Defense budget talks reignite debate over women’s military conscription

Written by Michael Washburn via The Epoch Times (emphasis added),

Provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2025 that would require women to enlist in military servicewhile providing exemption from service in front-line roles, have sparked vigorous debate among combat veterans and enlisted personnel about the wisdom of such changes and their likely impact on the armed forces.

Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) announced the introduction of the bill, S. 4638, last month. On August 1, the Senate Appropriations Committee voted unanimously, 28-0, to bring its version to a full Senate vote in the near future.The House of Representatives approved its own version of the bill on June 13.

The 607-page bill authorizes $911.8 billion in funding for the military and contains a number of provisions aimed at improving military life. These include increased monthly pay for junior enlisted personnel, housing allowances for junior enlisted personnel serving at sea, extensions of bonus programs that were set to expire and retroactive application of promotions that have been delayed in Senate confirmation.

The bill also slightly clashes with the Biden administration’s efforts, often through executive orders, to bring the military into line with diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) goals. by amending the United States Code to prohibit the use of Department of Defense money and facilities for sex reassignment surgery.

Additionally, the bill significantly expands the Biden administration’s inclusion and diversity efforts by revising Selective Service requirements to include women.

Subtitle J of the bill states: “The committee recommends a series of provisions that would require women to register for the Selective Service under the same conditions as those currently applied to men.”

Section 529B of the bill contains an exemption that, in theory, would limit the impact of the proposed change.

It states: “The committee recommends a provision that would specify that Women drafted under the Selective Service System cannot be forced to join combat missions “Schools that were closed to women prior to December 3, 2015, train or become qualified in a combat arms military occupational specialty, or join a combat arms unit.”

Despite this provision, members of the military community are deeply divided over the effect the bill would have if passed in its current form.

Compliance with standards

The impact of gender integration on fitness requirements and standards in the military has been a source of controversy for years.

Even after President Barack Obama’s Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced in December 2015 that combat positions previously reserved for men would be opened to women, the number of women applying to join the Marine Corps was low, and the number of those passing the physical fitness tests was even lower.

As of August 2017, nearly two years after Carter announced the sweeping policy change, less than 1 percent of women recruited into the Corps were seeking combat roles, and of those who did, only 25 percent met the physical requirements, according to a Marine Times report citing data from the Training and Education Command. Fully 96 percent of male Marines who took the same tests passed, the report said. Women who didn’t pass were forced to seek noncombat roles.

Given these realities and the exemption of combat roles in the new NDAA bill, Some observers do not view the change in Selective Service criteria as particularly significant.

“There are many noncombat and support roles in the U.S. military, and expanding the draft to include women does not mean putting women in the infantry or the Rangers,” Keith Naughton, principal of Silent Majority Strategies, a Germantown, Maryland-based consulting firm, told The Epoch Times.

“When conservatives slap the DEI label on everything they don’t like, it loses its effect and makes it harder to stop the growth of DEI where it matters.”

Recruitment challenges

The danger of aggression from Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, various terrorist groups and other hostile powers is pushing the Department of Defense to ensure a military large enough to protect American interests.

In fiscal year 2023, the Defense Department missed its hiring targets by as much as 41,000 people.

“The military services continue to face unprecedented recruiting challenges,” the department’s recruiting and retention report for the year ending May 2023 said.

As interest in national service wanes among the younger population, the danger of an understaffed military unable to perform its duties increases, said Scott McQuarrie, a former Army and Judge Advocate General’s Corps officer who now works as a lawyer.

“We must have a sufficiently large, adequately trained and equipped military to deter potential adversaries from drawing us into what would be a devastating conflict or“In the event of conflict, to protect and defend the homeland and our national security interests,” McQuarrie told The Epoch Times.

“If we cannot fill the ranks with volunteers and/or afford to build a volunteer force, what are the alternatives? The American people must answer this difficult question,” he said.

McQuarrie said trying to maintain military readiness while relying exclusively on the pool of young men who volunteer for service could lead to an unpleasant result: lowering standards and requirements for enlisted men.

The military followed such a path during the Vietnam War under Defense Secretary Robert McNamara under a program known as Project 100,000. McQuarrie described Project 100,000 as nothing short of a disaster for the military and the country.

He suggested that enlisting a small number of women to serve in non-combat roles could be a way to address personnel shortages and maintain the highest standards for men taking on frontline combat roles.

“I believe the current political climate is ripe for addressing these issues, but that will only happen if enough leaders have the political will and the moral courage to put the issues on the table for the American people to discuss and decide,” McQuarrie said.

Maintaining cohesion

Others, familiar with the realities of training and combat, are aware of the practical challenges of maintaining standards while integrating more women into the armed forces.

If the NDAA passes in its current form, it is not impossible to envision a near future in which more women seek access to frontline combat roles – and are granted those roles.

But Given the proven differences in physical abilities between the sexes, this will certainly require an adjustment of physical standards, they say.

“I think the message that citizenship sometimes comes with an obligation to your country is a very healthy message to send to both sexes, not just young men,” Sebastian Junger, a journalist and documentary filmmaker who spent years embedded with U.S. forces in combat zones in Afghanistan, told The Epoch Times.

But there should be no illusions about the arduous nature of frontline work and the immense physical demands it entails, he stressed. Junger drew an analogy between the U.S. military and fire departments, which are facing calls for diversification, often from people who have never been firefighters themselves.

“Combat, like firefighting, is extremely rigorous and demanding, and efforts to integrate women into the fire service are at a crossroads. Should we reduce the physical demands to accommodate more women in fire stations, or should we maintain exactly the same number of pull-ups and allow virtually no women to pass through?” he asked.

Learn more here…