|
Copyright © 2005 Alliance for National Defense. All rights reserved |
|
Alliance for National Defense Issue Paper |
|
ISSUE: The failure to assign women to U.S. submarines.
AND’S POSITION: American women must be given the opportunity to compete for positions in the US Navy’s submarine force. All persons, regardless of their gender, should be considered for assignment to military duties based on the training, experience leadership potential and characteristics needed to accomplish the specific tasks of the job they are assigned.
DISCUSSION: The U.S. Navy opened all of its combat ships to women in the 1990s. Submarines remain the only ship type from which women in the U.S. Navy are banned. It is US Navy policy, not law that prevents American women from permanently serving aboard submarines. The law, Title 10, section 6015 that prevented women from serving aboard combatant Navy vessels was repealed by Congress in 1994. The January 13, 1994 memorandum from the Secretary of Defense to the Service Secretaries that opened combatant vessels also stated: “…These policies and regulations may include the following restrictions on the assignment of women: -where the Service Secretary attests that the costs of appropriate berthing and privacy are prohibitive…”
It was on this prohibitive cost basis (and no other reason of record0 that US Navy submarines were closed to women and continue to be closed today. It must be noted however, that even in the design of a NEW class of submarines, the VIRGINIA, the Navy did not provide for facilities for an integrated crew. In addition, the Navy did not provide the option for female berthing areas when they converted ballistic missile submarines to cruise missile submarines. When the 1994 law was passed allowing women into combat ships, the Navy instructed NAVSEA to design ALL ships to be gender neutral…which they did not do with submarines. The Navy did not follow its own policies in this matter.
The Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS) has studied the issue of women aboard US submarines on a number of occasions. Their analysis included sending two teams of DACOWITS members out on submarines for a few days. These teams included female and male DACOWITS members. Their recommendations over the years have concluded: - “…that, beginning now, plans for future submarine platforms incorporate appropriate berthing and privacy arrangements to accommodate mixed gender crews.” (Fall 99 Issue Book) - “ that the Secretary of the Navy and the Chief of Naval Operations commit to the integration of women into the submarine community and develop an implementation plan. For long term integration, DACOWITS recommends that the Secretary of the Navy direct redesign of VIRGINIA class submarines to accommodate mixed gender crews. For short term integration, DACOWITS recommends that the Secretary of the Navy and the Chief of Naval Operations commence with assigning women officers to SSBNs.” (Spring 2000 Issue Book and restated in the Fall 2000 Issue Book.
Due to the recommendations by DACOWITS, some members of Congress sought to enact legislations that would require Congressional review should the US Navy ever change its policy to permit the assignment of women to submarines. The 2001 Defense Authorization Bill (HR 4205) required that no change to the Department of Navy policy limiting service on submarines to males could take effect until: 1) The Secretary of Defense submitted written notice to Congress, 2) a period of 30 days of continuous session of Congress expires following the date the notice was received, 3) no funds could be expended to reconfigure any existing submarine or to design any new submarine to accommodate female crew members until, 4) the Secretary of Defense submitted the written notice of the proposed reconfiguration or design and 5) another 30 days of continuous session of Congress had occurred.
Obviously, this requirement intentionally created a major (and to this date insurmountable) barrier to any change in the policy.
One of the most significant arguments for women serving aboard submarines is to enhance the “recruitable pool” of individuals who could serve on the submarines. The US Navy’s own information on submarines focuses on their being among the most technologically advanced equipment in the world. Navy recruiting materials mention the highly technical training (usually running for around 18 months) required to serve aboard submarines. With this superior level of skill required for the crew, it would make sense to have as large a well-qualified pool to recruit from as possible. The elimination of women from this pool reduces the number of highly qualified and motivated personnel, officer and enlisted, from which to draw for serving in submarines.
Other nations have had women serving aboard submarines for years. Most notably the Norwegian navy has had a woman command a submarine and the Swedish Navy has had women on their submarines for over 15 years. While their submarines are diesel submarines which handle the difficult task of securing their coastlines; these subs do not routinely deploy for extended periods.
In the late 1990s, the Australian Navy added a new class of submarines to its inventory. During the transition, there was a need for more sailors in the submarine service as the number of subs would increase from six to eight . The only way to meet that increased demand for crewmembers was to use women. In 1998, 10 Australian women sailors and one officer commenced Collins-class submarine training and qualified during the spring of 1999. Today, on average 30 to 40 of the 200 total personnel aboard Australian submarines are women. They are required to meet the same standards as the men serving aboard submarines.
Currently the Canadian Navy is making the transition to mixed-gender submarine crews with the introduction of its Victoria class submarine. Women have been in the Canadian Navy since 1942 and have been fully integrated in all naval occupations except submarines since 1989. In March 2001, the decision was announced that the submarine service would be integrated. The Victoria class submarine has separate heads (bathrooms) for men and women.
Among the reasons given by those opposing women serving aboard submarines are three chief items: privacy, personal relationships (and the impact on marriages) and pregnancy. Submarines are very small; however, other navies have found ways (such as privacy curtains and limiting heads-bathrooms-to a single sex) to make it work. The Australian Navy spent some time preparing the families of their submariners for mixed gender crews. By focusing on professional behavior at all times, the leadership on a vessel can promote behavior that is mission focused. The small size of a submarine makes it difficult for crewmembers to behave inappropriately and not have anyone else know about it. Additionally, it would make sense to ensure that every submarine crewmember is ready for deployment-physically, financially and emotionally. This might include pregnancy tests where an individual is not sure if she is pregnant.
There have been occasions where women who work for shipyard contractors have gone to sea aboard the submarines during sea trials or testing of new equipment. In 1999, a group of female and male ROTC midshipmen participated in a 48 hour, two-night career orientation training trip on Trident (SSBNs) submarines. Thus, issues of privacy are overcome when the Service desires it.
Women have made a successful transition to the surface and aviation sections of the Fleet. Given proper training, they can do the same in the submarine force. Women have proven they are highly capable in any number of military environments such as Afghanistan and Iraq. The submarine environment is based on leading edge nuclear technology. American women have already mastered nuclear technology in the surface environment and this provides a pool of women to jump-start the transition to the submarine force.
It is unnecessarily expensive to continue to pay large recruitment and retention bonuses to maintain an all-male submarine force. There have been times in the past when the Navy Recruiting Command has struggled to make its goal of nuclear trainable sailors. Currently, the Navy has a large pool of individuals waiting to enter the service but this has been shown to be cyclical. In just a short period of time, it could be a struggle to ensure there are enough submarine sailors. It is not acceptable to have part of our nuclear deterrent force be under-crewed.
Now is the perfect time for the US Navy to make the transition. Currently, former ballistic missile vessels are being converted to cruise missile vessels. The ships are large enough to create appropriately private berthing for female and male crew members and the renovations can be done while converting the ship’s configuration. There is that pool of women who are qualified to run surface nuclear plants who could transition to the submarine force. While modifying only one class of submarines will create a limited career path for those women who choose the submarine service, this “one class at a time” approach to integration is the method the Navy used to integrate aviation and the surface force.
The Alliance for National Defense and other like-minded organizations provide educational material on sexual harassment and gender discrimination to legislators, decision makers, educators and military members on this and other pertinent issues. |
|
|