When the Officers Training Academies in Chennai and Gaya held their graduation parades in September, only 48 of the 362 new Army officers—less than 14 per cent — were women. These officers will be permitted to join every regiment of the Indian Army, except for the combat arms — Infantry, Armoured Corps, and Mechanised Infantry.
It has been more than three decades since the Indian Army opened its doors to women in 1992, as what was called the Women Special Entry Scheme, for five years, as Short Service Commission (SSC) officers. Yet, it is an internal battle that is still not settled.
The exclusion raises questions about the evolving role of women in combat roles within the Indian Army, especially when compared with the Indian Air Force (IAF) and the Indian Navy, both of which opened combat positions to women years ago. Keeping women out of these “core combat arms” remains the subject of an enduring debate in the Army as the other two branches of armed forces push ahead with gender inclusion.
The question lingers with each new batch that graduates from the academies: Why does the Army, the most “manpower”- intensive of the three services, still keep its combat arms closed to women, when the skies and seas have already embraced them?
The IAF took a pioneering step in 2016, when it commissioned the first batch of three women fighter pilots — Avani Chaturvedi, Bhawana Kanth and Mohana Singh — breaking a ceiling once thought unshatterable. The Navy, too, allowed women in combat roles even earlier, in 2008, when it began inducting women officers for reconnaissance and anti-submarine warfare roles. It has since been deploying women aboard frontline warships in mixed-gender crews.
The National Defence Academy (NDA), the joint training school for all three services, once a male bastion, began admitting women cadets in 2021. This signalled a structural shift in how the armed forces imagine gender roles within their ranks, which earlier enrolled women primarily through graduation-level entries.
Yet, within the Army, the path remains layered with caution. Women who have risen to the rank of lieutenant general or equivalent have served in the Armed Forces Medical Services, wearing the Rod of Asclepius, commanding military hospitals, leading field medical units and United Nations missions only.
Their contributions in these medical and administrative branches are widely recognised.
But the contrast is sharp: While women have commanded operating theatres, they are yet to command a rifle platoon on the frontlines.
‘Role, not gender’
A retired Army veteran, speaking to the Blueprint on the condition of anonymity, asserted that the issue is not about inclusion but about operational suitability. “A mission should never be divided based on gender,” he said. “It must be decided purely on merit. The best people are selected for the role, irrespective of gender.”
“Certain tasks in infantry or counter-terror operations require extreme stamina and hand-to-hand combat capability. For such roles, the Army chooses the most capable individuals. It’s not a question of male or female; it’s a question of mission success.”
According to him, decisions on the induction of officers into combat-intensive roles such as infantry are taken only after a careful assessment of both physical and psychological endurance. Senior commanders, he explained, evaluate these parameters in line with mission requirements before finalising postings.
As the debate over women in combat roles continues to evolve, voices from within the services reflect ground realities as well as institutional change.
Major General Dr Rajan Kochhar (retired) highlighted that integrating women into combat arms is not merely a military question but also linked to societal norms, threat perceptions, and national security imperatives. He stressed, “Raising the issue of gender disparity in terms of human rights is okay. But taking up gender disparity issues in terms of national security is not okay.”
To be sure, many military powers such as the United States (US), the United Kingdom (UK), Australia, France, Denmark, Germany, and Canada have long allowed women in combat positions, but Kochhar said the Indian Army’s operational environment is different. India’s 15,000-kilometre (km) land border, with 10,000 km of it contested, demands constant vigilance, making combat readiness and physical capability non-negotiable.
Long-range patrols, carrying injured comrades under hostile conditions and enduring austere field conditions are crucial requirements that cannot be compromised. “If a woman is prepared to share the same facilities as the men, then she deserves to come into the combat arms.” Yet, he noted that societal attitudes, infrastructure constraints, and biological realities such as menstruation, pregnancy, and motherhood pose practical challenges to women’s deployment in frontline combat roles.
Promotions are now moving toward integrated boards where men and women compete equally, reflecting meritocracy rather than gender-based quotas. Kochhar emphasised, “I am not differentiating on gender. I am differentiating on the standard required to be achieved.” He added that the benchmark for combat roles must remain uncompromised, irrespective of who wears the uniform.
