New Policies Reflect Realities of Modern Warfare, Officials Say

WASHINGTON, Feb. 9, 2012 — Defense Depart­ment pol­i­cy changes announced today reflect both women’s increased roles in and out of com­bat and the fact that war is no longer lin­ear, senior offi­cials said.

The depart­ment noti­fied Con­gress today it will abol­ish the restric­tion on assign­ing women to loca­tions where ground com­bat troops oper­ate, and selec­tive­ly lift the pol­i­cy bar­ring women from assign­ments to ground com­bat units below the brigade lev­el.

Those changes will result in more than 14,000 new jobs or assign­ment oppor­tu­ni­ties for mil­i­tary women.

Defense Sec­re­tary Leon E. Panet­ta “is mak­ing these changes because he rec­og­nizes that over the last decade of war, women have con­tributed in unprece­dent­ed ways to the military’s mis­sion,” George Lit­tle, Pen­ta­gon press sec­re­tary, told reporters dur­ing a brief­ing here today.

Women ser­vice mem­bers have put their lives on the line and demon­strat­ed courage, patri­o­tism and skill in defend­ing the nation, Lit­tle said.

“But even as we make this announce­ment, I would like to stress that Sec­re­tary Panet­ta knows this is the begin­ning, not the end, of a process,” he added.

The ser­vices will con­tin­ue to review posi­tions and require­ments to deter­mine what addi­tion­al posi­tions may be opened to women, the press sec­re­tary added.

“Our goal is to ensure that the mis­sion is met with the best qual­i­fied and most capa­ble peo­ple, regard­less of gen­der,” he said.

Lit­tle not­ed while prepar­ing the report took longer than expect­ed, Panet­ta and the ser­vice lead­ers “want­ed this done right, not done quick­ly.”

The delay allowed the review­ers to gath­er addi­tion­al views on the issues, and result­ed in more posi­tions open to women than would have been the case with an ear­li­er report, he added.

The report fol­lows a depart­men­twide review of poli­cies affect­ing women’s job assign­ments in the mil­i­tary.

Two peo­ple who led the review — Vir­ginia “Vee” Pen­rod, deputy assis­tant sec­re­tary for mil­i­tary per­son­nel pol­i­cy, and Army Maj. Gen. Gary Pat­ton, prin­ci­pal direc­tor for mil­i­tary per­son­nel pol­i­cy — dis­cussed the new poli­cies at today’s brief­ing.

“Open­ing these posi­tions imple­ments lessons from over a decade at war, where women were proven excep­tion­al­ly capa­ble and indis­pen­si­ble to mis­sion accom­plish­ment,” Pen­rod said.

She said the review offered an oppor­tu­ni­ty to exam­ine all gen­der-restric­tive laws, poli­cies and reg­u­la­tions “with all ser­vices’ senior lead­ers at the table.”

The review pan­el worked to iden­ti­fy “changes … need­ed to ensure female mem­bers have an equi­table oppor­tu­ni­ty to com­pete and excel in the U.S. armed forces,” she said.

The report, Pen­rod said, “reflects the sec­re­tary of defense’s vision of remov­ing bar­ri­ers that pre­vent ser­vice mem­bers from ris­ing to the high­est lev­el of poten­tial and respon­si­bil­i­ty that their tal­ents and capa­bil­i­ties war­rant.”

The pol­i­cy lim­it­ing women’s mil­i­tary assign­ments dates to 1994 and lists four fac­tors that ban women from assign­ments or jobs: pro­hib­i­tive costs for berthing and pri­va­cy; the require­ment to locate and remain with direct ground com­bat units; units engaged in long range recon­nais­sance and spe­cial oper­a­tions forces mis­sions; and job-relat­ed phys­i­cal require­ments that “exclude the vast major­i­ty of women ser­vice mem­bers.”

Depart­ment lead­ers agreed the pro­vi­sion against locat­ing with com­bat units no longer applies, Pen­rod not­ed.

Before 2001, war typ­i­cal­ly involved front-lines com­bat and pro­tect­ed “rear” areas where sup­port func­tions like main­te­nance and med­ical care took place, she said.

