Defense Secretary William Cohen has said an affair in the mid-'80's with a CIA employee will not disqualify Air Force Gen. Joseph Ralston from being considered for the chairmanship of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Sec. Cohen's statement comes only days after he supported an Army general's resignation after a similar affair was uncovered. Both cases come only weeks after Lt. Kelly Flinn accepted a general discharge to avoid her own adultery charges. Does the Pentagon's top brass play be different rules? After a background report, Margaret Warner leads a discussion.

MARGARET WARNER: The latest issue roiling the military is adultery. In recent weeks news accounts have reported on several military officers being investigated, disciplined, or encouraged to retire early after allegations that they had engaged in adulterous relationships.

Two recent cases which both came to light this week prompted the Secretary of Defense, William Cohen, to weigh in. The first of these cases involved Army Major General John Longhouser, the commanding general of the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Aberdeen, Maryland, where several non-commissioned officers separately have been prosecuted for sexual misconduct. Longhouser said Tuesday he would retire early at reduced rank after admitting he had had an adulterous relationship with a civilian while he was separated from his wife five years ago. Cohen commented on the Longhouser case that day.

WILLIAM COHEN, Secretary of Defense: We have very high standards that we insist upon for the military. And when those standards are breached, then there are consequences that flow from it. And so it's not a broad side. It's another example of someone who failed to measure up to those standards. He has an extraordinary career, and he should be very proud of that career. And I think it is unfortunate that he has decided and for the good of the army to step down, but we insist upon maintaining the standards.

MARGARET WARNER: But yesterday in a different case Sec. Cohen took a different tact. The case involved Air Force General Joseph Ralston, a candidates for chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In interviews published today in The New York Times and the Washington Post the Defense Secretary said he still considered Ralston a top candidate for the job, in spite of the general's adulterous affair with a civilian 13 years ago. Both were students at the National War College, and Ralston was separated from his wife at the time.

"I have concluded that the actions taken back in the mid 1980's did not disrupt the good order of the armed forces," Cohen said, "and would not automatically disqualify him from consideration. I understand this puts me in a very difficult position, but that's part of the job. This is a drawing of the line. This is a case where I think the rule of reason has to apply and that we must draw distinctions."

Today reporters grilled Pentagon Spokesman Ken Bacon on the distinction between General Ralston's case and other recent disciplinary cases alleging adultery, including Air Force Lt. Kelly Flinn's and General Longhouser.

KENNETH BACON, Pentagon Spokesman: The central issue here is actions that prejudice or affect or compromise good order and discipline in the military. Now, the case--every case is different. Every case responds to its own set of facts. I know that you as members of the news media live on fact. Facts are sacred, so you review the facts of each--of each case very, very carefully. And when the Secretary reviewed the facts of General Ralston's case, he did not see any indication that good order and discipline were compromised.

REPORTER: Well, it looks like he is taking two different stands. It looks like, on the one hand, it's okay to do it, and on the other hand, it's not okay to do it. That's the perception, whether it's a fact or not.

KENNETH BACON: Well, I think that, again, if you walk through the various cases, you'll see that they all differ. And, of course, all--since humans differ, the facts of their cases differ. In the Ralston case he had a relationship with another woman in the 1980's, when he was separated from his wife. This woman was a civilian. She did not work in the Defense Department. She had nothing to do with the Air Force. The Kelly Flinn case was obviously a completely different case. Lt. Flinn was charged with fraternization, which is an inappropriate relationship between an officer and enlisted person. She was charged with disobeying a direct order. She was charged with lying. She was charged with conduct unbecoming to an officer, and she was charged with adultery. But there the--if you add up all the charges, they come back again to activities, alleged activities, that compromise good order and discipline.

REPORTER: What's different--what about Longhouser?

KENNETH BACON: The Longhouser case--first of all, the most important point to make about General Longhouser is that he elected to retire. But beyond that, I think the central point to focus on here is that he reached the conclusion that given his role as a court martial convening authority at Aberdeen, which has been the focal point of so much attention and so much legal activity, that to have a possible investigation of his activities going on at the same time could--could raise difficulties for him. And, therefore, he chose to leave.

REPORTER: That's a problem. Won't General Ralston, if he becomes chief, won't he set the moral code for the entire military, just not the Air Force?

KENNETH BACON: You know, the whole issue here goes back again to good order and discipline is the activity, prejudicial or damaging to good order and discipline, and no one has found that General Ralston's activity is prejudicial to good order and discipline. And when the secretary reviewed the facts of the case, he decided that this was not a case that challenged good order and discipline.

REPORTER: Can you talk a little bit about the concern that Cohen apparently has that this is going too far; that questions about personal life, adultery, somehow that this issue is beginning to step over the line and the concerns that you would have about other officers, if everyone in the building was asked, can you get into that issue?

KENNETH BACON: Sure. I think the Secretary, along with many other military officers, all military officers, is completely devoted to rooting out sexual harassment, sexual misconduct, and sexual activities that compromise good order and discipline in the military. Clearly, some of the cases brought to our attention at Aberdeen and elsewhere do that. The question is, in setting up hotlines and reporting opportunities and other methods for bringing alleged indiscretions to the attention of leaders, has it also opened up opportunities to perhaps--that go a little too far in terms of allowing people to file allegations that can't immediately be--be verified or proven or disproven right away, but trigger investigations that can take time, that can take emotional energy, and that can be very costly to the targets of the investigations. So the issue is: Has something driven the system out of balance? Was it in the right balance to begin with? Has it been knocked out of balance? Those are questions that have to be answered. It's a little difficult right now to answer in the heat of the moment, with the attention that's being placed on this by Congress and the media, but the secretary realizes that this has to be addressed. The question is when and how. And he's--he's toiling with that question now. It's something he's considering. He's talking about it with his advisers. He's talking about it with members of Congress. He's made it very clear that we don't want our lowest common denominator morality in the military. What we want are rules that make our military as effective as possible. We want rules that make the military fair to all people. We want rules that make people feel that they can serve to the fullest potential available to them. And that's what we're looking to do.