Latest / Follow the Leighder / From Marine Combat to Veteran Advocacy | Dr. Kyleanne Hunter, IAVA

Transcript

From Marine Combat to Veteran Advocacy | Dr. Kyleanne Hunter, IAVA · Follow the Leighder

• Leigh/@followtheleighder: Well, howdy folks and welcome back to another episode of Follow the Leighder. I'm your host, Leigh Larson, and I have an awesome guest for you all today. Joining me from Denver, Colorado, Kyleanne Hunter. Kai, ⁓ Welcome to the studio. Kyleanne Hunter: Thank you so much for having me. I'm really excited for this conversation. Leigh/@followtheleighder: the pleasure's all mine. Y'all check this out. Check out this resume and prepare to be humble. CEO of the Iraq Afghanistan Veterans of America, IAVA. She the senior scientist at RAND policy, ⁓ senior political scientist at RAND, co-creator of the Women, Peace and Security Initiative, co-author of Invisible Veterans. ⁓ And all of that, of course, is built on your Marine Corps combat veteran experience. ⁓ my goodness, and I'm gonna butcher this, AH-1W Super Cobra Attack Helicopters. ⁓ First of all, thank you for your service. And not only service in the military, but beyond with advocacy. Can you talk about what that was like to move from combat into policy advocacy? Kyleanne Hunter: Absolutely. And first, know, it's a it's always an honor and a privilege to be able to serve and to have a profession that continue to have impact. You know, I was a Marine and I was a Marine at a time when we were really at the height of the deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. We actually in the the Cobra community, we called it the endless cycle because our ⁓ it was these years of being deployed for nine or 10 months a year coming home for ⁓ a few months and then heading right back out, right back out the door. And ⁓ in many ways that was a actually somewhat easy job because you knew exactly what you're gonna have to do, right? Like it was somewhat predictable. You knew what your rotations were going to be. And when you were down range, like, yes, I'm not gonna undermine or diminish the ideas ⁓ of combat and war. And that's definitely something we should talk to. but it was predictable. You knew exactly what your job was gonna be. ⁓ I finished up my active duty time in the Office of Legislative Affairs for the House of Representatives for the Marine Corps. And that was a incredibly transformative experience for me of understanding the power of advocacy and really the power of evidence-based advocacy. And I was serving there at the time when we were doing the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. And so for folks who aren't familiar with that, Don't Ask, Don't Tell was a policy where ⁓ gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members did not have to disclose their sexual orientation, yet were not allowed to talk about ⁓ it. And if it was found out they were separated from the military, We ended up repealing that so that ⁓ members of the LGB community could serve openly. And I use those terms deliberately because it does only cover ⁓ gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members. It does not cover transgender members, which has been a whole other side of this. But I remember at the time, there was a lot of emotional-based arguments that were... that were coming up on both sides of the issue, right? People were approaching it with deep, deep emotion. And emotion is important. Emotion and stories are the soul of advocacy in many ways. However, there was virtually no research done on what the impact of this policy had been and like the very negative impact, as well as what are the best processes to undo this policy, right? And really create a new policy that both roots and respects the the rights of every single individual and creates the space for everyone to be able to serve, but also continues to center military effectiveness in a real and meaningful way. know, there's one, Rand had done one, but it was old by this point. And so that drove me to go get a doctorate in political science. It really drove me to say, okay, if people are saying this work is too hard to do, I'm gonna go figure out how to do it. And ⁓ so went and got my doctorate really with the focus of trying to connect this research on military personnel, right? Who are we recruiting in? How are we taking care of them? What does it mean to bring the actual best people into the military to the military effectiveness side? How are they actually making our military more effective at what we are supposed to be doing at a military? And I went into this with always the the mindset of research needs to be done in order to create better policy and advocacy is that bridge. And so, my journey from being a woman in a very male dominated career field in the military, I mean, the Marine Corps is male dominated as it is, Cobra pilots are even more male dominated as it is to, you know, some of my own lived experiences, right, into working on the Hill where I saw how objectivity Leigh/@followtheleighder: Yeah. Kyleanne Hunter: research data can really give voice to the voiceless and cut through a lot of the hyper emotional and hyper partisan rhetoric, you know, into going in and doing this work at Rand and at the Air Force Academy to now leading an organization whose focus is on advocacy, you know, unlike some other veterans organizations, we don't provide direct services to veterans. What we do is change laws and policies to ensure that America is a place that ⁓ everyone who served has the ability to thrive in, it really is a full circle moment for me. Leigh/@followtheleighder: Yeah, well, and ⁓ it's it's a really powerful story. It shows how much the service meant to you and how you want to continue to make sure that those opportunities remain in place. ⁓ Access to job promotions and skill development. And again, this benefits the entire military. This is this is total military readiness, bringing everybody up. ⁓ Can you talk a little bit about, and we have a whole bunch of questions to get to, but I did want to at least ask, while you served, what was that experience like? Did you feel like that you were supported or did you have some hardship? Can you talk a little bit about that? Kyleanne Hunter: Yeah, so service for me was a mixed bag. I had, I'll start with some of the positives, some incredibly, incredibly amazing mentors and friends, most of whom happened to be male because that was just the field in the world that I was in. you learn deep, deep leadership lessons. I remember there was a senior officer who was a man and he and I are Leigh/@followtheleighder: Yes. Kyleanne Hunter: super opposite, indifferent in so many ways. ⁓ Everything from just our background to how we got into the Marine Corps to our just almost personal beliefs that we have. And yet, when I went to work for him, one of the first things he said was, the Marine Corps was designed and made for people like me. And so I don't know what is... Concerning to you. I don't know what's hard for you. I don't know what hurts for you You need to let me know because my job is to remove obstacles out of your way as a senior officer I need to remove obstacles for people who are different than me because he's like it's very easy for people like me To navigate my way through this institution. I know it's not easy for you, but I don't know what the hardships are and I thought that was Such a powerful important important leadership lesson because it shows, you if you were the dominant, like you were the in-group, you were the person this institution was built around, rather than saying, well, yeah, that's the way it's supposed to be, right? It's the way it's always been. If you can't conform to what I'm like, if you don't do things the exact same way I am, you don't belong here, it was the opposite. It says, I know that there's going to be struggles for you, but I don't know what they are because I've never... experience them. So tell me. And it was, I could go talk to him and say everything from like, I have gear that's not fitting me right, and I'm getting ⁓ abrasive, know, like, just abrasions because things don't fit, you know, which is which is a real thing. And then he's like, ⁓ we can actually fix that. Right. That's an easy thing to fix. We can go order you a different gear, but not thinking about it because it don't know it. Don't don't fault him. You know, too. You know, I'm Leigh/@followtheleighder: Yeah. Yeah, right. Mm-hmm. Kyleanne Hunter: I'm getting sort of disproportionate flight time to whatever it was. I could go talk to him about this and he's like, now I know I can change. And that's, I think, one of the most important leadership lessons I learned, but also I think a testament to the fact that, as you mentioned, bringing a more diverse group of people into the military makes the entire unit better. It makes the military better. It makes the country safer and more secure. you need to know how the institution needs to change to accept these new people. But then on the flip side, I had some horrendous experiences as well, right? Everything from being ⁓ accused of getting things only because I was a woman and I can tell you they did not change any standards in the Cobra community for me. I also even made it my point to be able to... perform to the male physical fitness standards just to try to be accepted ⁓ more by people. But there was a group that clearly didn't want me there and whether it was through the sort of whisper rumor mill or an attempt to hold me to disproportionate standards, it was very clear that there was even at this time, 20 plus years ago, the perception that standards had been changed, I had gotten things because I was a woman, they were making special exceptions and that it, A, it's incredibly hurtful because it's not true. ⁓ B, it is the thing that's gonna kill unit cohesion the most, What we have, we look at even like the research and the literature beyond behind it, bringing... Leigh/@followtheleighder: I'm over here. Kyleanne Hunter: previous outgroups into organizations doesn't kill unit cohesion and culture. And in many ways, it actually makes things around task-based cohesion better. But the continued rumor mill is what absolutely destroys units. And just how much that was allowed to percolate ⁓ was really rough. Leigh/@followtheleighder: Wow, I'm so sorry to hear that. I know too, I laughed when you said that you even focused on the male physical fitness standards, because I did that myself when I served in the Air Force Champaign Corps. ⁓ It kind of worked. Then it made people mad because now it was beating men on the track. Then I was like, ⁓ I don't know if I actually should have done that. Now I've emasculated them. Kyleanne Hunter: Yeah. ⁓ I Well, I actually had in like one of my goodbye plaques that I got for leaving a squadron, it was the... I forget if it was the CEO or the opso who like wrote on my plaque. He's like, we're glad you're leaving because you won't embarrass us in PT anymore. And I was like, can we not win? Right? Because if we didn't, right, if we were not... holding ourselves to these standards, we'd be told we were slow and weak and, look, there's double standards made for you. But as soon as we achieve them, the response is, ⁓ you're hurting us. Leigh/@followtheleighder: No, I can't wait. No, you can't Never mind that. That is amazing. That like, mean, like you honoring the standard. Right. Run fast. And also the whole fact that it's like you're making us look bad. don't like this is the military. Like this is like this is not to the neighborhood block. Like we should all be achieving like and celebrating ⁓ success in the military because again, it brings all like Kyleanne Hunter: Yeah. Run fast, but not that fast. Yeah. Hahaha Leigh/@followtheleighder: we're unit. And that's also the thing too, is like, I don't think you were the slowest by any means, like to evolve your fitness to meet those standards, you definitely had to improve and ⁓ it shares the dedication you had. So thank you for that. Earlier you mentioned that standards women have, not been changed, that you met the standards. ⁓ There has also been quite a number of headlines about tamping down diversity programs or removing certain people from high ranking positions. ⁓ There's a lot to be said. First of all, the folks that held those positions did so. If anything, the military is a meritocracy. So this idea that they got where they are because, I mean, they're at every step. there are standards and things that we have to meet. But when these programs, ⁓ these roles or even the rhetoric, when these become, like you said, the rumor mill, what's at stake when we roll back these gains and who bears the cost? Kyleanne Hunter: This is a really important question and a really important line of ⁓ discussion. And I'm going to sort of take a step back to talk about the system for a moment and then get into like what the problem is. So as you mentioned, the military is a meritocracy. It is one of the few institutions out there where promotion and advancement qualifications are transparent and objective. You know, whether it's in your job, right? whether it was you as a chaplain or me as a