| OCR Text |
Show i 1 NEWS memi mm mm .July 26, 1991 12) lo) S1 If O wOOfiS American Fofces Information Service If Congress opens combat jobs to women, the military would gain flexibility, but much of the rationale for excluding women from the draft might disappear, the personnel chief of the Department of Defense surmised. The House of Representatives recently voted to lift the law excluding women from most combat aircraft, and the Senate is also looking at lifting restrictions. The House bill leaves DOD officials to decide ultimately on women's roles in the military and leaves in place the ban on women serving on combat vessels, except for female officer pilots and crews of carrier-base- d aircraft. Christopher Jehn, assistant secretary of defense for force management Gihcr countries If Congress repeals n combat-exclusio- its own. That, I hostile fire. That's not it at all. What they do is bar women from assignment to offensive combat units," he continued. "Women could still be in units that are very close to the front line-u- nits that may well be taken under fire and that may have to defend them- selves. Whether you consider that protection or a bar to opportunity and progress depends pretty much on where you stand on the whole issue. Jehn said if Congress repeals the laws, DOD will have more flexibility and will have to review its policies to determine what needs to change. "I think the precedents are there for us to bar women from some assignments if we think that's advisable, based on national defense considera- - Lessons-learne- d can't predict." report Jehn said military officials would have to look at rules on pregnancy, parental deployment, and single-paren- t and family-car- e policies to see if changes are needed to accommodate women in combat. He said DOD is working on a lessons-learne- d report on how those policies worked during the gulf war and is checking out the anecdotes about who was deployable and wasn't." "I don't envision any significant who changes in those policies right now," he remarked. "Women who are not assigned to combat units are today required to be ready to deploy on a moment's notice. That wouldn't change. And so far, all the anecdotal allegations turn out not to be true. For example, news stories were saying the No law prohibits women serving combat missions by Evelyn D. Harris American Forces Information Service No law prohibits a woman from serving in combat. What laws there are prevent women from serving only on ships and aircraft in combat missions. Congress passed these laws in 1948, when women's military auxiliaries became part of the permanent defense structure, and they apply only to the Navy and Air Force. Congress, however, didn't define "combat mission," and it didn't bar the services from developing policies, which they all did. The Army wasn't included in the laws because it was too difficult to define "combat" as the term applies to the Army's mission, according to retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Jeanne Holm, who wrote a history of women in the military. However, Holm said Congress expected the secretary of the Army to mind the spirit of combat exclusion laws in making policy. Air Force Maj. Doug Hart, a Department of Defense spokesman, said the secretary of the n 101st Airborne Division had a lot of pregnancies." Actually, out of hundreds of women assigned to the unit, only about a dozen were returned stateside due to pregnancy. The New York Times reported on a similar Navy study that found the pregnancy rate of female sailors in the gulf area was no higher than the peacetime rate or that of civilian women the same age.) An interim report about how women performed during the gulf conflict, problems with male and female single-paredeployability, pregnancy and related issues was scheduled to be The figiven to Congress in mid-Julnal report is due in January 1992. According to some critics, combat exclusions deny women equal career nt y. opportunities in the military particularly officers. Their complaints raise questions in other factions about how ending exclusions would affect the careers of women who don't want combat assignments. Jehn doesn't see any particular problem. "Men and women who are not in combat tracks such as supply do very well, but at the very highest level, positions are closed to them," he said. "A supply officer, man or woman, is never going to be chief of naval operations." Jehn said legitimate physical standards should never be lowered so women can qualify for combat assign Army's policy is that women will be restricted only n from those skills and positions that by doctrine, or battlefield location invite "the highest probability of direct combat action." Such direct combat action would include "womd en down there in the trenches ...fighting with the enemy forces," as former Operation Desert Storm commander Army Gen. Norman Schwartzkopf said in recent testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Although Schwartzkopf does not want women fighting he favors allowing them to fly combat mis-sio- hand-to-han- laws, DOD would need a thorough study of the readiness and defense implications and costs of opening combat positions to women, said Jehn. While DOD would also look at the experiences of other countries, he considered this aspect "basically und charted