Women in Combat?
by Elaine Donnelly

Thanks to the principled leadership of California Republican Duncan Hunter, Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC), members of that committee actually debated the issue of women in combat for the first time in more than a decade.

In a series of roll call and voice votes, a majority of members voted against women in land combat. These votes, which were secured with the support of Military Personnel Subcommittee Chairman John McHugh (R-NY), were unprecedented in history, and more than anyone expected. Please click on the headline below to read more about this story than you will find in most newspaper articles: HUNTER ADMONISHES ARMY ON WOMEN IN LAND COMBAT

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who would never tolerate dissent from service secretaries on proposed base closures, could have resolved the problem with the Army long ago. Instead, Rumsfeld's studied non-involvement conveyed the impression that issues involving women as somehow less important than other matters of national defense. Absent proper attention and leadership on his part, subordinates ¾ ranging from junior officers to the Army Chief of Staff ¾ have been violating or making up rules on their own. Precedents being set by default will affect all land combat units, and eventually the Marine Corps.

Just before the Hunter/McHugh legislation was scheduled for a vote in the full House, Secretary Rumsfeld met with Chairman Hunter and House Rules Committee members. Shortly thereafter Hunter withdrew the Committee-passed amendment and offered a substitute version that would not write DoD regulations into law, but would double the congressional notification period and require a formal report from DoD to the Congress by March 2006. That version passed the House on May 25, and will be taken up in a conference committee.

 With or without a new law, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has the responsibility to bring the Army back into line with current policy and law. Two choices are available for doing this:a) Issue a belated directive that restores the Army to genuine compliance with current DoD regulations or b) Officially notify Congress that the Army has effectively repealed the DoD collocation rule without the legally required notice to Congress.

Continuation of the status quo is not an acceptable option. It is unfair and demoralizing to expect field commanders to figure out what the policy is, or to continue making improper assignments of women to land combat-collocated forward support companies, in violation of current policy and law. CMR appreciates the statements of members of Congress who repeatedly reminded Army leaders that if they want to make changes in Defense Department regulations, they must follow the law and secure approval of proposed changes well in advance.

We are concerned about unauthorized policies that are forcing female soldiers into or near land combat units, and hurting morale among soldiers who are starting to question the judgment of their leaders. We are also concerned about recruiting. Once potential recruits and their parents learn that female soldiers will be forced into land combat situations, recruiting will decline even more among men and women alike.

CMR has worked very hard -- against tremendous odds -- and we have succeeded in finally gaining the attention of Congress, and making new friends in the past several weeks. We are encouraged that after more than a decade of neglect, Congress is now engaged in a debate that has just begun.

Some advocates are determined to eliminate all of women's exemptions from land combat, regardless of the military consequences and the predicted effect on women's exemption from Selective Service obligations. They will succeed in doing this if CMR is not ready and prepared to counter that challenge. Hearings will be scheduled soon, and we need your help to be prepared for them.

With your help, CMR will remain engaged in this critical, ongoing debate.

Elaine Donnelly, President, Center For Military Readiness

Email the Editor