News



In this June 30, 2006 file photo shows U.S. Air Force Reservist Maj. Margaret Witt after a hearing of a case challenging her dismissal from the Air Force for being a lesbian in U.S. District Court in Tacoma, Wash. A pressing legal reality for the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ standard for gays serving in the military is that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has already struck down the way it’s practiced in much of the Western United States. The 2008 ruling, while largely overlooked, would force the military to apply a much higher threshold in determining whether a service member should be dismissed for being gay. (AP Photo/John Froschauer, File)

In Afghan War, Letting Women Reach Women
By ELISABETH BUMILLER
Published: March 6, 2010

CAMP PENDLETON, Calif. — The Marines in a recent “cultural awareness” class scribbled careful notes as the instructor coached them on do’s and don’ts when talking to villagers in Afghanistan: Don’t start by firing off questions, do break the ice by playing with the children, don’t let your interpreter hijack the conversation.


Monica Almeida/The New York Times
Female Marines at Camp Pendleton, Calif., will be sent to Helmand Province next month to try to win over rural Afghan women.

Monica Almeida/The New York Times
About 40 women will be split into units that will accompany men on patrols to meet with the Afghan women in their homes.

Monica Almeida/The New York Times
Cpl. Michele Greco-Lucchina, center, led a group during a “cultural awareness” exercise last month at Camp Pendleton, Calif.

And one more thing: “If you have a pony tail,” said Marina Kielpinski, the instructor, “let it go out the back of your helmet so people can see you’re a woman.”

These are not your mother’s Marines here in the rugged California chaparral of Camp Pendleton, where 40 young women are preparing to deploy to Afghanistan in one of the more forward-leaning experiments of the American military.

Next month they will begin work as members of the first full-time “female engagement teams,” the military’s name for four- and five-member units that will accompany men on patrols in Helmand Province to try to win over the rural Afghan women who are culturally off limits to outside men. The teams, which are to meet with the Afghan women in their homes, assess their need for aid and gather intelligence, are part of Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal’s campaign for Afghan hearts and minds. His officers say that you cannot gain the trust of the Afghan population if you only talk to half of it.

“We know we can make a difference,” said Capt. Emily Naslund, 26, the team’s executive officer and second in command. Like the other 39 women, Captain Naslund volunteered for the program and radiates exuberance, but she is not naïve about the frustrations and dangers ahead. Half of the women have been deployed before, most to Iraq.

“We all know that what you expect is not usually what it’s going to end up being,” said Sgt. Melissa Hernandez, 35, who signed on because she wanted something different than her office job at Camp Victory, the American military headquarters in Baghdad.

As envisioned, the teams will work like American politicians who campaign door to door and learn what voters care about. A team is to arrive in a village, get permission from the male elder to speak with the women, settle into a compound, hand out school supplies and medicine, drink tea, make conversation and, ideally, get information about the village, local grievances and the Taliban.

Whatever the outcome, the teams reflect how much the military has adapted over nine years of war, not only in the way it fights but to the shifting gender roles within its ranks. Women make up only 6 percent of the Marine Corps, which cultivates an image as the most testosterone-fueled service, and they are still officially barred from combat branches like the infantry.

But in a bureaucratic sleight of hand, used by both the Army and Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan when women have been needed for critical jobs like bomb disposal or intelligence, the female engagement teams are to be “attached” to all-male infantry units within the First Marine Expeditionary Force — a source of pride and excitement for them.

“When I heard about this, I said, Oh, that’s it, let’s go,” said Cpl. Vanessa Jones, 25.

The idea for the teams grew out of the “Lioness” program in Iraq, which used female Marines to search Iraqi women at checkpoints. Over the past year in Afghanistan, the Army and Marines have assembled ad hoc female engagement teams, but the women were hastily pulled from work as cooks or engineers.

The women at Pendleton are among the first to be trained exclusively for the mission. “Every Marine wants to go outside the wire,” said Cpl. Michele Greco-Lucchina, 22, referring to assignments off the base. “We all join for different reasons, but that’s the basis for being a Marine.”

The women said they were not looking for combat and would work in areas largely cleared of militants. But in a war with no front lines, and to be prepared for ambushes and snipers, they have taken an extended combat-training refresher course.

On patrols, the women will carry M-4 rifles, which are shorter and more maneuverable than the military’s standard M-16s, but once inside an Afghan compound, and with Marine guards posted outside, they have been instructed, assuming they feel safe, to remove their rifles and take off their intimidating “battle rattle” of helmets and body armor.

They have also been told to be sensitive to local custom and to wear head scarves under their helmets or, if that is too hot and unwieldy, to keep the scarves around their necks and use them to cover their heads once their helmets are off inside.

Marines who have worked with the ad hoc teams in Afghanistan said that rural Afghan women, rarely seen by outsiders, had more influence in their villages than male commanders might think, and that the Afghan women’s good will could make Afghans, both men and women, less suspicious of American troops.

Capt. Matt Pottinger, an intelligence officer based in the capital, Kabul, who helped create and train the first engagement team in Afghanistan, recently wrote that when one of the teams visited a village in southern Afghanistan, a gray-bearded man opened his home to the women by saying, “Your men come to fight, but we know the women are here to help.”

The man also sheepishly admitted, Captain Pottinger wrote in Small Wars Journal, an online publication, that the women were “good for my old eyes.”

Rural Afghan women, who meet at wells and pass news about the village, are often repositories of information about a district’s social fabric, power brokers and militants, all crucial data for American forces. On some occasions, Captain Pottinger said in an e-mail message, women have provided information about specific insurgents and the makers of bombs.