territory," because precedents such as Israel are im- d, perfect. "Israel hasn't used women in combat since its war for independence," he said. "Women are subject to the draft, but about half of them never get draft- ed because there are exclusions for marriage, pregnancy and things of that sort." Israeli women in the Chen, the women's branch of the military, are evacuated from combat areas, according to a DOD report. According to an Israeli quoted in the report, Chen translates to "grace or loveliness." "There may not be usable lessons available from the experiences of other countries and civilian employers," Jehn said. "We're dealing with a lot of unknowns. We'll have to proceed carefully to make certain we do the right thing, and that's to see women have as much opportunity as possible, without affecting military capability and readiness in a negative way. "The rules ought to apply to everybody, so making sure they do without unfairly discriminating against anyone is part of the challenge," he said. "Whatever changes are made will come after careful study, because we want to do it right. Even if Congress changes the law tomorrow doesn't mean you'll see women fighter pilots the next day. It'll take even longer to see a woman command a flying squadron, because it takes years of experience to reach that level." elusion that bars women from flying carrier-basecombat aircraft. The legislation leaves DOD and service officials to decide if they want to allow women in combat positions. Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney said he'd like to see Congress repeal the exclusion laws so DOD will have the flexibility to choose which positions are opened to women. In Senate confirmation hearings as Army chief of staff nominee, Gen. Gordon Sullivan said he didn't believe in allowing women to fly combat missions. Gen. Carl Munday Jr., Marine Corps commandant, said he'd go along with the secretary of the Navy's decision on whether female Marines could fly combat missions. Adm. Frank Kelso, chief of naval operations, said he prefers the status quo but could live with a change in combat exclusions. DOD adopted a "risk rule" in 1988, when it opened many positions to women, said Hart. The rule states, units can be closed to women on grounds of risks of exposure to direct combat, hostile fire or capture provided that the type, degree and duration of such risks are equal to or greater than experienced by combat units in the same theater of operations. Thirteen U.S. military women were killed during Operation Desert Storm 11 during the ground war and two shortly after the cease-fir"The risk rule cannot protect women from harm. That's not possible in combat today," Hart noted. "At least two women were killed by mines. A mine doesn't know the gender or job classification of the d aircraft. The exclusion law applying to the Navy and Marine Corps is in Title 10 of the U.S. Code, Section 6015. It states in part, "Women may not be assigned to duty on vessels or in aircraft that are engaged in combat missions, nor may they be assigned to other than temporary duty on vessels of the Navy except hospital ships, transports and vessels not expected to be assigned to combat missions." Marine Corps policy is women will be assigned neither to units that would likely engage in direct combat nor to positions designated by the Navy secretary as reMarine." quiring a "combat-traineThe Air Force combat exclusions are in Title 10, Section 8549. The law says women, except those in medical, dental, nursing, legal and chaplain fields, "may not be assigned to duty in aircraft engaged in combat missions." The resolution "recentfy passed by the House would repeal the Air Force exclusion completely and repeal the part of the Navy" arid Marine CorpS"xr pcrsurrwhostepSI)n"rt.,,, "Non-comb- d combat-exclusio- n oft-cite- hand-to-han- combat-exclusio- i effect that will have on women's career chances," he said. "That will be a big element in our review and a big challenge as we implement changes to our policies." and personnel, said glowing reviews of women's performance in the Persian Gulf conflict have focused attention on tions," he said. "What's at issue is laws and poli- whether Congress would uphold the the combat-exclusiocies. The public, however, generally laws if that's the way we went. n laws provide "The doesn't understand those laws, he said. part of the rationale for excluding combat-exclusiowomen from the draft. If they're n "The net result of the laws is that women cannot repealed, then I think the case for exbe assigned to direct combat units," cluding women from the draft is consaid Jehn. "That means offensive siderably weakened," Jehn continued. units that seek out and destroy enemy "There is a question whether Congress units, installations, personnel and so would change the law to require women to register for the draft, and it's on. another whether the courts would Lows protect woman force Congress to do so if it didn't on "There's a sense, or at least there was until Panama, that the laws protected women from any exposure to (UJIq) ments. On the other hand, he noted, it's entirely possible DOD's comprehensive review may show the standards are artificial. "Some standards may increase, some may decrease. I don't know what by Evelyn 0. Harris don't H.lhcp T.mes at e. --- --- |
