Gender equality is – and perhaps will continue to be – a contentious sticky wicket in this country, for many a reason. The deeply entrenched attitudes of role segregation form the basis of opinions and decisions, as evidenced in the recent events regarding the Permanent Commission (PC) for women in the military.
On 24 july, 2020 The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has issued the formal Government Sanction Letter for grant of Permanent Commission (PC) to women officers in the Army.
Why such an order?
The order follows a Supreme Court verdict in February that directed the government that women Army officers be granted PC and command postings in all services other than combat.
Following this, Army Chief had said it was an enabling one and gives a lot of clarity on how to move forward.
He had stated that the same procedure for male SSC officers will be followed for women to give PC.
In a landmark verdict on February 17, the top court had directed that women officers in the Army be granted permanent commission and command postings, rejecting the Centre's stand of their physiological limitations as being based on "sex stereotypes" and "gender discrimination against women".
We should be clear here that army has already started granting PC to women who joined the services after March 2019, but this move in itself was discriminatory as pointed out by a bench of Supreme court. The bench on responding to Senior Advocate R Balasubramanian's argument said that "there was a delay on the part of government to take a policy decision on PC as the Delhi High Court had passed the order way back in 2010 but the decision was taken in 2019. The court said that if the bar of 14 years is allowed, many officers on whose plea the HC passed the order will not get relief as they would have completed more than 14 years of service."
The order came as a very positive step towards gender equality and at the same time gave a sigh of relief for all the women in the services and aspiring to join the services.
The move also sparked a new debate regarding the subject i.e., whether the women should be given Command postings and whether they should be inducted in combat roles. So lets have an in depth analysis of the arguments and counter arguments put forward and how exactly we should move forward
The various dimensions to this issue:
Women are being denied command positions and combat tasks on the basis of multiple reasons,such as the capabilities of women, and the societal impact.
Capabilities of women: The Centre states that although women are equally capable, if not more capable than men, there might be situations that could affect the capabilities of women such as absence during pregnancy and catering to the responsibilities of motherhood, etc. The arguments are presented on the basis that a role in combat would require tough training, whereas the current training for women is different and at a much lower level than that of their male counterparts.
Societal Impact: The government has argued that if a woman is taken captive by insurgents/terrorists or as a Prisoner of War (PoW) by an enemy state, then it would become an international and deeply emotive issue which could have an impact on the society.
Gender Inequality: most of the arguments are being looked at from the perspective of gender bias.
Possible challenges to women being in frontline combat positions:
According to the former Army Chief, India has not placed women in frontline combat because of the changing nature of war like the proxy war in Kashmir. He also cited logistical reasons behind not posting women on frontlines. The capabilities of women aren’t being questioned. The question is of women being able to manage and lead in the operational areas, which presents adverse conditions.
Physical Issues: The natural physical differences in stature, strength, and body composition between the sexes make women more vulnerable to certain types of injuries and medical problems. The vigorous training might also have an effect on the health of women officers.
Physiological Issues: The natural processes of menstruation and pregnancy make women particularly vulnerable in combat situations. Such positions usually leave the commanding officer with no privacy and during adverse situations the lack of sanitation can have an impact on their health.
Social Issues: The issue of military sexual trauma (MST) and its effect on the physical and mental well-being of women combatants is grave. MST may lead to grave, long-term psychological problems, such as Post-traumatic Stress Disorders (PTSD), and depression.
Conventional Barriers: The acceptance of women officers by their male counterparts is still in question, as most of the male officers are predominantly drawn from rural backgrounds. However, times have changed, and India should adapt to it too.
The big question is do these arguments really hold on ground?!?!?!?!?!?!
A worldview:
Traditionally, military everywhere, has either been skeptical or out rightly rejected the idea of women officers in combat role, primarily citing unsuitability due to “biological barriers”. Even if we agree that nature itself has imposed on women certain caveats, which dictate the flow of a woman’s life, can we allow that reason alone to further harden the stance or to let it completely colour the discourse against Permanent Commission and combat role? Is it reason enough?