According to him, operational realities further complicate women’s integration into combat arms as camaraderie and trust within units are built over years of shared hardships with eating, sleeping, and serving together under identical conditions.
“Leaders are recognised not by their gender, but by their professional capabilities. They have to eat, sleep, and work together,” Kochhar said. While women have excelled in technical, administrative, and logistic roles, and in select operational units like the Military Police, frontline infantry, or armoured units remain largely male-dominated due to physical and logistical imperatives.
When asked about the experiences of other countries, he pointed out that India cannot blindly follow the models of the US, the UK, Germany, or Israel. “When we inducted women officers, other countries like the US, the UK, and Germany had already done it long back. But today, are they actually fighting a war?” he asked.
He noted that Israel is an exception due to its unique security situation. “It is only in Israel that hostile deployment is a matter of national sovereignty and survival. Serving in the army is compulsory, there – 36 months for men and 18 months for women due to conscription. Their society and threat perception are different, for which they induct women to make up the numbers.”
Kochhar said the need to strike a work-life balance, spousal postings, and childcare creates additional constraints on women. Despite these challenges, he affirmed that women officers who meet the standards can progress to the highest ranks.
As a senior female officer, Flying Officer Itisshha Chauhan (retired) shared her perspective on how women navigate the expectations and realities of military life. “We are equal; we are a gender-neutral organisation,” she said, emphasising that women in uniform must meet the same professional standards as their male counterparts.
The perception of the “tough, emotionless soldier” has also evolved, she said. While soldiers were seen as resilient and “unfeeling”, the induction of women means there is now a broader understanding that professionalism and emotional intelligence can coexist.
“Women may be soft-hearted or emotionally driven, but over time, armed forces training has become so scientifically designed that you stop feeling that you are a woman; the professional environment takes precedence,” Chauhan added.
Reflecting on her own experience as an air traffic controller, she highlighted the importance of accountability, which transcends gender. “My every command is a whole lot of man, machine, time, effort, and money. If I gave a wrong command, nobody would look at me as a woman,” she said.
Colonel Sophia Qureshi (right) and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh at an Indian government media briefing on Operation Sindoor in New Delhi on May 10 (Photo: Reuters)
Numbers narrate a story
The numbers reveal that India still lags behind other countries. Women make up less than 1 per cent of the armed forces, largely because various roles were opened to them only recently. Chauhan cited both cultural and practical reasons for the low number of women in field postings. “It takes two to tango,” she said. “When a woman is keen to take over, her superiors gain confidence and allow her to do it.”
Institutional hesitation and scepticism among senior officers have also been barriers, but policy changes and women’s proven competence are reshaping the armed forces. Today, women fly Rafale fighter jets, serve as submariners and join the NDA, demonstrating their capability in demanding roles. “Everyone of us has gone the extra mile,” Chauhan said, highlighting the persistence required to earn respect in a male-dominated institution.
Chauhan also pointed out how partial privileges or restrictions, such as exemption from night duties, can inadvertently limit women’s exposure and growth. Looking ahead, she remains optimistic. While challenges persist, opportunities are expanding across the Air Force, Navy, and Army. “We have paved the way for the next generation. The ecosystem has to develop, the acceptance has to develop, and sooner or later, things will pick up huge traction,” she said.
Wing Commander Monica Dubey (retired), who has been posted on forward air-defence units, reflected on her journey in the Air Force, describing motherhood as “a journey” that subtly influenced operational responsibilities. She recalled how her superiors offered flexibility during her pregnancy and allowed her to continue her operational role without compromising her duties as a mother.
Discussing perceptions of physical capability and combat readiness, she dismissed the notion that women are less fit or less capable than men: “If there is a man who is physically inactive and a woman is physically active, the difference will be there. Training is not gender-specific — it’s about the individual’s commitment.” She also stressed operational practicality, proposing solutions such as “buddy pairs” for field duties in challenging terrains, ensuring both safety and efficiency without compromising standards.
