Of feminism and foxholes

Military, civilian leaders reconsider the role of women in combat

By Andy Walton
CNN Interactive

(CNN) -- The Persian Gulf War, among its other firsts and superlatives, was the largest-ever deployment of women in uniform. Women made up 7 percent of the total force, with some 35,000 in the area. Since Desert Storm, women's roles in the armed forces have continued to expand, a process that's a boon to some and a threat to others.

Women have been part of warfare for as long as anyone has recorded warfare. Joan of Arc was the most celebrated woman who dressed as a man to go to war, but hundreds of women did the same in the American Revolution and the U.S. Civil War. Officially, women worked as nurses and rolled bandages.

That remained more or less the case until the 1970s, when women's roles expanded rapidly. Some 7,500 women served in Vietnam, most of them nurses, and eight have their names on the Vietnam Veterans Memorial wall in Washington, D.C. In 1970, Anna Mae Hayes of the nurse corps and Women's Army Corps (WAC) director Elizabeth P. Hoisington became the first female generals. In 1972, 119 women joined the Reserve Officer Training Corps, and in the most jarring move to some of the military's old guard, women entered the U.S. Military Academy at West Point in 1976. In 1978, the WAC was abolished, and women became full-fledged members of the U.S. Army, assigned to non-combat roles.

Also in 1978, Congress devised a concise definition of combat: "to engage an enemy with individual or crew-served weapons while being exposed to direct enemy fire, a high probability of direct physical contact with enemy personnel and substantial risk of capture." The Army, in a 1982 policy review, set out to rank military occupational specialties (MOS) by risk to determine which occupations and which military units should exclude women.

Women remained in the rear echelons until Operation Just Cause, the 1989 U.S. invasion of Panama. Two women recieved the Distinguished Flying Cross for flying helicopters -- designated as troop transports, not combat aircraft -- into a combat zone. Captain Linda Bray, by some accounts, became the first woman to lead U.S. troops into combat when her military police unit, not designated a combat unit, came under sniper fire (though there is some confusion over what actually happened). Critics of a wider military role for women claim that two female truck drivers refused to ferry troops to the front, though the official Army version of events disputes the claim and calls the women's performance "exemplary."

Desert Storm and expanding roles

If the Panama invasion re-opened the debate on women in combat, Desert Storm brought it to center stage. Thirty-five thousand women went to Southwest Asia, in roles from rear echelon support to air traffic control to reconnaissance pilots. According to a 1992 House report, 15 women were killed, five by enemy fire; two women were captured, and one of them was sexually assaulted. Television images of young mothers leaving their children behind alarmed some viewers. But coverage of the war also brought images of high-tech warfare, waged from long distances by remote control.

In spring 1991, in the wake of Desert Storm, Colorado Rep. Pat Schroeder introduced a bill to repeal the prohibition against women flying combat missions. While that bill was pending, sexual misbehavior at the annual Tailhook gathering of naval aviators developed into a scandal. The bill passed, allowing women to fly combat missions, and the navy soon began allowing women on combatant ships.

"Tailhook was a crucial part of that because of the intimidation factor," says Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Preparedness. "The services dropped their opposition. Congress decided, 'Well, who am I to disagree with the admirals who say that it's okay?' and that's when everything went ahead with very little congressional oversight or review."

In another controversial move, "co-ed" basic training began in 1994. Opponents argue that in basic training and throughout the military, female recruits are held to lower physical standards than men -- or that standards for both have been weakened to allow women to pass.

"Standards have been adjusted and changed," Donnelly says. "It has ... led to some officers being less than candid about what is going on. Anyone who is aware of that -- and virtually everyone is aware that standards have been changed -- when they see their leaders saying nothing has changed, it hurts morale."

"The services are always looking at physical fitness standards. The standards between men and women are different," says Lt. Col. Susan Kolb, spokesperson for the Defense Advisory Committee On Women In The Services (DACOWITS). "They've changed over the years, too. It's a matter of asking whether you're testing for physical fitness or strength. Physical fitness is what is required most to achieve the mission requirements that we're asking people to do today."

Sex and the single soldier

Tailhook was by no means the end of the military sex scandals.

• 1996: Twelve soldiers at Maryland's Aberdeen Proving Ground were accused of abusing female recruits; Staff Sgt. Delmar Simpson, a drill instructor, was convicted of six counts of rape.
• 1997: Lt. Kelly Flinn, the first woman to pilot a B-52 bomber, was discharged from the Air Force after having an affair with a married civilian and continuing the affair after being ordered to end it.
• 1997: Gene McKinney, the most senior enlisted man in the Army, was court-martialed for sexual harassment and obstruction of justice. Acquitted of the harassment charges but convicted of obstruction, he was dropped in rank and reprimanded.
• 1999: Command Sgt. Major Riley Miller, the Army's most senior enlisted man in Europe, was accused of sexually assaulting a female subordinate.
• 2000: Maj. Gen. Larry G. Smith was accused of sexual harassment by the highest-ranking woman in Army history, Lt. Gen. Claudia Kennedy. Smith was being considered to head the inspector-general's office; in that post, he would have been responsible for investigating harassment claims.

To some critics, putting men and women in co-ed units makes trouble inevitable. "The sexual issues that have happened are due to the fact that people are human," Donnelly says. "This is not the fault of women alone. You have to account for the fact that people are human, and to encourage discipline rather than indiscipline."

Aside from sexual harassment and abuse, what happens when young men and young women share close quarters surprises few adults: Sexual relationships occur. In the civilian world, that's not a problem. But in combat, "Everyone must have absolute trust in everyone else," Donnelly says. "When you have relationships that set people apart rather than relationships that bind them all together, unit cohesion does indeed suffer."

"It happens in civilian society today, too. Members of both genders are working together," Kolb says. "I don't think that the military provides that much difference; it's another arm of American society." And while the demands of military life are different, Kolb says the military's regulations are up to the challenge. "Things do occur, and they're dealt with in a military environment by ... very strict guidelines.

DACOWITS was established in 1951, during the Korean War, to encourage women to enlist. Since then, it has been in the forefront of encouraging wider roles for women in the military -- and on the front lines of controversy. Donnelly says the commission, made up of civilians, amounts to "a feminist lobby" and should be abolished.

"I don't know why she would say that," Kolb says. "We only review the issues that are brought by service members. If there's a trend ... then we want to look at the rationale as to why things are closed."

Among DACOWITS' more controversial moves is the recent recommendation that women be allowed to serve on submarines, which offer some of the most cramped quarters and the least privacy of any military assignment, and in the three-person Multiple Launch Rocket Systems, a battlefield system with a three-person crew.

Whether these recommendations will be implemented, and whether recent expansions of women's roles will be rolled back, will depend on the new Bush administration. Where women fit in -- indeed, the entire shape of the 21st century military -- is very much an open question.