Martha McSally, (a retired United States Air Force colonel. She was one of the first women to become a fighter pilot in the United States Air Force (USAF) and the first woman in U.S history woman to fly a fighter aircraft in combat. In June 2006, she completed a tour as the first woman to command a combat aviation squadron.) in her thoroughly researched report “WOMEN IN COMBAT: IS THE CURRENT POLICY OBSOLETE?”, evaluates many of the biases that pose a hurdle to women’s role in combat.
“ The most typical arguments against women in ground combat are: 1) Women lack the physical strength to be effective in ground combat; 2) women’s presence will decrease unit cohesion and therefore overall effectiveness; and 3) women just don’t belong in combat.”
Further in her report she elucidates how these biases are entrenched and she counters them with her own personal experiences.
“A. Physical Strength
Closer inspection of the argument from “physical strength” reveals two troubling double standards; is both over – and under – inclusive; many women have the physical strength to engage in ground combat while men do not. Second, the Army does not submit male recruits to physical strength examinations before assigning them to ground combat positions… A male recruit’s physical strength is tested only informally by whether he can complete the training required for the combat job. The double standard here is glaring: Male recruits are not disqualified from entering combat career fields for lack of physical strength, but all female recruits are peremptorily disqualified from such fields regardless of their physical strength.
B. Cohesion
Military cohesion is based on people uniting for a common mission or purpose, not based on the group consisting of a common race, creed, or gender.
Of all the possible behaviours that degrade the good order and discipline of the armed forces, sexual misconduct is an offense that might uniquely arise from gender integration. Sexual misconduct can come in the form of sexual assault as well as consensual sexual relationships that degrade the good order and discipline… With regard to sexual assault, if the U.S. military has a sexual predator in the ranks, he or she should be identified, punished, and removed from the team. Restricting female soldiers from combat units will not protect all women in uniform from male sexual predators.
C. Women Just Don’t “Belong” In combat
These critics argue that women must be givers and protectors of life – not takers of life – and that a man’s role is to protect and a woman’s role is to be protected.”
The emotive issues of women combat soldiers being taken as a Prisoners of War (POW) needs a thorough evaluation –individually by the soldiers themselves and also by the policy makers – of risks that war(s) entails. On this issue, Martha McSally opines:
“Although the risk exists for women, it also exists for men, and both accept that risk as a part of their job. In either case, rape is a violation of the Geneva Convention.”
A woman’s life has many significant stages, perhaps nothing is more life changing than pregnancy and motherhood. The issue of pregnancy while being deployed in active duty rightly raises many questions on whether it is feasible at all to have women working in combat. Instead of summarily dismissing women combatants based on the possibility pregnancy, it needs effective reasoning.
“The military is unlike any other organization: Its purpose is the defense of the nation. Military leaders must create a climate where commanders are not afraid to talk about pregnancy as a a readiness issue and to counsel female warriors on their obligation to avoid pregnancies when it will negatively impact unit readiness.
While pregnancy is a temporary condition, parenthood is a permanent one that affects both servicemen and servicewomen.”
WHAT DO INDIAN ARMY OFFICERS HAVE TO SAY REGARDING THE ARGUMENTS PUT FORWARD TO DENY COMMAND AND COMBAT POSITIONS TO WOMEN?
Here are a few excerpts from an article written by Syed Ata Hasnain (Syed Ata Hasnain is former GOC 15 Corps and is now the Chancellor of Jammu University.)
"On the face of it WOs can do any of these jobs provided they have the ability to physically withstand the rigors of combat and more importantly continue to retain their mental balance, and decision making ability under severe stress. In my experience I have come across WOs from Engineers and Corps of Signals who could give male officers of the Infantry a run for their money.
Can women spend long hours/days alone with male troops in the field? I have seen dozer detachments of the Engineers with WOs sleeping on the deck of their machines for weeks altogether."
