Secret documents reveal Australian Military has issues with women on the front lines

SECRET Defence documents have revealed an extraordinary litany of reasons why it fears letting women fight in frontline combat roles – including increased sexual harassment, litigation, deaths and battlefield pregnancies.

The concerns include “almost certain” personal privacy problems while working with men, males trying to protect females in war zones and women being considered not “credible” in combat.

Serving female Defense personnel will be able to apply for new front line combat roles within three months.

But females outside the Army, Navy and Air Force will have to wait another three years before they can sign up.

The Australian Defense Force implementation plan to open the remaining 7 per cent of combat roles to women also reveals some equipment and facilities will have to be tweaked for new female recruits.

Under the plan – recently signed off by Defense chiefs and obtained by The Sunday Telegraph – in-service transfers can be applied for in January next year but actual deployment will rely on vacancies and availability.

But a risk matrix log of 71 issues, their likelihood, consequences and mitigation measures warns of possible injuries, non-acceptance from personnel and “almost certain” damage to the reputations of the ADF and government if the policy was bungled.

Defence “in-confidence” documents also list pregnancies on deployments from “inappropriate relationships” and women being killed in combat, captured by the enemy or men protecting females on the battlefield as sensitive issues requiring its management.”The community is divided on the issue with strong views opposing the move at one extreme and firm support with caveats at the opposite extreme,” the brief concluded.

In the September 2012 risk log obtained by The Sunday Telegraph, Defense believed there could be a “high” risk that government may apply pressure to bump up female numbers in new army combat roles, amid other risks that no women would apply or high percentages would fail physical standards tests.

But the department said it would reinforce to ministers the threat to capability and deploy senior service chiefs to intervene and influence government if it occurs.

Defense Personnel Minister Warren Snowdon yesterday ruled out any interference.

The revelations are the first time the full gamut of Defense’s worries have been revealed since the controversial new gender-neutral frontline strategy was revealed last year. It will open the remaining 7 per cent of positions to females, including infantry, artillery and armored corps roles, air force defense guards and navy clearance divers.

The List 

THE Defense Department has produced an extensive list of reasons why it is concerned about letting women on the front-line. Check them out for yourself.

EXTREME RISK

Defense Department

• Damage to Government reputation
• Damage to Defense reputation

HIGH RISK

Defense Department

• Negative community perception
• Non acceptance of Defense personnel to the required changes
• Inconsistent messaging and communications

Navy

• Low numbers of females in Mine Clearance Diving Officer and Clearance Diver intakes
• Exposure to low to non-existent levels of personal privacy, severe field conditions
• Navy female entrants unable to attend Army provided Military Skills training as it is not yet open within the Navy
• Media interest causing pressure on initial female trainees
• Perception of favoritism and reduced standards for females

Army

• Pressure from Govt to increase women in combat roles
• Perception of discrimination by allowing women to conduct on-the-job experience in their desired combat employment category but men don’t have the same opportunity
• Perception of discrimination by allowing women to return to former trade if combat role no longer desired, but men don’t have the same opportunity until they meet Initial Minimum Period of Service requirements
• Inability to influence cultural change within combat categories
• Increase in sexual harassment and inappropriate behavior within combat units
• Perception that Army is lowering its standards

Air Force

• Physical testing will increase incidents of injury among female
• Media interest causing pressure on initial female trainees
• • MEDIUM RISK

  Defence Department

  • Exposure to litigation during or post implementation
  • Increase to ComSuper financial exposure
  • Nil take up of women in these roles

  Navy

  • Women on training path may not pass new physical employment standards
  • Not waiting for critical mass
  • Heightened Occupational Health and Safety risk factors for females will increase incidence of injury
  • Unrealistic expectations of direct-entry recruits
  • Limited support mechanisms for initial female entrants
  • Perception of discrimination if females not allowed into Special Forces roles
  • Cultural resistance from within Mine Clearance Diving community
  • Perception of positive discrimination re. female priority for placement training
  • Female expectation they need to out-perform male peers to get acceptance

  Army

  • Defence/Army policies are not amended in time
  • Individuals in combat units do not support women in combat roles
  • Perception that women in combat roles will reduce capability
  • Public not supportive of women in combat roles
  • Inability to achieve critical mass during ab initio training
  • Inability to generate enough females in combat employment categories to build a suitable mentoring framework by Jan 16
  • Women who want to transfer but are more senior in rank than intended target, and are required to be reduced in rank
  • Defence Materiel organisation, Defence Support Group, other Groups not able to meet implementation plan schedule
  • High percentage of people cannot achieve physical employment standards Possible Moderate Reduce Actions planned
  • Unable to achieve critical mass in units
  • Inability for Defence Force Recruiting to conduct predictive testing from 2016 due to contract limitations
  • Unsuccessful in implementing Government’s policy
  • No women interested or capable of meeting the physical requirements
  • Too much media attention on female ‘pioneers’ interfering with training and causing resentment to those receiving the attention
  • Units/individuals do not feel consulted
  • Key messages not delivered to stakeholders in a timely manner
  • Women posted to a unit containing a less supportive command team
  • Perception that Army will implement quotas
  • In-service transfers not supported/ fail to meet the requirements
  • Increase in injury due to new physical employment standards requirements
  • Inability to conduct back-casting trial in required time
  • Perception of positive discrimination re. female priority for placement training

  Air Force

  • Resentment towards individuals receiving attention
  • Exposure to low to non-existent levels of personal privacy, severe field conditions
  • Potential that females not considered credible in combat roles
  • Perception females have reduced standard
  • Relevant Air Force areas not prepared for female entrants
  • Lack of support, network, mentoring mechanisms for direct-entry applicants
  • Perception of discriminatory treatment against men
  • Female applicants have unrealistic expectation of working context

  LOW RISK

  Navy

  • Performance pressure for entrants if Clearance Diver only option for Navy employment
  • Potential limitation on female participation in coalition activities

  Army

  • Facility issues/amendments not identified/amended in suitable timeframe
  • Potential limitation on female participation in coalition activities
  • Government has not amended legislation before Jan 13

  Air Force

  • Training for some categories occurs through Army
  • Defence Materiel Organisation, Defence Support Group, other Groups not able to meet implementation plan schedule
  • In-service applicants not happy with career choice
  • Direct entry applicants not happy with career choice
  • Air Force not considering critical mass necessary, as this may disadvantage women keen to commence training.
  • Risk that current female Military Working Dog handlers may not view removal of gender restrictions favorably          

By: Patrick Lion/The Sunday Telegraph