Authors: Gayle Tzemach Lemmon
What Admiral Olson was coming to understand was that from a strategic point of view, not having access to Afghan women meant that U.S. soldiers were entirely blind to half the country’s population, and all the information and social influence it held. Even more: whatever may have been hidden in the women’s quarters—everything from enemy combatants to weapons and nuggets of critical intelligence—would remain unfound. This reality signaled a dangerous security gap, for no soldier had ever truly cleared a house when even a single room went unchecked. The only question that remained was: could the military actually do anything about it?
I
n Iraq, a similar question had been asked and answered years earlier with the creation of the “Lioness” program within the Marine Corps. In 2003 and 2004, as the budding insurgency grew bolder in the city of Ramadi, commanders gathered an ad hoc group of twenty female soldiers and female Marines—most of them drivers or mechanics certified on the .50-caliber machine gun—to join male Marines and Army soldiers on raids, security patrols, and at the increasing number of security checkpoints designed to stop suicide bombers. Much of the Lionesses’ work consisted of searching Iraqi women for hidden weapons and explosives vests, and confirming they were indeed women, not men who had disguised themselves beneath the veil.
A similar story played out later in Afghanistan, and once again it was the Marines out in front. It was early 2009, and a unit was planning an operation in Farah Province to capture the men responsible for planting improvised explosive devices (IEDs) that had killed several fellow Marines.
One of the planners was Lieutenant Matt Pottinger, a Marine who traveled an unlikely path to Afghanistan. Before arriving there, Pottinger spent five years covering China for the
Wall Street Journal
’s Beijing bureau, where his aggressive reporting got him detained for a piece about political corruption. He watched from Beijing with
growing concern as his
Journal
colleague Daniel Pearl was abducted and killed by al-Qaeda and the war in Iraq descended into chaos. Then, in 2004, the
Journal
sent him to cover the Asian tsunami that killed a quarter of a million people. The only first responders who impressed him on a personal and professional level were the U.S. Marines and sailors who landed there en route from Iraq. While local and international charities fumbled in disorganized chaos, the servicemen and women methodically tackled problems and found ways around the countless obstacles to get actual relief to the people in need. Witnessing them in action profoundly affected Pottinger, and he thought if he were ever going to serve his country, he should do it now, with this caliber of people, at this time of severe national crisis. So in 2005, at the age of thirty-two, he entered Marines’ Officer Candidates School. A year and a half later he deployed to Iraq.
By the time Matt Pottinger reached Farah Province, the battlefield acumen of a trained Marine and Iraq veteran now complemented a reporter’s instincts for navigating the cultural fault lines that shape the country. He soon realized that, given Afghanistan’s social customs and traditions, it would be nearly impossible for the military to raid homes filled with women without alienating everyone in the village. After months of study he reached a surprising conclusion: in order to achieve success,
the missions needed women
.
It was a counterintuitive idea, one Pottinger himself initially mistrusted, so with the help of a satellite phone he tracked down a few U.S.-based Afghanistan experts, including Sarah Chayes, an American journalist who had lived on her own in Kandahar for several years. Chayes confirmed what Pottinger had hypothesized: having U.S. female soldiers on hand would not ratchet up tensions with Afghan men, but instead was likely to defuse them and make the whole operation run more smoothly. And if the experts were right, far from violating social codes, it would, on the contrary, help build trust. With his commander’s approval, Pottinger assembled a group of seven female Marines and one female interpreter, and over
a period of several days led impromptu lessons on Afghan culture, proper search techniques, and how to conduct tactical questioning.
The experiment worked. With the help of local village women who had been questioned by members of the female engagement team—soon to be known by the acronym FET, coined by Pottinger and logistics officer Lieutenant Johannah Shaffer—the Marines located the insurgents responsible for killing their brothers-in-arms. As significant: village elders expressed approval that neither Afghan nor American men had interacted with their women. Having the female Marines on-site had proven to be a boon both culturally and tactically.
This point was driven home during a failed mission a few months later in southern Helmand Province that became notorious when male insurgents literally, and brazenly, walked past a team of Marines who had cordoned off their compound. They simply donned burqas and filed right by the Marines, who had called for the women to leave the compound so they would be protected from the fighting that would inevitably follow. Only later did the Marines realize what had happened.
Word of Pottinger’s work spread. And soon former Marine 1st Lt. Claire Russo, who was determined to formalize for the Army the kind of female engagement teams Pottinger was developing for the Marines, reached out to him for advice. Russo arrived in Afghanistan in 2009, the same year as Pottinger, as part of a civilian team created to help the Army better understand the cultural terrain. The C-130 transport plane had no sooner dropped her off in eastern Afghanistan than the colonel in charge of the region enlisted Russo for a very specific mission—one for which this female former Marine was particularly well suited.
The Army colonel had been hearing from battalions and companies across the region that certain units were using ad hoc, informal teams of women soldiers to help achieve their missions. He wanted to understand what female soldiers were being asked to do,
why commanders thought they were uniquely suited to these assignments, and whether it was legal, given the military’s official ban on women in ground combat. Russo’s task was to investigate and to come back with answers.
Russo’s fact-finding mission took her to bases all around eastern Afghanistan, where she surveyed Army units from Provincial Reconstruction Teams to infantry units. She found they all were using women in different ways: some started livelihood projects for local Afghan women while others had women soldiers “going outside the wire” to learn what was happening in their community.
But what alarmed Russo was the clear lack of tactical training the female soldiers received. These women, mostly medics, sometimes civil affairs officers, were now operating in close quarters in areas heavy with insurgents and other enemies in the middle of a war zone. Competent at their jobs and brave though they were, basically they all were improvising. It was clear to Russo that there was a need for female engagement among Army units, and commanders told her they were getting valuable intel and a stronger understanding of local dynamics from the teams of soldiers. But there was still a persistent belief among some senior Army leaders that women in Afghanistan had no power or influence. Russo’s direct observations had led to the opposite conclusion: Afghan women sat at the center of a complex web of family relationships and had a significant effect on the population.
Buoyed by this conviction, and encouraged by senior Army officers who wanted this capability in their units, Russo was determined to press the case. She had always been nearly impossible to deter once she put her mind to something, and personal tragedy had only hardened her resolve. In 2004, Russo was a newly minted intel officer who had fulfilled her childhood dream of becoming a Marine, which had been sparked by the movie
A Few Good Men
. A few months into her first assignment, a fellow Marine raped her at a Marine Corps ball. She reported the assault, but the Marine Corps refused to press charges. Eventually, with the help of a Navy criminal
investigator, Russo’s case landed on the desk of the San Diego district attorney, whose investigation revealed that her accused had done the same thing to another servicewoman. For her refusal to be silenced, Russo eventually received a “Citizen of Courage” award from the San Diego district attorney.
Now in Afghanistan five years later, working as a civilian for the Army and still passionate about serving, Russo was searching for someone with experience in building these all-female teams—and Pottinger’s name immediately came up. Borrowing some of Pottinger’s FET materials after tracking him down in Kabul, Russo began the process of training Army FETs for a commander in northeast Afghanistan.
Later, with a trove of knowledge they had gathered about women and both the cultural and actual battlefields, Pottinger, Russo, and an influential Afghan-American cultural advisor named Hali Jilani teamed up to publicly address the persistent myths surrounding the FETs. The title of the report, published in 2010 in a military journal, spoke for itself: “Half-Hearted: Trying to Win Afghanistan without Afghan Women.”
The article began by explaining that Afghan men tend to see foreign women as a third gender: not threatening, like American men or subject to the cultural restrictions of Afghan women, but a third group with whom they could interact in a respectful and forthright manner. Noting that “our reluctance to employ all but a few allied servicewomen in tactical counterinsurgency operations mirror-images the Taliban,” the authors pointed out that in 2009 “so few U.S. servicewomen had meaningful contact with Afghan women that, statistically speaking, they literally had a higher chance of getting pregnant than of meeting an Afghan woman outside the wire.”