A conversation moderated by Dinakar Peri, Lieutenant General Syed Ata Hasnain and Lieutenant General D.S. Hooda discuss this question. Excerpts:
"Army Generals on the question of what they think about women in commanding positions ?
Lt Gen Hasnain: That’s a good question. I admit that I started with a negative mindset myself, way back in 1991. But my mind changed very early because of the demonstrated capability on the ground. In almost every arm and service, I visited in my own division on the Line of Control, I saw a detachment of engineers working feverishly on a particular operational track and the person commanding that detachment and spending time on the deck of the bulldozer at night, for three to four weeks with the men, was a lady officer. Thereafter, there have been many occasions where I’ve seen young women, convoy commanders, who’ve done a marvellous job under the most challenging circumstances in cases of ambushes on the Uri-Baramulla road. Lt Gen Hooda: I will give you two stories. In 2005, I took over command of the Brigade from Lt Gen Hasnain, and we had this earthquake in September 2005.
My Brigade Major wasn’t there [in Uri]. The officer below him, the captain who is called the G3, was injured. And we had no officers there, we were completely cut off. The Education Officer, Captain Rosie, performed the role of Brigade Major and she handled the whole operational side. Hats off to the way she handled it. So, I have no doubts about women officers handling responsibilities during a crisis. Then we had Colonel Santosh Mahadik, Commanding Officer of a unit, when I was the Army Commander, who was killed while fighting terrorists in September 2015. When my wife went to pay condolences, his wife said she wanted to join the Army. She was 35 years old, 10 years older than anybody who can get commissioned into the Officers Training Academy. We took up her case. She got commissioned in 2017 as a Lieutenant in the Ordnance (Corps). Now, the inspiration we get from her story is beyond words."
"Generals, in retrospect, would you have taken orders from a woman officer?
Lt Gen Hasnain: Without blinking an eye, if someone above me, whether man or woman, was someone who demonstrated capability and leadership qualities, there is no question that I would not accept directions, orders. In the Army, we are trained to do that. It’s just a mindset [regarding women], we need to overcome that. I would have overcome it almost immediately.
Lt Gen Hooda: Soldiers respect professionalism, good leadership, irrespective of whether it is demonstrated by a male or female officer."
WAY FORWARD :-
IN WORDS OF SYED ATA HASNAIN :
"So I am all for experimentation but with such stringent norms that the most daring of women find it difficult to qualify. Special psychological tests would require to be drawn up for this. We need to start gingerly after all it involves lives and we can’t be playing games with that. Let us be start with the Artillery and graduate to the Armoured Corps. If a woman can fly a fighter aircraft she can fire a Bofors gun and drive and fire a T-90 tank. However, the standards could be such that only the best of the best WOs should only make it to the hallowed Arms.
Let them be troop leaders and battery second in commands. Based upon the experience over three or four years, decide about the Infantry and Mechanized Infantry. I consider these synchronous in task content and the last bastion should be decided upon after more thought. The issue of command should be debated extensively. I am not sure that this is something the WOs are going to break into very easily."
MY TAKE ON THE ISSUE
A women combat squadron should be designed and studied extensively before any further development or decisions are made.
The training provided to men and women should be similar to eliminate differentiation on the basis of physical standards.
Administrative issues should not be cited as a barrier to women’s entry in the Armed Forces. It is the responsibility of the Government to create both administrative and social infrastructure for the easy induction of women into the Armed Forces.
The framework for the induction of women should be incorporated into a policy. As for the concern of preserving the female officers’ modesty and dignity, there should be elaborate codes of conduct to ensure no adverse incident occurs.
Women should be granted permanent commission on the basis of their abilities and not on the basis of their gender. The decision-making process should involve more women.
Misleading information such as using the patriarchal nature of the society as an excuse to deny women their deserving opportunities should be stopped. India has come a long way, and the society should be supportive of women being inducted in to combat roles.
JAI HIND JAI BHARAT JAI HIND KI SENA VANDE MATARAM
Comments