Women’s roles in the military have grown significantly since the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. | Courtesy DOD to lift ban on women in combat

The Pentagon is lifting its ban on women in combat roles, opening thousands of previously closed jobs in the most dangerous units in the military, but the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee said it might not mean major changes by the time all is said and done.

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is expected to make a formal announcement at 1:30 p.m. Thursday. A senior defense official told POLITICO that Panetta made his decision after a recommendation by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, indicating the top brass supports opening more combat roles to women.


( PHOTOS: Female war veterans: From uniform to Congress)

But Panetta and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey will not announce a wholesale lifting of the ban, the senior defense official said.

Instead, they’ll “initiate a process whereby the services will develop plans to implement this decision,” he said. Service leaders will have until 2016 to recommend “exceptions” — areas they feel should remain male-only — to Defense Department leaders. Some combat jobs will be immediately opened to women, defense officials said, though those details weren’t clear yet.

Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in a statement that Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter told him the policy change would not have that big of an effect on the makeup of military units.

“I do not believe this will be a broad opening of combat roles for women, because as [a] 2012 report indicated, there are ‘serious practical barriers which must be resolved so that the department can maximize the safety and privacy of all military members while maintaining military readiness,’” Inhofe said.

Although he praised the service of women in the military, Inhofe blasted the Pentagon for leaking it before telling Congress.

“As a result, we don’t yet know the details of this announcement,” he said.

( Also on POLITICO: Duckworth: Women in combat 'win for our nation')

The Pentagon’s decision reawakened one of the most politically explosive issues facing the military, pitting purists and conservatives against women’s advocates and modernizers who have long argued women can do anything on the battlefield that men can.

Over time, the policies governing female troops and their actual roles on the battlefield began to overlap. One of the most notorious stories of the Iraq War was the capture of a female soldier truck driver, Jessica Lynch, who although technically barred from combat, was nonetheless captured and taken hostage just as any front-line soldier might have been.

As the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan wound down, the services’ policies caught up with the reality of female troops’ service. Women were permitted to serve aboard Navy submarines, from which they were once barred, and then in combat support — as tank mechanics or radar operators, for example, who were close to the front lines if not serving on them.

( PHOTOS: 13 people to watch in 2013)

Congressional Democrats welcomed the decision almost unanimously, while Republicans and conservative critics were slower out of the gate.

“I support it,” said Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.). “It reflects the reality of 21st-century military operations.”

West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, another Armed Services Committee Democrat, said he knew women would do their part.

“I have not a problem with that because the ladies I know in West Virginia shoot very well,” Manchin said. “And they’ll do a very fine job if they desire to do it. Ladies help us, we all work together, everybody pulls their own load.”

House Republican leaders referred reporters’ questions to House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon of California, who issued a one-sentence statement.

“After a decade of critical military service in hostile environments, women have demonstrated a wide range of capabilities in combat operations and we welcome this review,” he said.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, a California Republican who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, said he would reserve judgment, but the Marine veteran initially appeared skeptical.

“The focus of our military needs to be maximizing combat effectiveness,” Hunter said. “The question here is whether this change will actually make our military better at operating in combat and killing the enemy, since that will be their job, too. What needs to be explained is how this decision, when all is said and done, increases combat effectiveness rather than being a move done for political purposes — which is what this looks like.”

Another Republican, Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, said he and his colleagues would expect to have their say.

“Congress should be consulted about that,” he said. “I think that’s a historic policy of the Department of Defense. There are physical differences in the sexes. … Of course, you always hear something like that could happen, but I have been given no briefing. It’s a major decision, and I’d like to see how they came to it, what their recommendations are and who makes it.”

Penny Nance, CEO and president of Concerned Women for America, agreed.

“The decision is further proof that this administration simply does not care about the issues about which the majority of women care,” she said. “Once again, their interest on women issues is driven by special interest groups. The point of the military is to protect our country. Anything that distracts from that is detrimental. Our military cannot continue to choose social experimentation and political correctness over combat readiness.”

But another Senate Armed Services Committee Republican, Sen. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, said she was “pleased” by Panetta’s decision and seemed open to the next steps.

“I’ve seen firsthand service men and women working together in a range of dangerous operations to achieve our military objectives — and today’s announcement reflects the increasing role that female service members play in securing our country,” Ayotte said. “As the Pentagon begins the review process, I’m also glad that military service leaders will provide guidance on how best to implement this policy change.”

House newcomer Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, a Hawaii Democrat and Army Iraq veteran, joined her party colleagues in praising Panetta’s decision.

“As a twice-deployed combat veteran, I have a firsthand appreciation and understanding of the contributions women in uniform make every single day, all around the world,” she said. “I have had the honor of serving with incredibly talented female soldiers who, if given the opportunity, would serve as great assets in our ground combat units. It is crucial that we shed light on the great value and opportunities that these women bring.”

Illinois Rep. Tammy Duckworth — another Iraq veteran — as well as California Rep. Loretta Sanchez, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand and Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono were among the other Democrats who praised Panetta’s decision.

And Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) anticipated the argument — heard in the 1990s debates over women in combat — that incorporating women might hurt unit cohesion. He compared it with the rhetoric used to argue against the repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” ban on open service by gays and lesbians.

“Where have I heard that before?” Harkin asked. “They said that about gays too, didn’t they? I’ve heard that one before.”

Panetta made his decision on the combat exemption as his time at the Pentagon winds down: The Senate Armed Services Committee is set to convene Jan. 31 to consider the nomination of the man President Barack Obama has picked to replace him, former Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel.

Hagel’s views on women in combat were still something of a question mark on Wednesday, but advocates have faulted the positions he has taken in the past.

Anu Bhagwati, a former Marine captain and executive director of Service Women’s Action Network, said: “We are thrilled about the news.”

SWAN, along with four servicewomen, sued Panetta in November over the DOD policy barring women from combat positions. Bhagwati said Wednesday’s announcement was unexpected, especially because none of the women involved in the lawsuit or representatives from SWAN have met with the defense secretary since the lawsuit was filed.

“I think the Joint Chiefs looked at the facts on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan and found all the proof in the world they needed to make this decision,” Bhagwati said. She credited the SWAN/ACLU lawsuit against Panetta, plus an earlier lawsuit brought by the University of Virginia School of Law on behalf of two women in the Army Reserve, as instrumental in pushing the Pentagon toward lifting the ban.

Juana Summers contributed to this report.