustified and harassing, as claimed." Some West Pointers feel Ulmer has been made "the fall guy" for the entire scandal. He is being replaced by a much admired West Pointer (class of '54): Brigadier General John ("No Holds") Bard, 47, a Rhodes scholar who earned a master's degree in aeronautical engineering at the University of Michigan and is currently executive to NATO Commander General Alexander Haig.

Army Secretary Hoffmann promised to act on the recommendations of the two reports. Even if he decides to reinstate the dismissed cadets, it is questionable how many will return since they have gone on to other things. Any change in the honor system must be approved by the cadets themselves, who only this month narrowly failed to reach the two-thirds vote necessary to amend the current system. But the weight of the Borman report is expected to change enough minds to modify the code in a subsequent vote. Says Cadet Peter Eschenbach, class of '78: "I used to be a hard-liner about the code, but after seeing my friends fall by the wayside. I feel differently."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.