The ‘What-If-They’re- Killed’ Argument : No women in combat does not mean no women in danger

Suddenly, Americans’ knowledge of Middle East geography has grown by leaps and bounds. Suddenly, U.S. viewers can see war on television, live, from 7,000 miles away. Suddenly, everyone knows what a Scud is.

But of all the new realities brought to the forefront of the American consciousness by the Persian Gulf War, probably none has been more startling than this: seeing a U.S. soldier in fatigues and helmet and then realizing that the soldier is a woman.

Of course, it shouldn’t surprise anyone to see a woman in a theater of war. But it still does. Women have participated in every American military campaign since the Revolutionary War. But since the 1970s, with the coming of the all-volunteer forces, women have taken on more and more military jobs formerly restricted to men.

The increasing numbers of women and African-Americans in the armed forces, are, in effect, making up for the middle- and upper-class men who are no longer being drafted.

Women, who 20 years ago made up only a tiny percentage of the military, now make up 11% of U.S. armed forces, and about 6%, or about 27,000, of the nearly half-million Americans serving in the Gulf.

Last year, Rep. Pat Schroeder (D-Colo.) introduced a bill that would have created a four-year trial period for Army women to take part in all military activities, including combat. The bill went nowhere, but the Gulf War--in effect--may turn out to be the trial run she wanted.

In this war, women drive trucks and fix them, fly planes and helicopters, operate communications equipment, develop and provide intelligence, handle cargo, refuel and repair.

In other words, they do everything except serve in combat. And as the line between “support” and “combat” blurs, the illusion of a “safe haven” for women fades, too.

As the case of Army Spec. Melissa Rathbun-Nealy, who is missing in action, so sharply points out, no women in combat does not mean no women in danger. Also, Scud missiles, as several have noted, are equal opportunity killers. And so, this war may bring to a head the debate about the role of women in the military. It will likely harden the position of those who say that the Gulf War proves once and for all that all jobs should be open to women, and that career military women ought not be “protected” by false “no combat” rules that, in fact, only keep them from getting key promotions.

Nevertheless, the war may also render such arguments emotionally irrelevant as women are captured as POWs, or are killed.

Yet, the “what-if-they-are-killed” argument was made when women were trying to break into the ranks of local police and fire departments. Women have been killed and injured, with no more, or less, public sadness than expressed for male cops and firefighters.

What this war will do, for certain, is crystallize awareness about the already major role of women in the U.S. military--a role that is much bigger and more critical than most Americans ever realized. It’s been that way for a long time. The only difference is that now Americans know it.

WOMEN IN THE MILITARY

Women make up 11% of the U.S. military servies. Here is a breakdown as of June 30, 1990: Army: 11.4 Navy: 10 Marines: 4.9 Air Force: 13.7 Source: U.S. Congressional Information Service