ARLINGTON, Va. — The “Close Combat Badge,” a controversial Army award created for soldiers with “combat” in their official job description, is dead.

In its place is a new “Combat Action Badge” or CAB, and its criteria is simple:

You are an American soldier assigned to a combat zone.

The bullets start to fly.

You fight back, as you were trained to do.

The Combat Action Badge will be available to any active, Reserve or National Guard soldier, regardless of his or her job, or military occupational specialty (MOS).

But unlike its predecessor, the CAB is for soldiers deployed to any authorized hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay area who are “personally present and actively engaging or being engaged by the enemy, and performing satisfactorily in accordance with the prescribed rules of engagement,” the Army announced Wednesday.

The Combat Action Badge “recognizes the new reality of today’s 360-degree battlefield,” Army spokeswoman Maj. Elizabeth Robbins said Thursday. “If you’re a dental hygienist … and you’re in a convoy that takes fire, and you acquit yourself well, you should be recognized.”

The badge’s first version, the CCB, was introduced in February as an equivalent of the Army’s Combat Infantry Badge and Combat Medical Badge.

But the Close Combat Badge was restricted to enlisted soldiers in armor, the cavalry, combat engineering, and field artillery, and officers with a branch or specialty recognized as “having a high probability to routinely engage in direct combat,” according to “predecisional” criteria released Feb. 14.

Soldiers have argued for more than 60 years that all soldiers, not just the infantry, Special Forces (who can earn the CIB) and medics, should be eligible for combat badges.

Despite periodic reviews, however, it wasn’t until the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan turned into insurgencies that the noninfantry soldiers’ point of view gained increased momentum.

In 2004, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker approved a task force to look at creating a new badge to widen the pool of soldiers recognized for actions under fire.

When soldiers learned that the Close Combat Badge the task force developed was still restricted, many were incensed.

Soldiers and veterans wrote to Stars and Stripes to argue their point of view [see sidebar].

Meanwhile, “many” soldiers also made their views known directly to the Army, Robbins said.

“There was a great level of comment from people in combat support and combat services support,” as well as “input from field commanders,” Robbins said.

Senior Army leaders defended their decision to restrict the CCB to combat positions, saying soldiers deserve recognition for deliberately planned battles, not unplanned skirmishes.

“While everyone in Iraq and Afghanistan is in harm’s way, there is a difference between combat operations such as patrols fighting off attacks, and deliberately plans offensive combat missions,” the Army top personnel officer, Lt. Gen. Franklin L. “Buster” Hagenbeck, said Feb. 13.

In the end, leaders recognized the validity of the “no-front” argument, which says that modern conflicts rarely have “front lines” where fighting is focused, and a “rear” where soldiers and civilians alike can consider themselves relatively safe from attack.

“This should be a tremendous morale boost,” Robbins said.

The CAB will be retroactive for actions taken on or after Sept. 18, 2001, which is the day President Bush signed Congress’ joint resolution authorizing military force for the war on terror, Robbins said.

The full criteria for the CAB’s award, as well as the badge’s design, will be released “soon,” Robbins said.

Army officials are planning to have the badge available this summer through unit supply and for purchase in military clothing sales stores, Robbins said.

You were heard ...

In February, Army officials announced a new badge for non-infantry soldiers to recognize their participation in ground combat. The subsequent uproar was part of the reason the Army changed direction. Here are excerpts of Letters to the Editor that ran in Stars and Stripes:

I was reading the Feb. 16 article about a new combat badge (“Army creates badge for non-infantry GIs”). I’m appalled that once again the Army has selected a few fields that are eligible for this badge. This badge is designed for soldiers who are armor, cavalry, combat engineers and field artillery. What about transportation companies and other support units? ...

———

The infantry, Special Forces, combat engineers, artillery, armor and cavalry are not the only members of the Army who fight. These military occupational specialties are supported by a small, and often overlooked, group of individuals. These people are members of Combat Service Support. In today’s world, there is no forward or rear area. Every soldier is on the front lines. ...

———

I am writing from Camp Arifjan, Kuwait, in reference to the personnel considered eligible for the Close Combat Badge. I think it’s great that a new combat-related badge is being introduced. Lord knows these soldiers out here deserve a little hooaahh! However, there has been a major oversight on the part of the motor transporters and our role here in theater. Since being deployed here in January 2004 with a combat heavy equipment transportation company, I think that most would agree that the truck drivers have arguably the most dangerous role here in theater. ...

———

I am furious. I recently completed my second tour in Afghanistan as a civil affairs operator. I have been in at least five direct combat situations. I have been awarded three Bronze Stars, one with a “V” device for valor. One of my soldiers took a grenade to the face (he’s fine, thanks to the vest). I have been IED’d, RPG’d and ambushed, had a price on my head, and had to call in Warthogs to save our butts in a night attack. I was on a 12-man team that initiated the actions that led to Operation Mongoose in January 2003. So why haven’t 38As (civil affairs soldiers) been included in this new category? ...

———

Military police are asking for a helping hand and a voice to be heard. I think we deserve something other than cop jokes for our contribution to the war [in Iraq]. I have a real big problem with this new [Close Combat Badge]. I am glad others are getting the recognition for their actions during Operations Iraqi Freedom I, II and III. I am a two-time OIF participant. (But) I know many MPs who have seen more combat time than most infantry, combat engineer or artillery soldiers. Artillery soldiers are being cross-trained to be MPs for a good reason.