Military Review English Edition March-April 2015 | Page 60

focused on equality.7 As former Army Lt. Col.
Robert Maginnis told Time magazine, “Pentagon
brass are kowtowing to their political masters and
radical feminists to remove exemptions for women
in ground combat in defiance of overwhelming scientific evidence.”8
Despite these claims, the need for women in situations where combat is likely cannot be denied. This
then begs the question: What is best way to employ
women as a combat multiplier? There is a strong
argument for the presence of women in a separate
“engager” military occupational specialty (MOS)
specifically designed to fit within infantry units.
This MOS would be designed to satisfy the need
that has been identified by taking the most qualified women who meet both the physical and mental standards of the infantry but also satisfactorily
complete additional training to address the unique
role that women would play in these units. Recent
experiences of FETs preparing for deployment
to Afghanistan provide
a model for the potential implementation of
such a program and the
challenges that exist in
selecting, resourcing,
and training.

This decision was made for several reasons. First,
many of the brigade’s responsibilities would include
work at the village level, especially during base
closures. Additionally, around the same time that
4th SBCT began planning for deployment, an Army
requirement was released that mandated FETs for
brigades deploying to Afghanistan. In many ways,
this requirement was the direct result of the successes that teams had experienced in prior rotations.
Because the decision to form the team was made
so early, 4th SBCT had the luxury of nine months
of training prior to the deployment. Unfortunately,
because we were resourcing the brigade team internally, we did not have the ability to pull any female
soldier who was interested in joining the team. Once
we eliminated those who were not medically eligible
to deploy and those who were mission essential, we
were left with a fairly small group of women to train.
This brings me to my first point: It is critical
that women selected for
these roles are volunteers who are valued
for their unique skill
set, not “extra” soldiers
performing an additional duty. If an MOS was
created specifically to
fill the role of “engagers,”
brigades would not be
Experiences
stretched thin trying
with the Female
to fill this requirement
Engagement
from their own ranks.
Team
Further, when the time
(Photo by Sgt. Kimberly Lessmeister, 69th Air Defense Artillery Brigade)
In 2011-2012, I had
and resources spent on
1st Lt. Christina Rath, the officer in charge of a female engagement team assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 12th Field Artillery
the honor of serving
the team are taken from
Regiment, speaks with local women 15 February 2013 during a
as the FET leader for
the brigade organically,
shura, or consultative meeting, in Dand District, Kandahar Provthe 4th Stryker Brigade
ince, Afghanistan.
the FET can be seen as a
Combat Team (SBCT),
distraction from the rest
2nd Infantry Division, based out of Joint Base
of the mission rather than an added capability.
Lewis-McChord, Washington. 4th SBCT deployed
This also creates a situation where the FET is
to Regional Command–South in Afghanistan in
fighting against every other unit in the brigade for
the fall of 2012. We knew prior to the deployment
resources. Without a specific line in the modified
that 4th SBCT would primarily be functioning as
table of organization and equipment (MTOE), the
“battlespace owners” in the Panjwai District with a
FET is often left without a strong representative
support battalion on Kandahar Airfield.
in that fight.9 I specifically remember drawn-out
Nine months prior to the deployment, the decifights over the assignment of M9 pistols to team
sion was made to augment the brigade with a FET.
members. Although it should have been obvious
58

March-April 2015  MILITARY REVIEW