Women must fight to get combat roles in the Armed Forces

From the time of Independence, women have been progressively absorbed into the mainstream of economic life. They have now entered almost all walks of life which were earlier considered male bastions in our country. The first batch of women officers was commissioned in June 1993, the year in which India ratified the UN Convention on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). However, the induction of women and the progression of their careers in the Armed Forces in the last 25 years have been marred by controversies. In June 2006, when a lady officer had committed suicide due to poor job satisfaction, the then Vice Chief of the Army Staff had remarked that the Army could do without them. He was merely expressing the general belief that women are not capable of withstanding the hard life of a soldier. 

Women join the Armed Forces with the aim of (a) job security; (b) economic independence; (c) social status; and (d) a sense of achievement. However, their career profile cannot be compared to those of men. The aim of the Armed Forces has been to use them on a short-term basis to fill the existing gaps in the cadre. After a prolonged legal battle, women officers are now allowed permanent commission in the Armed Forces, albeit in select streams.  

Organisational Problems

Currently, women are inducted in the accounts, administrative, education, legal, medical, signals and engineering wings of the three services. Combat roles are off limits for them due to operational concerns. The Armed Forces also face certain constraints in the optimum utilisation of women officers. For example, postings to units performing field activities may not be suitable for women officers, considering the size of such units and the nature of the tasks performed by them. Due to the mindset of senior officers, women generally get preferential treatment, which causes resentment among their male colleagues and results in low performance and morale. The medical category of a woman officer is lowered as soon as pregnancy is confirmed. She remains on low medical category for about 12 months and is protected from strenuous duties. This creates considerable pressure on the other officers, who have to shoulder additional workload. Posting women officers with their husbands, though a government policy, does not benefit the organisation.

Women’s Right to Combat Roles

In 2006, when the Defence Minister had asked the Chiefs of Staff Committee to examine the feasibility of combat roles for women, the Army Headquarters, in an affidavit filed in the Delhi High Court, had ruled out any such possibility in the near future. Since then the Minister of Defence and the three service chiefs have made statements in favour of combat roles for women in the near future. Army Chief General Rawat remarked last year that the process of allowing women to play combat roles is moving fast and that initially, women would be recruited for positions in the military police. The Air Force has recently trained three women fighter pilots on an experimental basis, and the Navy is deliberating on a policy of having women onboard ships. However, women may be allowed to serve only in ‘combat support-related jobs’, which offer fewer career advancement opportunities than hard-core combat roles in the infantry and artillery, or as fighter pilots or commanders of combat ships, because promotion to the higher ranks depends on having served in a combat unit.

Only a handful of countries, including Australia, Britain, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Norway, the US and Sweden allow women to have combat roles. Even in these countries, the employment of women in combat roles remains marginal. The culture of exclusion is deep-rooted in the Armed Forces and is not likely to change in the near future. Many military thinkers and senior commanders hold the opinion that employing women in combat would have devastating consequences, though there is no empirical evidence to support such an opinion. 

The exclusion of women from combat seems to be based more on social mores than on practical considerations. Even in the United States, the combat-exclusion policy for women is based on the need for ‘privacy’ for soldiers and ‘berthing’ considerations. For instance, many older ships do not provide adequate sleeping quarters for women. However, the lack of female quarters on some ships is no reason for prohibiting women from serving in all combat units. As reported in the New York Times (January 23, 2013), hundreds of thousands of American women soldiers were deployed in combat-related tasks in Iraq and Afghanistan and nearly 800 were wounded and more than 130 died. 

The Indian Armed Forces may not offer combat opportunities for women in the near future, as reported in the media or as promised by the Army Chief. However, the Supreme Court could come to their rescue to eliminate unnecessary gender-based discrimination in the Armed Forces. Women officers must raise their voice to be permitted to serve in combat units because they are just as qualified to do so as their male counterparts.

The author is a retired Wing Commander. Views are personal.