As part of their conversations with Afghan women, the Marines are to ask basic questions, including what is the most difficult problem facing the village. The answers will go into a database to guide the military and aid workers. As Ms. Kielpinski, the instructor, told the Marines, “If the population has told you that their biggest problem is irrigation and your unit does something about it, that’s a huge success.”

For now, the Marines remain apprehensive about the unknowns they will encounter. Capt. Claire Henry, 27, the top commander of the team, said she worried, like any officer, about her responsibilities to the women working under her. “You’re about to take Marines into harm’s way,” she said, “and at the end of the day you want to make sure you give them the right training and that they’re physically and mentally prepared for it.”

A version of this article appeared in print on March 7, 2010, on page A1

Wed Mar 3, 6:12 pm ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The US military still plays too dominant a role in American foreign policy and Washington needs to place a higher priority on diplomacy and “soft power,” the top American officer said on Wednesday.
The military is a vital tool of national power but “should never be the only tool,” Admiral Mike Mullen said in a speech at Kansas State University.
“US foreign policy is still too dominated by the military — too dependent upon the generals and admirals who lead our major overseas commands and not enough on the State Department,” Mullen said.
“It’s one thing to be able and willing to serve as emergency responders, quite another to always have to be fire chief,” said Mullen, who as chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff is the top-ranking American military officer.
Mullen backed calls by President Barack Obama to balance the military’s role with diplomacy, intelligence and other civilian efforts but said: “My fear, quite frankly, is that we aren’t moving fast enough in this regard.”
In future wars similar to counter-insurgency campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, Mullen said that any decision to deploy forces should be accompanied by a commitment to employ civilian agencies as well.
He said that “we ought to make it a pre-condition of committing our troops — that we will do so only if and when the other instruments of national power are ready to engage as well.”
Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “have called for more funding and more emphasis on our ‘soft power,’ and I could not agree with them more,” the admiral said.
If Washington relies solely on US troops to exert influence, “we should expect to see that influence diminish over time,” he said.
Citing his experience advising Obama and former president George W. Bush, Mullen laid out three “principles” that he said should govern the use of the military.
— The military should not be the last resort of the state but should be complemented by vigorous diplomacy and other civilian efforts.
— Military force should be used in “a precise and principled way” to protect innocent lives.
— Policy making cannot be separated from military strategy and debate among civilian and military leaders should be encouraged.
Referring to the war in Afghanistan, where the NATO commander has restricted the use of air power and heavy guns, Mullen said avoiding civilian casualties was crucial to the success of the mission.
“In this type of war — when the objective is not the enemy’s defeat but the people’s success — less really is more,” he said.
Mullen said recent incidents of coalition firepower claiming civilian lives “will hurt us more in the long run than any tactical success we may achieve against the enemy.”

Copyright © 2010 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.Questions or CommentsPrivacy PolicyAbout Our AdsTerms of ServiceCopyright/IP Policy

Posted 14h 58m ago

Source: U.S. Army

By Gregg Zoroya, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — The percentage of soldiers who are unavailable for combat has risen sharply during the past three years from 11% of each brigade in 2007 to 16% this year, Army records show.

Repeated deployments and health problems have driven much of the increase in soldiers listed as non-deployable, said Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the Army vice chief of staff. A brigade has about 3,500 soldiers.

“These are folks who had a knee problem after the first (combat) rotation,” he said, “and then, finally, after the third one of humping a rucksack in Afghanistan at 10,000 feet, the doc says, ‘I don’t care if you’re going to deploy again, the fact of the matter is you’re going to (stay back until you) get your knee fixed.’ “

Nearly 70% of the Army’s current roster of 460,000 enlisted soldiers have been to war — half of them once, nearly a third of them twice, 13% with three combat tours and 4% deployed four times.

REPORT: Army doctors assessing fitness sometimes in conflict
DEATH TOLL: A closer look at American lives lost in Afghanistan, Iraq
Although the Army tries to make up for the missing soldiers by adding those from other units, Army records from 2008 show the shortages hurt overall readiness.

When Army brigades deploy, scores of soldiers remain back for many reasons, Army data show.

Some are assigned jobs back home, such as running motor pools or conducting training, while others require additional training and will deploy later. Some are held back to meet the Army’s goal of allowing soldiers at least 12 months at home before deploying.

The largest group are soldiers with health problems, Army data show. They are either temporarily sidelined for issues such as rehabilitation or surgery, or are awaiting medical review to determine fitness for remaining in the Army.

Precise numbers for the Army are not available, but between 2006 and 2008, bad backs, strained knees and other ailments increased from 1.4 million cases in the overall military to 1.9 million, according to Defense Department records.

Mental health disorders increased by 67% during that time from 657,144 cases to 1.1 million, those numbers show.

Longer recuperation times between deployments should help soldiers recover, Chiarelli said. Recently, a brigade that had 28 months to rest had only 4% of its soldiers unable to deploy, he said.

At the peak of combat activity in Iraq and Afghanistan in recent years, soldiers had only about 12 months between deployments to train, spend time with their families and recuperate. That has increased to 14 to 15 months on average, with other brigades experiencing longer periods at home.

In addition, the Army is increasing its ranks from about 500,000 when the Iraq war began to about 570,000 next year.

“With the drawdown in Iraq and the growth that we’ve completed, we’re starting to see (time between deployments) stretch out and that’s only going to help us,” said Gen. George Casey, Army chief of staff.

Next Page »