What's new

Women in combat roles in armed forces: Wait gets longer

arp2041

BANNED
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
10,406
Reaction score
-9
Country
India
Location
India
Women in the country’s armed forces will have to wait longer to get into combat roles. The defence ministry has said it has no proposal as of now, including recruiting women as fighter pilots, a distinction that even Pakistan has.

"There is no proposal to induct women into combat duties in the defence forces including as fighter pilots in Indian Air Force (IAF)," the government has asserted before parliament twice in the last two months.

For rejecting the combat role demand, the government has cited the studies on women in combat roles carried out by the Delhi-based Integrated Defence Staff (IDS) headquarters in 2006 and the tri-services committee which gave its report in 2011.

"Induction of women in combat duties has not been recommended by the studies carried out by the IDS headquarters in 2006 and the High level Tri-Services Committee in 2011," the government has said.

Though India began recruiting women as short-service commissioned (SSC) officers into the armed forces in 1992, it is yet to make up its mind on allowing them to participate in combat. It has only in recent years relaxed its norms on having women as permanent officers.

But countries like New Zealand, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Israel and Sweden, however, allow women to serve at all army positions. The US and the UK too allow women to join combat roles, but with a few restrictions. Neighbouring Pakistan too has women fighter pilots in its air force now.

India's women are recruited initially as SSC officers for five years, but are offered to extend the commission up to 14 years of service.

In certain branches of the three services, though, they are offered permanent commission on a par with men SSC officers, provided they complete the criteria laid down.

The defence ministry, after considering a comprehensive policy paper on induction and employment of women submitted by the armed forces and keeping in view the role and responsibility of the armed forces in defending the nation and protecting its territorial integrity, issued in November 2011 a letter laying down the policy framework including granting permanent commission.

Permanent commission has been offered to women officers in Judge Advocate General (JAG) and Army Education Corps (AEC) of the army and their corresponding branches in the navy and the air force, apart from the naval constructor branch in the navy and the accounts branch in the air force since September 2008.

Additionally, women in the air force are eligible for consideration of permanent commission in technical, administration, logistics and meteorology branches.

"The grant of permanent commission will be subject to willingness of the candidate and service-specific requirements, availability of vacancies, suitability, merit of the candidate as decided by each service," the government said.

At present, a petition filed by some short-service women officers regarding offering them permanent commission and against their release from service is pending before the Supreme Court.

"Women serving in the Indian armed forces is an evolving process. Till 1992, women were never recruited. Now we get permanently absorbed into some of the streams of service. We have come far ahead since the time we started out. I am sure time will come when we will do combat roles too. But it is still a little far away," a serving woman officer in the rank of an army captain said.

"Over these 20 years, we are now rubbing shoulders with men officers at every level of service. It is more so in the air force and navy than in the army. But there are practical issues, which need thought and resolving, such as living quarters in forward areas," according to an air force woman officer.

"I know women officers who have laid mines in border areas. I know women who flew planes better than men during training. Once mindset changes, things will fall in place. It is just a matter of time," says another woman army officer.

According to figures available, there has been a 67 percent increase in recruitment of women officers into the army, navy and air force since 2009. As many as 781 women joined the armed forces as officers during this period. The army alone inducted 343 women, the navy 129 and the air force 309. These figures do not include the women officers joining the armed forces medical services.

There is no separate fixed sanctioned strength for recruitment of women officers in the armed forces and they are recruited within the overall sanctioned strength of the respective services.

"Both society and armed forces are reconciling to women in uniform, donning roles traditionally performed by men. I am sure, not only combat roles, even commanding units may become a reality in the future," said a woman squadron leader from the air force.

Women in combat roles in armed forces: Wait gets longer
 
.
Fighter Pilots are fine but i wont support them to serve in the Infantry.Its a really tough job under challenging situation and our society is not like western countries.Moreover if they would be able to earn the respect of their soldiers in combat is also questionable coz soldiers want their officers to be better than them in everything which to be honest i dont think they can because of biological reasons.Lastly there is no question about them serving as non officers shoulder to shoulder with the jawans..we are not yet ready for this.
 
