Uniformed Equality

Published in Frankfurter Rundschau
(Germany) on 25 January 2013
by Damir Fras (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Ron Argentati. Edited by Laurence Bouvard.
That's how quickly it can sometimes happen: At week's beginning, Obama announced in a speech that he would be doing more to level the occupational playing field for women during his second term. Now, the departing secretary of defense did his part to realize that intention for the military: Women will henceforth be allowed to serve in combat units.

The bizarre sexual inequality in the U.S. armed services appears to be nearing its end. While women had previously been allowed to serve in combat zones, they didn't enjoy the same opportunities for promotion and higher pay as their male counterparts because they could not get the combat experience required by a 1994 regulation.

Now the U.S. military — better late than never — has finally understood that women can no longer be excluded based on arguments that have long since been proven obsolete. Women already serve in the Army now, and there has been no decline in morale among male soldiers as had been predicted. Neither will anything change in that regard when women finally start serving in combat units. The basics are simple: Female soldiers must have the same opportunities as their male counterparts because they will be sharing the same risks.


Gleichheit in Uniform
Von Damir Fras
25. Januar 2013


So schnell kann es mitunter gehen: Anfang der Woche hat Barack Obama in einer Rede angekündigt, in seiner zweiten Amtszeit als US-Präsident mehr für die Chancengleichheit von Frauen und Männern machen zu wollen. Nun hat der scheidende US-Verteidigungsminister Leon Panetta seinen Teil dazu beigetragen, dass das Versprechen wahr werden könnte. Frauen sollen künftig auch in Kampfeinheiten des US-Militärs eingesetzt werden, hat Panetta beschlossen.

Das Ende einer bizarr anmutenden Ungleichbehandlung in den US-Streitkräften scheint nahe zu sein. Die Soldatinnen durften bisher zwar in den Krieg ziehen, doch haben sie bei weitem nicht die Chancen ihrer männlichen Kollegen, befördert zu werden und mehr Geld zu verdienen. Weil ihnen die Kampferfahrung fehlt, die sie laut einer Vorschrift aus dem Jahr 1994 gar nicht erwerben können.

Nun hat das US-Militär – spät, aber immerhin – begriffen, dass sich der Ausschluss von Frauen nicht mehr mit Argumenten begründen lässt, die aus der Zeit gefallen sind. Schon heute dienen Frauen in der Armee, und die Moral der Männer hat deswegen nicht gelitten. Daran wird sich auch nichts ändern, wenn Frauen demnächst in Kampfeinsätzen mitmachen. Im Grunde ist es simpel: Frauen in Uniform müssen die gleichen Chancen haben wie Männer. Denn sie gehen das gleiche Risiko ein.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Ireland: The Irish Times View on Trump’s Move on Diesel: an Imaginary Ceasefire

Germany: What It Means To Have Trump as an ‘Ally’*

Canada: Carney Struggles To Know If He Should Back Trump on Russia, or Not

Canada: The Unpleasant Logic of Live-Streaming Nidal Hasan’s Execution

Topics

Germany: Saudi Arabia Is Paying the Price*

Germany: Quickly Lashing Out Once More

Japan: Pressure on Ukraine: The US Administration’s Focus Is Backward

   

Ireland: The Irish Times View on US Midterms: a Lame Duck Trump Is Still a Danger

Australia: Trump and Netanyahu Are Putting the World at Risk To Stay in Power

Canada: The Unpleasant Logic of Live-Streaming Nidal Hasan’s Execution

Egypt: What Happens in the US Economy Doesn’t Stay in the US Economy

Related Articles

Germany: Sabotage and Attacks: War without a Declaration of War

Guatemala: The Return of Nationalism

Germany: Trump’s Fatal Signal to Putin*

Austria: Trump Punishes Merz but Also Weakens His Own Country

South Korea: Trump’s Move To Cut Troops in Germany Must Not Affect Korean Peninsula

Previous article
Next article