She highlighted how women officers bring unique strengths to missions — in humanitarian missions, for instance, empathy can improve cohesion and effectiveness. But, she asserted, when it comes to combat, the gender distinction disappears: “If my enemy is in front of me, whoever it is, I’m going to act. Gender doesn’t come into it.”
Away from combat duty, women officers have also had to fight a battle for permanent commission (PC) — which allows officers to serve until retirement — for decades. The Delhi High Court decreed in 2010 that women should be granted PC. But the Army and the government challenged this ruling, arguing that courts cannot interfere in policy decisions. Finally, in 2020, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of PC for women officers.
However, according to a paper published in the Social Policy Research Foundation in 2021, a year after the Supreme Court judgment, only 45 per cent of women officers were permanently commissioned across all 10 branches of the Indian Army, in contrast to 90 per cent of their male colleagues. Women officers, the paper argues, are valued for social currency and token presence, not merit.
Perception vs performance
This gap reflects not just administrative delay but a deeper institutional hesitancy rooted more in perception than in performance.
Lt Col Ipsa Ratha (retired) said the debate on women’s suitability for combat must shift from capability to preparation. “Nobody is doing any favour to women in uniform,” she said, acknowledging the intense training undergone by women officers who have earned their place through “sweat, blood, and rigorous discipline.”
“At the age of 12 or 13, when boys enter Sainik School, running becomes part of their life. You can’t suddenly expect anyone– be it man or woman – to run 10 km without having built that habit over years.”
Ratha’s stance remains resolute as a mother. “If my daughter has the capability and proves herself, why not?
It would be an honour to see her in the infantry,” she said. Her words carry the weight of the lived experience of a soldier and a Veer Naari (“brave woman”, the term recently adopted by the government and forces for widow of a soldier) of an infantry officer. “I lost my husband, an infantryman, seven years ago. I’ve raised my daughter alone. I gave birth, managed my duties, and ran my home without asking for concessions. So when people say women won’t be able to manage family and service, I find that argument baseless.”
She dismisses the notion that women officers might struggle to build the same camaraderie with jawans as their male counterparts. “We try to glorify discomfort or highlight what’s ‘different’ about women officers. If the system wants to promote someone, it can empower and recognise their effort. But if it doesn’t, the same aspects are used to prove them unworthy. It’s not about capability but perspective,” she said.
“You can surmount mountains, but you say women can’t surmount a mental barrier? Then what are we really questioning — physical capacity or mindset? When you’ve already decided that something cannot happen, you block every channel of communication. It’s not that women can’t serve in infantry; it’s that the institution hasn’t opened its mind to how it can be done.”
Ratha said India’s hesitation is driven more by societal bias than institutional limits. “Women face daily dangers in their own neighbourhoods, yet people doubt their safety in the combat, that’s hypocrisy. In uniform, they understand and accept the risks. Don’t lower standards — just give women the same training and chances.”
“When you hide behind logistics, postings, and traditions, what you’re really saying is that you don’t want to change,” she said, pointing to the IAF as an example of what pragmatic leadership can achieve. “The Air Force manages spouse postings, ensures productivity, and supports its officers. If they can do it, why can’t the Army?
The number of women is still small and manageable.” The first batch of 33 women officers completed their command courses in 2021, after the Supreme Court decision to grant PC. “For years, women were denied the Junior command course that was mandatory for their male counterparts. A male officer within 4 years of experience did those courses, while a woman officer with over two decades of experience was made to do the same course with juniors, where’s the parity in that?” she asked. It wasn’t until the 2020 Supreme Court judgment on PC that women officers began to get formal recognition for command roles.
The decision reflects a growing shift towards equality in training, command and operational roles, bridging a gap long faced by women officers. As India witnesses more women donning olive greens with pride and purpose, experts said it is only a matter of time before they command all crucial roles. Every cap tossed up skyward at graduation parades in Chennai
and Gaya seems to be pointing to that inevitability.
 "A battle within")
Premium ContentPremium ContentSubscription ExpiredSubscription Expired