. .
I have no real issue in for women to be fighter pilots other than the fact you would have to be able to ensure a women signed up for a long term commission and there were provisions so that she did not take leave for pregnancy in this period. It is a matter of cost- the IAF has stated it costs in excess of 1 Million USD to train a single fighter pilot and you can't have the IAF investing such huge amounts of money in training a female pilot for her to turn around and take a year or two off for maternal leave it makes. O financial sense. As far as infantry and Special forces go- NO WAY (of course it is almost certain a women would be unlikely to qualify for the latter) it has been proven time and again in countless studies that women are just not as physically able to serve in frontline combat roles added to that they are more prone to break certain bones and it has been speculated are more prone to mental issues as a result of frontline duty. It is possible that men may ave an issue taking orders from women but in non-combt roles this has already happend and by all accounts there has been a positive feeling by most involved so this may not be as much of an issue.

Also I read a few pieces that said that COs of women officers were gave the women favourable postings and women weren't sent to areas like JK and Siachin so this would cause a degree of resentment.
 
.
^^^Mate in the OTA where women officers are trained with men there is no equality.A Lady cadet has to run far less than a Gentelman cadet..they dont even carry RLs.There is absolutely no equality coz they are not biologically capable of competing with men on these things.

Navy and Airforce is fine but Army life is full of sacrifices and struggles.I cant imagine them going on LRPs,I cant imagine them carrying RLs even for 2-3 kms forget about LRPs.We have to accept the fact that they are not as physically tough as their male counterparts and it starts in OTA itself.

In order to make our guys tough there is a common saying that"we break you to make you".I cant see this happening to women.The guys are abused,given rigrous punishments etc during the time they are broken which you cant do with a woman.OTA instructors are specially told to handle them with care.

We dont want the Army to get a bad name here because after they start facing tough behaviours in the process of becoming a infantrywomen they would start complaining like in the past and would only give a bad name to the Army.Infantry is no place for cry babies.Besides serving in the infantry would put you in direct contact with the terrorists,well trained enemy troops or SF operatives and the fight can easily go hand to hand..which i dont see them comming out victorious.

I think much more openings should be there for them in AF and Navy but Infantry should be kept off bounds as of now.


Check out this video where you can see their training is not equal to GCs in OTA forget about Infantry.

?????? ???? ?? ?????? ???????
 
.
Trust Women.....Trust Nation,,although patriotism is not patented by mens only

Its nothing about patriotism, its about reality and truth.

And the truth is a women can't match a man in physical stamina and ability.

And we are talking about real things not fairly tales.

In army training:

- A lady is to jump over a less longer pit then man
- A lady is to run with lesser weight

the list goes on.

When it comes to fight in rough weather, high mountains, deserts with no food, worst situations these things takes a toll of the performance.

If we have a lady against enemy men then she will have uneven battle.
 
.
Mate I 100% agree with you, my post says as much I thought! The argument a femmaist would make (and have to me when I argued this before) is that standards for women shouldn't be lowered and they should be as able to them. My rebuff (that I didn't say to their face) was that the lowly numbers (if any) of women able to pass these rigorous trails would be so negligible that they could in no way justify the costs of separate berthing/changing faculties and the like.


There is a reason why NO modern day proffesional army has women serving in combat positions on a regular/permanent basis.
 
.
Its nothing about patriotism, its about reality and truth.

And the truth is a women can't match a man in physical stamina and ability.

And we are talking about real things not fairly tales.

In army training:

- A lady is to jump over a less longer pit then man
- A lady is to run with lesser weight

the list goes on.

When it comes to fight in rough weather, high mountains, deserts with no food, worst situations these things takes a toll of the performance.

If we have a lady against enemy men then she will have uneven battle.

Is that so.....
then Usa,uk,italy,israel are fools
 
.
Mate I 100% agree with you, my post says as much I thought! The argument a femmaist would make (and have to me when I argued this before) is that standards for women shouldn't be lowered and they should be as able to them. My rebuff (that I didn't say to their face) was that the lowly numbers (if any) of women able to pass these rigorous trails would be so negligible that they could in no way justify the costs of separate berthing/changing faculties and the like.


There is a reason why NO modern day proffesional army has women serving in combat positions on a regular/permanent basis.

Ya i agree with you and also a point worth mentioning is that most of the time they might be faciing ratios in favour of the enemy or situations where the enemy has upper hand.

I would say among the fighting Arms of the Army Artillery,Combat Sappers and to an extent Cavalry is also fine and Army Aviation(LCH Pilots) in future but Infantry is a totally different thing all together.

