I don't trust the DesChamps report. There are issues; some of the women involved stated they found the questions, discussions "leading" for example.
FWIW, and this is just my opinion...
We already HAD policies, regulations, orders..you name it...in place to deal with harassment, assault, all of this stuff. The problem is...they were not being applied and employed.
I agree this is mostly a LEADERSHIP issue. If LEADERS, at all levels, applied the policies, regulations, orders, CSD, RMs, etc etc the way they were supposed to...there would be no need for OP HONOUR.
Who is responsible for harassment stuff, ultimately? ROs...who are they? COs, Cmdts, etc. If a case was mishandled...are they not responsible for it? If they mishandle a case, complaint, etc are they then held to account? In some cases, for sure, the answer is 'no'.
Leadership and deterrence are what is needed now to get those who aren't paying attention to pay attention. At all rank levels.
In all honesty...we are doing 'more with less' all the time. Ethics Programs are part of our (minimum) yearly trg requirements, but the scope of OP HONOUR can't be supported by the unit level Ethic Coord's.
This is a leadership task. There were enough rules and policies and corrective tools in place. If those weren't being used before, the only thing that will make the change desired is holding people, at all levels, to account for their performance and/or conduct deficiencies. Hey...we even have DAODs about that stuff. How odd.
But, much like CFPAS...let's not just issue stern direction and marching orders from the top to "follow orders and policy, no questions, get on with it"...we'll reinvent the wheel instead. "If we make it look broken by not using it right, we won't have to use it at all!"