Women Fighter Pilots: A Slapdash Act of Tokenism

Women Fighter Pilots: A Slapdash Act of Tokenism

(Defence and Security Alert February 2016)

Major General Mrinal Suman

Since the induction of the first batch of women Short Service Commission (SSC) officers in 1992, the country has been witnessing an unhealthy and detrimental competition between the three services. Every service wants to be seen as the leading champion of the ‘equality of sexes’. Resultantly, a race for one-upmanship is underway to induct women in maximum number of fields and policy decisions of colossal significance are being undertaken in a totally cavalier, slapdash and hasty manner. No attempt is being made to study likely long term implications of multiple issues involved and their effect on the fighting potential of the services.

Presently, women are being granted SSC in a large number of areas in the three services. However, permanent commission is being awarded to them only in Judge Advocate General and Army Education Corps of the Army and their corresponding branches in Navy and Air Force; Naval Constructor in the Navy; and Accounts, Technical, Administration and Meteorology Branches in the Air Force. Significantly, women are not allowed in combat jobs in all the three services at present.

It appears that the Air Force has decided to be the first to induct women in combat functions, i.e. the fighter stream. The chronology of the events leading to such a major policy decision over the last few years makes an interesting reading.

On 16 May 2012, in a written statement in the Rajya Sabha, Defence Minister Antony had categorically stated that there was no proposal to induct women into combat duties in the defence forces including as fighter pilots in the Air Force. He went on to add that induction of women in combat duties had not been recommended by the studies carried out by the Headquarters Integrated Defence Staff in 2006 and a High Level Tri-Services Committee in 2011. He also informed the house that a detailed Government policy letter had been issued on 11 November 2011.

Similar views were expressed by Defence Minister Parrikar at Pune on 30 May 2015. Ruling out combat role for women, he cautioned, “One needs to give an apt thought on what could be the fate of women combatants if they are taken prisoners by the enemy in a war. That is not allowed anywhere in the world”.

Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha took over as Chief of the Air Staff in December 2013. In early 2014 at Kanpur, he stated, “As far as flying fighter planes is concerned, it is a very challenging job. Women are by nature not physically suited for flying fighter planes for long hours, especially when they are pregnant or have other health problems.”

In light of the above unambiguous assertions by the government and the Air Force, the environment was astonished to hear the Air Force Day address of the Air Chief on 08 October. In a complete turnaround, he declared, “We have women pilots flying transport aircraft and helicopters. We are now planning to induct them into the fighter stream to meet the aspirations of young women of India.”

Within a fortnight, the government accorded approval to the proposal on 24 October 2015.

Irrational Incongruities

The air force has over 1,300 women on its rolls including 94 pilots and 14 navigators. According to the government press release, the first women pilots for flying fighters would be selected from the batch which is presently undergoing Stage-I flying training at Air Force Academy, Dundigal. After initial training of 18 months, based on their fitness and willingness, the trainees will be selected for Stage-II training in the fighter stream in June 2016. Thereafter, they will be imparted advanced training for 12 months and be allowed to enter the fighter cockpits by June 2017. After due assessment of their suitability by the instructors, women trainees will be assigned to fly different types of combat aircraft, i.e. Su-30 MKI, MiG-29, Mirage 2000 or Jaguar.

The decision has given rise to a number of worrisome issues. In a written reply to the Lok Sabha on 04 December 2015, Minister of State for Defence Rao Inderjit Singh informed the house that the government had accorded approval to the entry of women into the fighter stream of the Air Force on 'experimental basis' for a period of five years. It was a bizarre revelation. No such stipulation was mentioned in the government’s approval of 24 October. Apparently, within a short period of six weeks, the government appears to have had second thoughts. It converted a blanket approval into a provisional experiment.

Interestingly, even ACM Raha continues to entertain doubts regarding the physical suitability of women. While announcing the decision to induct women in fighter stream on 08 October, he had to concede that women pilots might face problems in terms of physical fitness. However, he claimed to be hopeful of the problems being overcome.