pilot, right? Like you knew what you had to achieve to hit the next rank, right? You know the qualifications. For technical career fields, there are very set standards that are published that must be tied to the operational requirements of whatever that career field is that you have to do. And those have always been gender neutral, right? Whether you are a... pilot or logistician or a chaplain or a supply clerk or in the infantry, the operational standards are gender neutral. And actually it was the reversal of the women in ground combat exclusion that actually forced the infantry career fields and armor and artillery, you all of these previously closed jobs that actually forced them to make gender neutral, occupationally tied standards. for those career fields. For a while, the requirement to get into infantry officer school was that you were a man who had completed your basic officer training and things like that. There weren't these clear objective standards. When you added women, they're like, ⁓ we actually need to make clear objective standards. It turns out a lot of men can't meet them either. So that's to say is that there's physical standards that are objective that you need to make to just progress in your career. And then for things like promotions into the general officer ranks and the very senior enlisted ranks, there's also very clear standards that need to be met. And you need the recommendations of several senior officers above and below, right? And so to get to these positions and to get to these positions of power, it's hard work. It's a lot of hard work. And you got to stick it out in this institution for like over 20 years, right? So it's hard work, it's dedication, and there are... are not, nor have there ever been quotas for the number of women or people of color that need to be in these roles and positions, which is also some of the sort of rumor mill that you hear serving. And what we've seen over the past 20 plus years is that there's been a significant increase in the number of women in these positions, which makes sense if you look back sort of historically. We had first the opening of the service academies to women in the 70s, which integrated women in with what was at the time the regular officer commissioning side of the house. had combat ships open to women in the early 90s and combat aviation open to women in the early 90s, both of which, these are career fields that you have people achieving the highest ranks of their various services. And that was one of the things historically when you had positions close to women in particular was that women were not in career fields that would often get promoted to the highest rank. For those who are not in the military listening to this, there are certain career fields that will promote more into the most senior four-star levels, which typically are associated with what we call the main effort of what people are doing. So aviation being one, surface warfare ships being... being one, some of the logistics, more sort of like, use the term combat for lack of a better term, focus logistics, right? These are career fields that do promote into the most highest ranks. So they're sort of core to what the military services do. Whereas a lot of the ancillary support roles, it's much less likely that you're going to promote into the highest ranks just because they don't need as many general officers or flag officers in those ranks. And so we've seen over the past 20 years, women, people of color ascending into these ranks, not because of their identity, but because we've normalized and integrated at the lower levels, women and people of color more. So they have the opportunity to achieve the highest levels. And it's important for a few reasons to have diversity in the senior ranks. One, it's an essential recruiting tool. We know right now that women have, for about the past decade, women have been the fastest growing group to join the military. They're also been, consequentially, the fastest group of veterans. ⁓ And this is due to several things. One, women are more eligible to serve in every state in the country right now when it comes to education, physical fitness, legal records. Women are just more eligible to join the military than men at this point. ⁓ And then additionally, We've done a lot as a country in the past 20 years to really invest in women's education, women in STEM, women in sports, which actually opens up a lot more of these careers to them, right? You have people who are already athletic and, you know, so it's easier to meet the standards, but also a lot of the STEM push with things like the Air Force and the Space Force and even Cyber Command across all of the services recruiting very deliberately for Leigh/@followtheleighder: Yeah. Kyleanne Hunter: know, exciting, fun jobs in the STEM world. So it's natural that women are going to move in. The firing, particularly of women from very prominent roles, has led to a ripple effect in recruitment, right? It has led to this ripple effect that women are expressing more concern about joining, wondering if there is a future for them. What we're also seeing is people... leaving the military at a faster rate than they were before. I there was an article not that long ago that was looking at the army can't even keep people through a full contract often right now. If they have the option, they'll leave to get out. And I think if you look around, the economy out in the civilian world is not all that great. It's not like we are at a time where there are jobs. People are just like, there are jobs everywhere and there's more jobs and there are people to fulfill them, which is Leigh/@followtheleighder: Mm-hmm. Kyleanne Hunter: when you often have this like exodus from the military, it's like, cause it's really easy to go get a civilian job. It's not really easy to go get a civilian job right now. I think everyone looking around the job market and kind of see it's not the best economy, but we're seeing people leave and there are these rumblings and discussions of like, well, if you don't pass some certain level of like loyalty tests, you're just not going to have any future. And so rather than sitting around and waiting to get fired, people are opting out of the system. And what's really at stake with this is we're losing talent very, very quickly. Yeah, we're losing talent super, super quickly, as well as it's going to hinder our ability to recruit. And leaders, there's tons and tons of research around there on how diverse teams perform better at very complex tasks for three big reasons. One, people who don't look like