“Who,” they asked in conclusion, “is shielding their women from Afghan society more: Pashtun men or U.S. commanders?”
A
t around the same time, back in Tampa, Admiral Olson was working on his own concept of the all-female teams. Though he
found the Marines’ FET model interesting, he believed it was too structured for special operations. While movies portray these men as Olympian athletes and tactical geniuses, Olson often described the best of the SEALs and other special operations teams—including the Army Special Forces and the 75th Ranger Regiment, Navy SEALs, Air Force and Marine special operations forces—in much more earthbound language: “physically fit problem solvers.”
Olson knew that any proposal to put women in direct combat zones would guarantee heavy resistance from within the military. Although special operations had long deployed women to hostile zones in a number of roles, including psychological operations and intelligence, the direct ground combat exclusion prohibition—the official ban, formalized in a 1994 memo, that prohibits women from serving on the front lines—was, for Olson, the “bridge that we had to cross.” And it was clear that the time to cross it was
now.
Since 1948 women’s military service had been governed by the Women’s Armed Services Integration Act. Among other limits, women were barred from serving aboard any navy ship other than hospitals and transports and from aircraft that could have a combat mission. No mention was made back then of women in ground combat. By the 1980s things were slowly changing: women formed part of non-combat air crews and served aboard some Navy ships. More roles opened up after more than 40,000 servicewomen deployed in 1990 and 1991 as part of Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm. By the mid-1990s women could serve in aviation and naval combat. But assignment to units “whose primary mission is to engage in direct combat on the ground” remained off-limits for women.
Around headquarters Olson began to raise the issue of getting women into battle roles to support special operations teams, and again and again he met with the same, unenthusiastic reception. Olson understood the limits of his power, for while the role of SOCOM commander carried a great deal of clout, in actual fact he was a “force provider,” not the commander of all Special Operations
Forces operating around the world. This made him effectively the CEO of Special Operations Inc. with a mission to provide a product—readiness, options, and capabilities—that commanders on the ground could choose to use. Or not. Olson couldn’t
make
commanders use these teams; he could only imagine and then develop the ideas so they would be there if and when they were wanted.
Officials around SOCOM listened politely enough to Olson’s idea, then they slow-rolled him. Most gave him the clear impression they couldn’t wait for his time as commander to end so he could take his idea about these new all-female teams with him. It was the same thing that had happened in the Pentagon twenty years earlier, when Congress demanded the creation of SOCOM.
A few months later, however, the landscape changed. By April 2010, a new wave of U.S. troops was entering Afghanistan as part of a force surge announced the previous December, and the fight against the insurgency was accelerating. Olson’s idea was about to get a second chance, and from a most unlikely source, a group of the Army’s most grizzled infantry fighters: the U.S. Army’s 75th Ranger Regiment, the night-raiding special operations ground-pounders whose history dates back to colonial times.
I
n April 2010 Admiral William McRaven, the highly regarded head of the Joint Special Operations Command, submitted a formal request to Olson at SOCOM that
women soldiers
be made available to join the Rangers on missions. It was based on a radical premise from a forward-thinking leader: that women enablers could make Ranger missions more successful. The idea was that the best female soldiers in the Army would join the 75th Ranger Regiment’s elite strike forces as they went out on nightly direct action raids to get terrorists and insurgents.
JSOC, McRaven’s command, came to life in the early 1980s following the humiliation of the failed attempt to free American hostages in Iran. In the aftermath of the disastrous aborted mission that
ended with eight American servicemen dead, the Pentagon created a commission to figure out how so much had gone so wrong. One of the panel’s recommendations was the creation of a “joint” command that would create a cohesive team of special operators from the toughest units in the service: Navy SEALs, the Air Force’s special operations pilots, Army’s Delta Force and Green Berets, and, eventually, the Army’s 75th Ranger Regiment.