I greatly admire Lt. Gen. Claudia Kennedy, and believe her endorsement of Harris Miller is a big one for him. Having said that, I must respectfully disagree with her comments regarding James Webb as having a "troubling record" of opposing women in the military and of not being "in touch with today's military." With all due respect, General Kennedy, that's simply not true. In contrast, James Webb has been a leader on integrating women into the military. From The Nightingale?s Song by Robert Timberg:
On December 21, 1987, two months before he resigned [as Secretary of the Navy], Webb nearly tripled, to fifteen thousand, the number of seagoing combat-support jobs open to women, moving the Navy into the forefront of the services in terms of expanding opportunities for females. Anticipating the Tailhook scandal by four years, he also ordered a Navy-wide crackdown on sexual harassment.
When I was secretary of the Navy, I opened up more billets to women than any secretary of the Navy in history. But we did it the right way. I got my warfare chiefs, the three warfare chiefs, to go down and examine inside their own specialties where women should be absorbed. I had them then report to the chief of naval operations. And then the chief of naval operations reported to me. I had the uniform side make the decisions, the recommendations, and then bring them to me. This wasn't me standing up there pontificating because I was a civilian official. So when this has been done in a rational way where it works, I fully support it. When it's an intrusion from the outside, I think that not only I but other people should have questions. So where it is now? I think that from what I can see from a distance it's working well.
In other words, James Webb was a leader during the 1970s and 1980s in: a) thinking through the whole issue of women in the military; b) moving forward on this (extremely controversial at the time) issue in a way that didn't damage the military; and c) opening up more opportunities for women in the military than anyone in his position had ever done. Not bad.
Also, regarding James Webb's 1979 article titled "Women Can't Fight," here's a bit of background. According to Timberg, Webb had been selected as "writer in residence" at the Naval Academy in late 1978. Webb's first assignment came from Jack Limpert, the editor of Washingtonian magazine, who "thought it was time to take a close journalistic look at the women who had entered the Academy for the first time in 1976" - just three years earlier. And that's exactly what Webb did:
...Turning to the article he had promised Washingtonian, he commenced a series of interviews with female midshipmen. His first draft was a predictable series of character sketches that did not even address whether or not women belonged at Annapolis. Unhappy with his initial effort, he set up more interviews. One day, because of a mix-up in names, a male midshipmen...reported to his office instead of the female he had asked to see. Since you're here, said Webb, sit down and let's talk. "Sir, what you'd hear from me you'll hear from any guy in our class...I'd much rather have been in the last class with balls than the first class with women." With that, he spun around and walked out.[...]
Resuming his research, no longer limiting his interviews to women, Webb gradually realized there was a story he hadn't begun to touch. The women were the story, sure, but so were the men. And at the heart of the tale was the very soul of the Academy.
[...]
Keeping the sensational information to himself, he produced a piece that in many was was a model of restraint. Entitled "Women Can't Fight," it challenged the growing political sentiment for women in combat roles as well as the presence of somen at the service academies. "There is a place for women in our military, but not in combat," he wrote.
Lots of material here, no doubt, but recall that Webb was acting primarily as a serious, sober journalist - a role which won him an Emmy Award for his PBS coverage of the U.S. Marines in Beirut. As a journalist, Webb's job was to get at the truth of the situation, which he did brilliantly regarding women in the military back in the late 1970s. That was then, however, and this is now. Today, James Webb is proud of his leadership on integrating women into the military. In my opinion, we should all be thankful to James Webb - not critical - for helping lead our country through this difficult, even gut wrenching, transition. I would also argue that it is completely unfair to judge peoples' actions out of historical context. Look at the whole story here, including the sentiment in America at the time, and then make up your mind about James Webb. That's all I ask.
Finally, since this issue is certain to come up during this year's Senate campaign, here's Webb on what he would have done about Tailhook if he had been Secretary of the Navy when it took place in September 1991 (note: Henry L. Garrett III was Secretary of the Navy at the time under President George H.W. Bush):
...I would have found the senior admiral present, and I would have told him to go clean that up. And if it hadn't been done in a certain period of time, he would have been relieved. This was before the larger ramifications started falling out. That is the way that it should have been dealt with....Egregious behavior by a handful of people should have been dealt with. They should have been dealt with at Tailhook convention, before it got out of hand. And certainly, once it was put on the table, those people should have been dealt with aggressively. And then, the leaders of the Navy should have turned around and defended the culture of the Navy.
The bottom line here is that James Webb has been a consistent advocate of integrating women into the military while maintaining its fighting culture and morale. Webb has condemned outrageous situations like Tailhook, while simultaneously fighting any attempt to smear the entire Navy or tarnish the names of innocent men.
Finally, as far as being "not in touch with today's military" is concerned (as Claudia Kennedy charges), I would point out that Webb opposed the invasion of Iraq in part out of concern for what he calls "the dangers of over-stretch if we ask too much of a military with only 1.4 million active-duty members." And today, we see that Webb was 100% right, with the military facing tremendous strains - recruitment, retention, etc. - due to the Iraq quagmire. I would also point out that Webb has developed a new doctrine for the 21st century U.S. military:
The key elements of a new doctrine seem obvious. We must retain our position as the dominant guarantor of world-wide stability through strategic and conventional forces that deter potentially aggressive nations. We must be willing to retaliate fiercely against nations that participate in or condone aggressive acts, as well as non-national purveyors of asymmetric warfare. But we should take great care when it comes to committing large numbers of ground forces to open-ended combat, and we should especially avoid using them as long-term occupation troops.
Pretty impressive for a guy who's supposedly "not in touch," huh?
[UPDATE: Perserverando has an interesting take on the Claudia Kennedy endorsement with the article, "Is Harris Miller Desperate?" I thought the following was particularly revealing: "If you want to know who trusts women in positions of importance, lets look at the staff makeup of both campaigns...Miller's campaign is clearly dominated by males. Andrew Resnick, Adam Goers, Brian Cook, Mo Elleithee...After months of operation, Miller has yet to appoint a single female to a leadership role in his campaign....Now look at Webb's team with Jessica Vandenberg, Kristian Denny-Todd, Susan DiLiddo, Liz Reiter...Two days out of the box and the Webb campaign is being led by wom
In his letter to Webb, Edney wrote, "I have come to respect and admire your leadership, integrity, and intellectual capacity more than any other individual I have been privileged to serve under in my 31 years."
My issue is that while you and I both know that Webb hasn't disrespected women, we should both recognize that he hasn't answered clearly the issue of whether he supports women in combat. Has he changed his position? a clear yes or no would be best.
I haven’t received the mail piece but I did look at it online. It seems to me that Miller attacks Webb on not allowing women in combat. So that is the question to be answered.
Some things...
"combat-support jobs"- Yes he worked for women to gain these positions but the 'support' in the quote above makes it clear that he isn't talking about combat.
"specialties where women should be absorbed"- The word absorbed makes it sound like women are being dealt with... It sounds like 'we've got them (women) now what are we going to do with them?
Please let me know what you think.
Here's a bit of background on the issue:
The role of Women in combat has evolved over the centuries.Although women are permitted to serve in the military in most countries, only a few countries allow women to fill active combat roles. Countries that allow this include Germany, Canada, Denmark and Norway. Only Canada has fully integrated women into the infantry, and currently has only six women in that role.
"...historially most cultures have discouraged or even forbidden women from engaging in combat."
In the United States:
In the United States military, women can serve on combat ships, to include command. However women are not permitted to serve on submarines or to participate in special forces programs such as Navy Seals. Women are barred from serving in Infantry, Special Operations, Artillery, Armor, and Forward Air Defense. Women can fly military aircraft, but make up 2% of all pilots in the US military. The issue has been contentious in America since World War II when women were killed in combat in sizeable numbers for the first time. So far the position closest to combat open to women in the U.S. Army are in the Military Police, where women man machine-guns on armored Humvees, guarding truck convoys. Although Army regulations bar women from infantry assignments, some female MPs, known as "Lionesses", are detailed to accompany male infantry units to handle search and interrogation of female Iraqi suspects.
Like you, I'm not really sure what I think about all this. On the one hand, I strongly favor equal rights for women. On the other hand, this is WAR we're talking about - people fighting and dying. Frankly, I'm uneasy with that for men OR women.
JE McNeil, the Quaker lawyer who runs the Center on Conscious and War (the preeminent group dealing with Conscientious Objector status) here ins DC is on a record as saying that were a draft reinstituted it would have to include women because if yoy look at the MOS positions they can hold it represents a majority of active duty military.
Again, people sometimes want to hammer Webb because they don't see him leading public charges, whether it is gays or women in the military. Part of what makes him an effective leade3r is his ability to persuade people by not presenting them with public confrontations where they lock themselves into positions from which they then cannot easily back down. Again, he opened more billets to women than any Navy Secretary before or after him, and he only served one year in that capacity.
I'd like to add a thought. If we want to recognize, as Webb has of himself, that Webb's reaction to Kerry's comments during Vietnam were visceral, as a result of immediate pain and concerns, and that it took him a long time to overcome that, I thinki we have to grant Claudia Kennedy the same respect -- as a pioneering woman in the military it was easy for her to overreact to Webb's words as a journalist reflecting what he was encountering by talking to the men. She -- and other women at the time -- must have felt some level of betrayal, that in the way he wrote that article hye was validating the hostility to women in the military that was a part of the current culture. I would argue that the difference between Webb and Kennedy is that Jim has struggled with gut reactions and been able to move beyond , and has said so publicly. I would hope General Kennedy, who was and is an outstanding example not only for women but for all who wish to widen the envelope, would be able to come to a similar recognition.
I'll say this, it's very bad to have bathrooms far away from women of a certain age. Or worse, pregnant. When I was pregnant, I remember going to the restroom, and by the time I made it back to my work area, I had to turn around and go back again.
World. Women pee. A lot. That's all there is to it.