each other are actually more likely to share information with each other because they don't assume that you have the same baseline set. Leigh/@followtheleighder: Right. Kyleanne Hunter: information sharing happens. Two, differentials of perspectives and backgrounds lead people to ask different types of questions. Different type of questions lead to different information engagement. That's really important. And then three, you ⁓ are able to speak to and reach out to and engage with different types of effectively affinity groups to get information. We saw this. on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan with things like female engagement teams, right? We had to go out and actually like, you know, all the men couldn't do it, right? You needed women to come in. And as you sort of take that same theory and level it up through the ranks, having diversity in the most senior areas allows people to go out and actually engage with populations who may not look like the most senior leadership to continue to keep a robust fighting force. Leigh/@followtheleighder: Mm-hmm. That was so well said, the three ways that a diverse team actually enhances communication because I have experienced that but I didn't have the language to say that. But I have been in situations where like, it didn't look like, we looked like a motley crew but that motley crew, we were so that it. Kyleanne Hunter: You Leigh/@followtheleighder: there wasn't the ego stuff that comes with if I walk into a group and everyone looks like me and now I have to flex so that I'm different and individual in some way. ⁓ That's a really ⁓ beautifully way to word that. And I want to add to your point just because you are so data-driven that I recently ⁓ not only wrote a guest article, but I hosted the executive director here on the podcast of the Quaker House. Kyleanne Hunter: Mm-hmm. Leigh/@followtheleighder: who was talking about the number of consciences, objector requests in paperwork. He said that that has gone increased in the last year. And for officers, officers can retire, like in a different, or they can separate differently, but they were saying they're getting a lot of moral injury resource requests. And so that fits perfectly of what you're saying as people are leaving. Kyleanne Hunter: The end. Yeah, and I think that's one of the things that we're hearing. again, this is still at anecdotal stage. We haven't done the full research dig into it is for women when they're seeing these most senior women fired, there's this feeling of like, did my service matter? Am I really a veteran? Should I be eligible for? the benefits that I have or am I some other lesser than person that needs to sort of be discarded? So when we talk about the rhetoric, it has a real impact on people who are currently in, as we've seen this desired move, but also people who may have served decades ago starting to question like, what did I do and was it worth it? how do I Think about my past service. Leigh/@followtheleighder: And that's exactly the word discarded, like feeling discarded. Like I served, I gave you years, I gave you time of my life, but I also gave you my body. Like I signed a form that was like, yeah, I'll give my body to the state to do this and I will execute it to the best of my ability and I will serve and whatever. And now it's like, well, hold on. ⁓ That's... Kyleanne Hunter: Mm-hmm. Well, I had a, I was having a conversation with ⁓ a good friend of mine who is also a pilot and he said it, I think more beautifully than I ever could, so give credit, these are not my words. He said it, when I joined the Marine Corps, I truly believed that the American people were going to treat the gift of my body like the precious gift it is. And I don't know if that's true anymore. And I thought that was like one of the most beautiful sentiments of the way of saying this is that, you know, when you join the military, you're effectively putting your trust in the institutions that we have, right? We're putting the trust in the fact that those in power will make wise decisions. They will understand. the value of human life. They will not be cavalier with deciding to go throw it away because everyone who joined said, yes, I recognize I might not make it back. Right? Like that is part of signing up to do that. And regardless of what your job is in the military, there always is that as a possibility. But in return, there's this expectation that we're taking care of, but I think even more than the care on the backside is this expectation that decisions to go send us into harm ways are being made carefully and calculatedly and for the right reasons. And that's where we're hearing as well, more and more questioning of that. Leigh/@followtheleighder: That is, ⁓ it's very well echoed in the rhetoric of Hegseth and Trump just talking about, especially this is war in that like, yeah, some people will die. Or like we had a, I can't remember the word he used, but he was just talking about, you ⁓ that was a ⁓ rogue or something. He was talking about a bomb that, and just this. very detached, dehumanized, like you said, cavalier way that they're speaking about the war. They're promoting the war as if it's a video game. They're talking about it as if it's a video game. And then on top of it, it's all under the guise of religious rhetoric. Now I know that you, I can't read my handwriting, but you were the director of strategic warfare at the Air Force Academy. Did I say that title right? Kyleanne Hunter: Yeah, I was the director of the Strategy and Warfare Center, yes, at the Air Force Academy, yes. Leigh/@followtheleighder: Okay, so very close. knew, the Air Force again. That's a handwriting thing, sorry folks. But ⁓ did you see any of this language or kind of like we just touched on before, you know, ⁓ removal of folks from roles and the impact that it's having? Did you see that at the Air Force Academy, the Christian rhetoric or the gender or maybe racial rhetoric? Kyleanne Hunter: Yeah. So when I showed up, I would say I was actually at a really good time where there was a lot of, there was a ⁓ push to sort of divest from a lot of the, I think very gung-ho, let's go kill them all type rhetoric and really center the human aspect of it. And this is something that I was really proud of being able to do as part of the strategy and warfare center. And we also, at the time, ⁓ When I was first there, we were setting up this multi-domain lab, which was an immersive educational tool, right? That our cadets could go in and actually simulate what it would be like to be in a broader war situation. And it was really, really important to us when we were building this that the human was the center because there is so much... technological innovation in the military right now. And I will say in the Air Force and Space Force in particular, ⁓ lots and lots of technological innovation, everything from the continued integration of AI into weapon systems to the use of more remotely piloted aspects to ⁓ just huge improvements in targeting and radar systems and sensors that allow people to like reach out and touch things from a much further away. And so because of this, which has the ability to effectively dehumanize warfare in lot of ways, right? If you're sitting behind what's basically a big video game council, it's a lot easier to sort of disassociate yourself from it. But what decades of research from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, particularly on those that were UAS pilots, so remote unmanned aerial system pilots, we saw is that the moral injury was so much worse for them. And so we were really focused on centering the human. And that work went on for several years. thankfully, the MDL is still there. The strategy and warfare center is still there. But there's Leigh/@followtheleighder: Mm-hmm. Yes. Kyleanne Hunter: You know, at the academies as well, there have been some concerning changes recently with how turnover, whether it's with the cadet wing or the process of bringing new deans in. There's again, this is, it sits often in the sort of whisper network of like people being removed because they aren't in line with, you know, basically the administration's priorities. There was a big push to reduce the number of civilian faculty. at the academy, which ⁓ is something that I have big, big concerns about because your civilian faculty, A, the vast majority of civilian faculty is prior military. think over 90 % of civilian faculty is prior military at the academy and they provide continuity. They are there throughout a cadet's life cycle, unlike the uniform folks who often have to cycle in and out because of ⁓ operational needs. ⁓ But it also ensures that folks who have a rigorous academic background are part of the curriculum and training program. So there's been concerns raised by cadets and formal faculty about the accreditation potential of the academy if we keep trying to shrink civilian PhDs as part of the faculty there. ⁓ And then there's been raised concerns about there being an attempt to have a more sort of white Christian focused thrust at the academy. I the academy has unfortunately suffered around rumor mills of Christian nationalism for a really long time, right? And... ⁓ you know, thankfully, while I was there, personally, we saw a ⁓ big focus on ensuring that everyone was able to serve, but really diversifying the curriculum that keeps the human at the center. The dean did a lot of work on really the scholar warrior ⁓ side to focus, but there's from folks who are there now, their concerns that it's drifting away from that academic rigor, from that really that place of exploration. Leigh/@followtheleighder: Well, there are, like you said, there are concerns like, for example, Erica Kirk joining the Air Force Academy Board and all of us thinking, what are you doing here? Can you kind of talk about these, you know, Academy Board? Yes, the Air Force Academy Board, but how does Erica Kirk fit into a board like that or does she? Kyleanne Hunter: Yeah, so I mean, it's a bit of a confusing one. the boards, the boards of visitors are typically made up of, there's always some members of Congress, which is very bipartisan and you want the ideological bipartisan spread because it's important to have those that are controlling the purse springs understanding the needs of the academy. ⁓ There's also frequently subject matter experts from, you the education and training commands, like formal general officers from education and training command. You have academic subject matter experts on particular topics that are important to the ⁓ the service academy. You typically have ⁓ alum, right? You'll have a one or two alum that are there because it's getting their perspective of like, I was a cadet or midshipman, you know, at any of these boards. And then you have other academic administrative leaders and experts, you know, to help. you ensure that everyone's up on like best practices of pedagogy. know, the service academies are interesting in that they serve two functions, but first and foremost, primarily they are a educational institution, right? And they need to be, and historically they've been very good. You know, West Point, Annapolis, Air Force Academy have been like really, really good academic programs because there's been a really strong focus on recruiting top you know, top civilian and military academic talent to teach because that's number one. And it's sometimes, you know, I'd have to remind my cadets there that like, no, no, you do need a college degree to graduate or to commission, you know? So like first and foremost, they are a academic institution. And then second, they're the officer training facility. ⁓ But the Board of Visitors that ⁓ for all of the service academies, you know, they Leigh/@followtheleighder: Mm-hmm. Kyleanne Hunter: they need to oversee the academic rigor, ensuring that these boards meet academic rigorous standards. And then how that then fits in with the whole sort of four-year life cycle of training our future officers. And so I think there's zero political about people's concerns about Erica Kirk being on there, but more of what sort of what of these qualifying roles does she fill, right? Because she's not a Leigh/@followtheleighder: Thanks Kyleanne Hunter: She's not a former academic or a current academic. She's not a military member or an alum or someone who's worked, even if we've had some like former DOD civilians who have worked very closely in like the education and training side of the DOD house, right? Who bring some unique skill that's going to further the Academy's mission. There are always concerns when people who are sort of seemingly out of place fall on here because The academies are really the place that needs to be free from politics ⁓ for, I think, two big reasons. One, they are, again, a place of higher education, and there needs to be preserved that political and academic freedom to actually question and engage and grapple, right? Just as a college student, that's part of going to college is you should be able to, A, you should absolutely read things that you disagree with when you're in college. that are going to challenge and question. B, you need