“The bat­tle­space we have expe­ri­enced in Iraq and Afghanistan is quite dif­fer­ent,” Pen­rod added.

High­ly mobile ene­mies now trav­el among the civil­ian pop­u­la­tion, while coun­terin­sur­gency and sta­bil­i­ty mis­sions to com­bat such ene­mies require U.S. forces to dis­perse across the coun­try in large and small bases, she said.

“There is no rear area that exists in this bat­tle­space. Forces of all types and mis­sions are required to be in close prox­im­i­ty and flow between loca­tions,” she said.

Pen­rod said lift­ing the loca­tion-based pro­hi­bi­tion opens 13,139 new Army jobs to women, because the Army is the only ser­vice that iden­ti­fied posi­tions that had been closed sole­ly because of where they took place.

The change will expand career oppor­tu­ni­ties for women and give com­bat­ant com­man­ders more options in deploy­ing forces, she said.

The report not­ed Army offi­cer career fields with the great­est num­ber of restrict­ed posi­tions include logis­tics, sig­nal, intel­li­gence and spe­cial oper­a­tions. Enlist­ed occu­pa­tions with the largest num­ber of restric­tions include radio oper­a­tor, sig­nal sup­port sys­tems spe­cial­ist, radar repair­er, elec­tron­ic war­fare spe­cial­ist and con­struc­tion equip­ment repair­er.

The sec­ond change is not a new pol­i­cy but may lead to one, Pen­rod said. DOD has grant­ed the Army, Navy and Marines a pol­i­cy excep­tion to selec­tive­ly assign women to bat­tal­ion-lev­el com­bat units.

The ser­vices will gain expe­ri­ence through those assign­ments that will help depart­ment lead­ers assess the cur­rent prohibition’s rel­e­vance and “inform poten­tial future pol­i­cy changes,” Pen­rod said.

The report also takes aim at the pro­vi­sion exclud­ing women from jobs because of phys­i­cal require­ments, she not­ed.

The ser­vices are work­ing to devel­op gen­der-neu­tral phys­i­cal stan­dards based on the tasks troops per­form on the job, Pen­rod said.

“This is an area of empha­sis for us as we move for­ward beyond the ini­tial steps report­ed as part of this review,” she added.

Accord­ing to the report, DOD will eval­u­ate gen­der-restrict­ed, phys­i­cal­ly demand­ing jobs once gen­der-neu­tral phys­i­cal stan­dards are devel­oped.

Pen­rod said when she began her 35 years in the Air Force, women were 2 per­cent of the force, and were restrict­ed from some assign­ments based on the tem­per­a­ture – Minot, South Dako­ta, was “too cold.”

Over the past 10 years, she said, women have had the oppor­tu­ni­ty to prove them­selves in new ways while train­ing and equip­ment have improved. Ser­vice lead­ers are now active­ly seek­ing ways to expand oppor­tu­ni­ties for women, she added.

“This is very excit­ing to me … [that] com­man­ders were com­ing to us and say­ing ‘we need to change these poli­cies,’ ” she said.

Pat­ton said based on his career as an infantry offi­cer and through the lens of 45 months of com­bat over the past sev­er­al years, the changes announced today are the right thing to do.

“The way I look at it, as a for­mer infantry bat­tal­ion com­man­der, I wish I’d had the oppor­tu­ni­ty to bring women into my bat­tal­ion,” he said. “It expands the tal­ent pool.”

Pat­ton said the oppor­tu­ni­ties announced today are a first step toward the ques­tion of com­bat arms and spe­cial oper­a­tions jobs ulti­mate­ly open­ing to women.

As Panet­ta told the ser­vice chiefs, he said, “This is the begin­ning, not the end.”

Pol­i­cy changes will take effect lat­er this spring after 30 days of con­tin­u­ous ses­sion of Con­gress, as the law requires, Pen­rod said.

Source:
U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs)

Team GlobDef

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist GlobalDefence.net im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. GlobalDefenc.net war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →