W Post
 
 
Pentagon to remove ban on women in combat
By Ernesto Londoño, Published: January 23,  2013
Outgoing Defense Secretary _Leon E. Panetta_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/leon-panetta/gIQAQNAq9O_topic.html)  
plans to announce Thursday a 
lifting of  the ban on female service members in combat roles, a watershed 
policy change  that was informed by women’s valor in Iraq and Afghanistan and 
that removes the  remaining barrier to a fully inclusive military, defense 
officials said. 
Panetta made the decision “upon the recommendation of the Joint Chiefs of  
Staff,” a senior defense official said Wednesday, an assertion that stunned  
female veteran activists who said they assumed that the brass was still 
uneasy  about opening the most physically arduous positions to women. The Army 
and the  Marines, which make up the bulk of the military’s ground combat 
force, will  present plans to open most jobs to women by May 15. 
The Army, by far the largest fighting force, currently excludes women from  
nearly 25 percent of active-duty roles. A senior defense official said the  
Pentagon expects to open “many positions” to women this year; senior 
commanders  will have until January 2016 to ask for exceptions. 
“The onus is going to be on them to justify why a woman can’t serve in a  
particular role,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity 
to  discuss the plan before the official announcement. 
The decision comes after a decade of counterinsurgency missions in Iraq and 
 Afghanistan, where women demonstrated heroism on battlefields with no 
front  lines. It dovetails with another seismic policy change in the military 
that has  been implemented relatively smoothly: the repeal of _the ban on 
openly gay service members_ 
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/22/AR2010122201888.html?hpid=topnews)
 . 
Lawmakers and female veterans applauded Wednesday’s news, saying the ban on 
 women in combat roles is obsolete. 
“This is monumental,” said Anu Bhagwati, a former Marine captain and  
executive director of the Service Women’s Action Network, which has advocated  
for the full inclusion of women. “Every time equality is recognized and  
meritocracy is enforced, it helps everyone, and it will help professionalize 
the 
 force.” 
Critics of opening combat positions to women have argued for years that  
integration during deployments could create a distracting, sexually charged  
atmosphere in the force and that women are unable to perform some of the more 
 physically demanding jobs. 
Advocates and experts say women are unlikely to flock to those positions,  
such as roles in light infantry and tank units and Special Forces — although 
 some may. More substantively, they say, lifting the ban will go a long way 
 toward changing the culture of a male-dominated institution in which women 
have  long complained about discrimination and _a high incidence of sexual 
assault_ 
(http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-12-21/world/36017489_1_sexual-assault-military-academies-defense-department-report)
 . 
Changes long sought  
Lawmakers and advocates have long pressed the Pentagon to create a more  
inclusive force, yielding incremental changes. The American Civil Liberties  
Union recently sued the Pentagon over its policy, calling it discriminatory. 
Last year, military officials opened numerous job categories to women after 
a  study concluded that the Defense Department was ready for greater 
inclusion in  combat units. That made it easier for women to be assigned, for 
example, to  combat brigades as radio operators. It also gave commanders a 
sense 
of how a  broader integration process could work, said an Army general who 
played a key  role in last year’s effort to open new positions for women. 
“The average professional will say, ‘I’ve served with women at all levels, 
 and based on my experience, women have done a phenomenal job,’ ” said the 
 officer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the change had 
not been  formally announced. 
The debate over the supposed pitfalls of women and men sharing close 
quarters  has been rendered moot by the recent wars, he said, adding: “If you 
were 
having  this debate in peacetime, it might be more emotional.” 
The fact that women have excelled in de facto front-line roles in Iraq and  
Afghanistan has proved such concerns unwarranted, Sen. Carl Levin 
(D-Mich.), the  head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in an 
interview 
Wednesday  afternoon. 
“The reality is that so many women have been, in effect, in combat or  
quasi-combat,” he said. “This is catching up with reality.” 
In a statement, Sen. James M. Inhofe (Okla.), the leading Republican on the 
 Armed Services Committee, voiced a measure of concern, saying last year’s 
study  raised “serious practical barriers” that, if ignored, could 
jeopardize the  “safety and privacy” of service members. 
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), another member of the panel, said he supports 
the  decision, but he alluded to some of the thorny implementation issues 
that have  yet to be addressed. 
“It is critical that we maintain the same high standards that have made the 
 American military the most feared and admired fighting force in the world —
  particularly the rigorous physical standards for our elite special forces 
 units,” he said. 
The senior defense official said the Pentagon expects to have 
gender-neutral  standards for combat jobs. 
‘The time has come’  
Overall, women make up about 14 percent of the active-duty military.  
According to the Defense Department, 152 female troops have been killed in the  
Iraq and Afghan wars. 
The Pentagon announced last February that it would _open about 14,000 
combat-related positions _ 
(http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-02-09/national/35442716_1_ground-combat-units-combat-roles-female-troops)
 to female  
troops. But an estimated 238,000 other jobs — about one-fifth of the regular  
active-duty military — were kept off limits to women. Virtually all of those  
jobs were in the Army and Marine Corps. 
Panetta, who is expected to step down soon, has long favored a more 
inclusive  military, and after last year’s review, the senior defense official 
said, the  Joint Chiefs and service chiefs began seeing eye to eye on the 
issue. 
In a _Jan. 9 letter_ 
(http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/national/letter-from-joint-chief-of-staff-chairman-regarding-lifting-the-ban-of-women-f
rom-combat-roles/263/)  to Panetta, Gen. Martin Dempsey, the  chairman of 
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote that the chiefs “unanimously”  supported 
his goal of integrating women into “occupational fields to the maximum  extent 
possible.” 
“The time has come to rescind the direct combat exclusion rule for women 
and  to eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers to service,” he wrote. 
“It is a paradigm shift for the military,” the senior defense official 
said,  “one that everyone is ready to make.” 
Julie Tate contributed to this report.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org



Reply via email to