Most shockingly, ACM Raha appeared totally confused regarding the role to be assigned to women fighter pilots. In response to a query, he categorically declared that ‘women fighter pilots need not necessarily get involved in combat across border and could be assigned tasks within the country, especially air defence, training and qualified flying instructions’. Realising the oddity of the averment, he went on to correct himself by adding that if the need arose they would also do proper combat roles. He demonstrated totally muddled thinking by claiming that he saw no incongruence in women fighting in a real combat scenario. It is shocking that a decision of such enormous proportions has been taken without defining the envisaged role for women fighter pilots. 

If ACM Saha is to be believed, the Air Force will have two streams of fighter pilots, one for operations across the border and the second one restricted to operating within the country. One has not heard of a more preposterous proposition – drawing of an operational ‘Lakshman Rekha’ for air battles, which women pilots are not to cross even while pursuing hostile aircraft. 

  

A Hasty Decision

One fails to understand government’s compulsion in according approval for such a critical issue without being fully convinced of its appropriateness. No country takes decisions that impact operational preparedness, risk fighter aircraft worth millions of dollars and endanger lives of pilots without due deliberations. What happens if at the expiry of the trial period of five years, the government realises infeasibility/futility of the experiment? Will all the expenditure incurred on women pilots’ training be considered a waste? What about the resultant shortage of male fighter pilots as some training vacancies would have been appropriated by women?

The government has stated that it has already taken up ‘a comprehensive review pertaining to induction of women in armed forces both in short service commission and permanent commission and once finalised more and more branches would be opened up for induction of women to give them the space with they deserve in the armed forces of the country’. If that be so, it would have been prudent to defer such a major decision till the receipt of the review report.

Perhaps the most perplexing aspect of the issue is the fact that the High Level Tri-Services Committee had opined against the induction of women in combat duties in 2011 and the government had accepted its recommendation. What has changed to prompt a rethink now? Similarly, in early 2014, ACM Raha considered women to be physically unsuited to flying fighter planes for long hours. Pray what evolution in women physique has taken place in the last one year for him to revise his opinion!

Senseless Tokenism

Tokenism is the policy and practice of making a perfunctory gesture towards the inclusion of members of minority groups. It implies a policy or practice of making only a symbolic effort. It generally lacks genuine intent/conviction.  In fact, it is an exercise in political expediency to give the impression of being equitable and all inclusive. It aims to earn plaudits by appearing to be progressive by resorting to non-serious gimmicks, such as hiring a few persons of a minority group to demonstrate intent to desegregate. The decision to induct women as fighter pilots smacks of tokenism of reckless nature.

It is apparent that the government has failed to think-through the likely long term implications of the convoluted issues involved. The sole justification for the decision (given both by the Air Force and the government) is that the said decision is a ‘progressive step’ in keeping with the aspirations of Indian women. In other words, it is being conceded by both that it is not a need-based decision: the country does not   require women fighter pilots. It gives rise to a vexing question: is it the responsibility of the Air Force to satisfy aspirations of all segments of the society. Howsoever strong the pressures may be, it should resist temptation to masquerade as an equal opportunity employer.

The raison d'être of the Air Force is to ensure security of the nation. It is neither a flying club for adventure thrills nor a hobby club for recreation. It is mandated to win wars. No one can demand a right to fly fighter aircraft to satisfy vocational whims. It is for the armed forces to select and recruit the best material available to discharge highly challenging responsibilities of national defence. 

    

Nearly 25 years have passed since the decision to induct women was taken. The services are mired in numerous court cases filed by women officers. Worse, instead of earning kudos for inducting women, the services are getting flak from the judiciary, media and self-appointed champions of gender equality.  

Adoption of slogans like ‘women empowerment’ and ‘women’s liberation’ may make an organisation look progressive, but can prove highly detrimental for the fighting potential of the services. Howsoever righteous and morally upright the principle of equality of sexes may be; it should be applied to the armed forces in a conscientious manner without succumbing to populist pressures. National security imperative should never be compromised at the altar of political expediency. The policy to induct women as fighter pilots needs to be revisited.*****