to have the space to be able to debate and ask questions, right? That's just how we grow as people. And I want our military officers to have a very, very well-rounded education and to understand other cultures, other ways of thoughts, you know? And so number one, like injecting any sort of political agenda into that is going to threaten the ability to just have a... robust academic experience. It's the same things like you should not ban any books at the academies because people need to be able to read. And then number two, in democracies, militaries function best when they are reflective of the country that they represent, which means that we need to be recruiting and attracting people from all walks of life that represent America. Those are, and there's huge, huge robust academic literature out there around how militaries that look more like their populations that they protect are just more effective militaries. And if we start to say that, well, only people who think this way are welcome, we are not going to be reflective of our country. And that ultimately hurts all of us. Leigh/@followtheleighder: ⁓ it absolutely does. Well, you spend a lot, we've talked a lot about institutional culture. You served as the co-chair for the Culture and Climate Line of Effort for the Independent Review Commission on Military Sexual Assault. I do apologize listeners, everything is a mouthful with the military. Everything is acronyms and just some of the most wordy things we've ever done. But you have done a lot for the culture and climate in the institution. Kyleanne Hunter: You Leigh/@followtheleighder: Can you talk about ⁓ how the culture has changed since your time of service to what you are observing now ⁓ as a policy advocate? Kyleanne Hunter: Yeah, absolutely. know, and culture and climate are important because that's where the rubber meets the road, right? We can create all the policies we want. And particularly an institution like the Department of Defense that is just huge. I think people think about the military as, you know, ⁓ there's all these people that run around and like shoot guns and break things, right? It does that. But at its core, the military is a ginormous employer. Right there are just, you look at the number, I mean, think it's, if you look at the DOD, it's the number one employer in the U.S. basically. ⁓ So lots and lots and lots of people. And in big institutions, policies are really only as good. as the mechanisms and the people that you have enforcing them and actually teaching them, right? So it came from the place that it's not enough to just change laws and policies. We actually need to have a culture that allows for these laws and policies to be implemented. ⁓ But also, there are behaviors and actions that you can't policy in or out of people, right? It really has to come down to how you show up as a human. And On the encouraging side, the military and military services are built around core values that open up a space for fantastic culture. I'll talk about the Marine Corps, honor, courage, and commitment being our core values. Those are values that, when executed on, create phenomenal cultures. The idea of honor and the idea of actually having a you know, someone who respects and honors each other is essential, right? We talk about courage and it's not just jumping on grenades, right? But standing up for when you see somebody being mistreated, right? Including folks is often much more difficult and courageous, right? If you have someone go jump on a grenade or go have a really hard conversation. think a lot of people would rather jump on a grenade because I think you're just done. Everyone thinks you're a hero for doing that, but having a really hard conversation, it's uncomfortable. It makes you difficult. It takes courage to do that. Commitment isn't just saying, yes, I will do whatever you say. It is, am going to ensure that this person sitting next to me is taken care of. These values open up the door for really positive. culture. And so some of what we did was tie these core values to the way in which we treat each other. And we saw a lot of positive change come out in the past decade or so. Everything from the Army's implementation of the BCAP program, which really allowed for 360 reviews, we got better leaders in place who really focused on how they treat people, not just how they execute sort of above and beyond. ⁓ We saw a greater recognition and acceptance for women in positions of leadership, which was really important. ⁓ We saw also part of culture and climate was things like the opening of the Civilian Harm Mitigation and Reduction Office that used to be in the DOD, right? Where we integrated the idea that we need to protect civilians into how we did our war fighting and planning. What we're seeing right now, I think in addition to, you we've touched on the firings of ⁓ a lot of people, but is this return to rhetoric about killing and destruction and having no mercy and violence as being a linchpin and like, yes, everyone who is in the military knows they may be asked to go do violence on behalf of the United States government. But what makes us professional and makes us the most efficient and effective is the understanding of when we need to use restraint. of how this fits into the broader goals of the United States military, as well as how we're able to integrate as a collective to serve the country, right? Like the military is a whole bunch of, you I think you served as well, right? Like you get thrown in with people that you never would have otherwise been around, right? And you have to integrate to work as one to serve. Leigh/@followtheleighder: Yeah. bright. Kyleanne Hunter: the broader collective, right? Which means that as members of the military, we are there to protect and serve and be of service of people we probably disagree with. And we disagree with it for a whole host of reasons, right? And so there's this real concern that this return and sort of retrenchment back to very violent rhetoric is going to undermine a lot of these positive culture gains that have led to a much more effective military. Leigh/@followtheleighder: Well, and I think about a few months ago when Hegseth called all the generals to come for a meeting and he said a lot that day. But the thing that stood out to me was his comments about no more walking on eggshells. We're going to be rolling back policies and dealing with the complainers and all of that. For a number of reasons, I offended, insulted by that. ⁓ But then I started thinking about the effects. Like I was like, let's walk out that policy if he decides to go with this all white Christian heterosexual military. And you've just rolled back all these policies. And I was like, this, not only is it like terrible for women, queer, anyone who's not Christian, but when you start rolling back these policies, when you start shaming complainers, it doesn't make those actions go away. It makes it harder for accountability. It makes it harder ⁓ for justice, for care, for whatever the next steps may be. And I'm looking at this with a lot of concern. I'm like, these are borderline, ⁓ if not, but almost male prison conditions when you have no way to address when harm, particularly when it's sexual harassment or assault in nature. Do you see any other red flags about the rhetoric that you're concerned about just from this past year? And I know there's been a lot of rhetoric, there's been a lot of things. But I mean, there's, and part of it is like, you know, which one do I respond to? It all needs a response, but Kyleanne Hunter: Yeah. Leigh/@followtheleighder: What are some things that you've heard this year that you're like, ⁓ no. Kyleanne Hunter: Yeah. So there's a few things that really stand out. One is this notion of complainers and calling people complainers, ⁓ which is, and they're complainers for raising the fact that they were raped and wanting to be taken care of. And what we saw a few years ago, and it was a super, super narrow, case, but it started to open up some cracks, right, where there was a challenge to the Ferris Doctrine. So the Ferris Doctrine is the legal doctrine that basically says that members of the military cannot sue the DOD for ⁓ harms received in the line of military service. And effectively what this was designed to do was like, you know, if you were in a, know, a like, if you were in combat and you were shot, you can't sue the DOD because you were shot. because that's like an inherent hazard of your job, right? If you were a convoy operator and your vehicle rolled over, right? You can't sue the military for the injuries, right? And we have other systems and means, right? We look at even like VA compensation, which has been often referred to as like in lieu of having class action, we pay you for the rest of your life, right? But so the Ferris doctrine says you can't sue. In a first limited case, there was the first successful case of someone suing Leigh/@followtheleighder: Right. Kyleanne Hunter: the Air Force actually for damages from being raped and winning. Right? And the argument was that rape is not a, should not be seen as a preconceived condition of employment in the military. Right? Like there are other harms that can be preconditioned, even other psychological harms that can be seen as a, as a potential precondition, but this should not be presumed that it might happen to you. And I bring that up and why it's really important is because it started to reframe some of how rape in particular was thought of as this not being a condition of employment, which I can't believe that those words are all coming out of my mouth at same time, right? But it showed that these were people who had been legitimately harmed. They have a valid grievance and they need to be taken care of. ⁓ And so that's, you know, that was a positive sign, right? We started to see it becoming like, no, you should report more, right? We want you to report more. ⁓ And language like that, A, it gives cover to those that are engaged in the bad behavior, right? That like, well, this, what did you expect? You work here type thing. You're just complaining. And B, it's going to continue to have people not report and then not be able to get the... support and help they need and I really worry what that is for like our long-term what it's going to do to suicidality what it's going to do to recruitment and ⁓ retention. So that I'm very very worried about. I am incredibly concerned about the language around violence that's being used right now ⁓ and the continued complete and utter dehumanization of in particular right now the Iranian people. Leigh/@followtheleighder: Mm-hmm. Kyleanne Hunter: And they keep saying that, we're not at war with Iranian people. Well, when you say that you're going to destroy an entire civilization, when you refer to people as your enemies that you want, and I don't even remember the exact words, but around like, you know, basically unmitigated violence against them, right? This creates real concerns, A, about what does it say about the type of person that's going to be attracted to serve in this institution? Because, you know, When we give young people the ability to enact incredible, incredible violence, what we need to ensure is they also have the ability to exercise restraint. And that's what makes the American military the best military in the world. It's not how much violence we can actually do. It's our ability to wisely choose when to do it. And if the rhetoric is kill them all, effectively, give no mercy, no quarter, who is that going to attract the person who says, want to serve. I understand that I may be asked to go do the hardest thing. that a human being is going to be asked to do. But I do it because I believe in this institution. I believe in the person to the left and the right of me. I believe that we are doing this as a last resort and for all of the right, legitimate and justified reasons. Or is it going to entrap the person that's like, woo, go kill them all, right? And like, what person do you really want serving and able to enact this violence? Because you... Leigh/@followtheleighder: time. Kyleanne Hunter: You can't take back dropping a bomb. You can't take back shooting someone. You can't take back making kids orphans. And what we learned from Iraq and Afghanistan was that, you know, the more reasons you give for other people to dislike you, the more the other guy wins, right? Every time there would be civilian casualties, that is a wonderful Al Qaeda or Taliban recruiting ground, right? And Leigh/@followtheleighder: ⁓ all day. Kyleanne Hunter: And so this language, I worry as well as to what that actually means for our adversaries. What does that mean for their ability to say, US leadership says they want to destroy all of us. They want to destroy our entire civilization. They don't want to give us any mercy or quarter, which is a war crime. We have to, like if somebody surrenders, you have to let them surrender. ⁓ you know, which you know more than I do, even from your chaplain time, right? there's, what does this, what sort of, what does this language do to build or pit people against us? Leigh/@followtheleighder: it, like you said, it has concerns for suicidality. It has concerns, you know, we're hardly taking care of the veterans we have. We're making more veterans. We're making more, like you said, orphans. It's just not, it, there's no cool head in the building is is what it is like, are you kit like, ⁓ but one of the things that I am just I have so much respect for you for the IA VA, you're the CEO of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, IA VA. ⁓ You're serving someone like half a million veterans. And Kyleanne Hunter: Mm-hmm. Leigh/@followtheleighder: really impressive. mean, you're doing a lot of policy advocacy work. One of the things you've said ⁓ online is that veterans remain among the most trusted people in American life. Can you talk about why veteran trust is important? Why veterans speaking out is important to listen to? ⁓ And just ultimately ⁓ the impact that you're making with IAVA. Kyleanne Hunter: Yeah, so IAVA as a veterans organization is a bit unique in that we are a advocacy organization, not a direct service providing organization. So we don't take veterans on camping trips. I love camping myself. I will go on many camping It's great, right? We don't. ⁓ We don't help veterans with their claims that they do. There are amazing magazine organizations that do that. Our focus is on changing laws and policies so that America is a place where everyone who served has ⁓ the ability to thrive. And so I guess we could say we serve all the veterans by the fact that we try to change laws and policies to make things better for everyone. But we don't do individual service provision. I think it's important for three big reasons. One, as you mentioned, veterans remain a very, very trusted group of people. This is incredibly important right now because America is a very, very polarizing place right now. Anyone who doesn't see that, I don't know where you've been for the past decade, but we are, and the encampment of trust, and it's only accelerating with things like AI in terms of trust and like, how do we trust information? Whose information do we trust? ⁓ Where do we get things that are trustworthy? Right? So there's just a general lack of trust out there. Veterans remain trusted. And largely the reason is, is when you are in the military, you have no choice who you serve with, right? It's one of the very, very few career paths that doesn't have a lot of self-selection bias in it. Like once you're in, you're going to go where you go, you're going to work with the people they tell you to work with, and you're going to do the things they tell you to do. And so because of that, know, veterans are a group that has had to be able to communicate and navigate across these, you know, pretty big divides, which builds trust among all groups. So that's number one, is like it's important to have veterans as advocates because they are trusted. This is about issues that matter from people who have a understanding of how to have hard conversations with each other and really work past differences. Number two is that veteran issues are American issues. And I say that in the fact that if we look at something like the VA as a public health care system, some of the biggest innovations in medicine and medical history have come because of investments in the VA and have come in the fact that veterans are a discrete population that is unique in some ways, particularly as it comes to like physical health care and the types of things that impact our bodies. right, which has allowed for incredible, incredible innovation in terms of just the general broader medical community. We look at things like head trauma and our understanding of head injuries, right? The veteran population is responsible for so much of that and what we are able to ⁓ just know that benefits everybody. ⁓ But additionally, when I talk about veterans issues being American issues is Veterans are Americans. They are just people like everybody else. And they touch everything from public lands to fair housing to like, you know, clean water access, international relations. And so having a strong, incredible voice that is able to work through a lot of these different populations is really, really important for just getting anything passed in the American population right now. And then your third, is the fact that veterans are kind of related to number one and two, like incredible coalition builders, right? It is the ability to work across hard issues because it's what we've had to do in the military, right? We've had to go be with a bunch of people that didn't know each other before and go do a hard thing together. That is a real, I think, positive benefit of what we do. Leigh/@followtheleighder: Well, I think that is the perfect place to wrap up this conversation because I know that, I mean, you had, thank you. like I said, very humbled and honored that you were here. Absolutely wonderful conversation. Please come back. With everything that you're doing, doctor, can you tell folks where ⁓ they can donate, follow, learn more about you and your mission? Kyleanne Hunter: Absolutely. Yeah, absolutely. So at IAVA.org, and there are multiple ways, like first join us, it is free to join and become a member. And ⁓ if you are a veteran, you're able to join our verified veteran network and be eligible for things like participation in our advocacy programs, our fellowship programs, ⁓ you know, survey work, because everything we do is also based on the needs and understandings of our populations. You can also go there to donate. are fueled. get no government funding. We are 100 % funded by the generosity of ⁓ donors and foundations. And so to keep this work moving forward, we do need everyone's support. So IAVA.org and ⁓ check out the events. There's some coming soon events in places that you might be too. Leigh/@followtheleighder: Well, thank you so much for being here. Are there any other last words? Kyleanne Hunter: Just thank you for this. You know, I do have deep faith that we will get through on the other side of the moment we're in right now, but being able to call out some of the rhetoric for what it is, but also, you know, having real faith and trust in our veteran community and populations that they are able to serve as a bridge to, I think, bring us through some of this incredibly divisive time right now. Leigh/@followtheleighder: Absolutely. Well, folks, what did you think of that episode? Let me know in the comments. Don't forget to like, follow, subscribe. You know the drill. This has been another episode of Follow the Leighder. I'm your host, Leigh Larson. And until next time, see ya.