Is that so.....
then Usa,uk,italy,israel are fools

Sir/Ma'am,

I suggest you read this.


The Rape of Our Military Women by Kelley B. Vlahos -- Antiwar.com
 
.
Is that so.....
then Usa,uk,italy,israel are fools

Mate NO proffesional Amy today has women in permantent combat roles. The US has women in "femal engament teams" in Afghanistan deployed on patrols occasionally to win the trust of local women and allow them to be physically checked for contraband. I'm not sure about Italy. Israeli army is conscription based so there is a inherent shortage of manpower (lol) and hence women have to plug the gaps but even then women are NOT utilised in combat roles intentionally and are NOT deployed in infantry battalions. But the nature of the IDF and the fight they are involved in reflects the fact that sometimes women may come to harm and may have to engage in combat but this is not by design.
 
.
OTA instructors are specially told to handle them with care.
Where did you get this gem from? There are NO such orders/instructions at the Officers Training Academy, Chennai to treat women any differently. They are made to do what the gentlemen cadets do.

Initially they do feel the heat and try and make excuses not to do certain things, but that's just a passing phase. They are many a time made to front roll like the GCs across the length and breadth of the asphalt drill square till their backs turn blue! And they do get used to it after a while. They are 'punished' (toughening exercises) just as hard as the GCs.

However, I do agree that they would not be fit for combat roles but this is due to purely biological reasons and NOT because of lack of motivation and leadership qualities.

For your info, Lady cadet Divya Ajithkumar received the 'Sword of Honour' from the Army Chief at the Officers Training Academy in Chennai last Sept. The silver medal for the second best cadet was also bagged by a lady cadet.

A sword of Honor is awarded to the best all round cadet that includes both Lady cadets as well as Gentlemen cadets.

ota2.JPG

Divya Ajithkumar leading the parade as parade commander at the OTA Passing Out Parade.

In her own words:

"We were not exempted from any routines during the 11 months of training and treated on par with our male counterparts. The training has enabled us to take up more responsibilities in future."
 
.
Where did you get this gem from? ]


:lol:

That gem..i got it from here.

?????? ???? ?? ?????? ???????

Do watch the whole video and you will see the Instructor say that we are specially told to not be rude with them etc etc.(i dont remeber every line i watched it a month ago)

"We were not exempted from any routines during the 11 months of training and treated on par with our male counterparts. The training has enabled us to take up more responsibilities in future."

And if you watch the video carefully ignoring the initial stupid commentary then you will forget this gem of yours.

Also notice them carry dummy RLs for equality.
 
.
^ pal no one is questioning the Women's resolve or spirit but purely their ability to serve in combat which they catergorically are NOT. The OTA isn't the infantry training school as such the standards are inherently lowered. I can't see a women being able to successfully pass the same courses as men at schools such as SBS or HAWS or CIJWS or even the "Commando" course mandatory for infantry officers at Belguam. If you have someone- regardless of gender- unable to pull the same weight as the rest of the unit they are deadweight end of.
 
.
:lol:

That gem..i got it from here.
?????? ???? ?? ?????? ???????

Do watch the whole video and you will see the Instructor say that we are specially told to not be rude with them etc etc.(i dont remeber every line i watched it a month ago). And if you watch the video carefully ignoring the initial stupid commentary then you will forget this gem of yours.
Buddy, you're going by a video that's tailor made for public viewing! I've been training these girls at the OTA myself! And with a total of almost five years in two tenures at the OTA, I think I know what the heck I'm talking about!

pal no one is questioning the Women's resolve or spirit but purely their ability to serve in combat which they catergorically are NOT.
Agreed! You can't equate them. Men and women can never be at the same level of physical fitness per se.

But I need to add, the Lady cadets are highly motivated, more responsible and have the inherent urge to come out tops. Their officer like qualities (OLQ) are as good if not better than their male counterparts.

Cheers! :pop:
 
.
I really could never understand the issue with feminists.

There are some things that nature doesn't intend both men and women to do.

Feminists cannot reverse nature. No matter how much they shout about women's rights.

Nature hasn't made women's body with enough muscle mass.

It's basic anatomy. Men have more muscle mass in their body. Just like a woman can bear a child and a man can't. It's anatomy. IT CAN'T BE CHANGED.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom