Equality of arms: women on the front line
Angela Sirdar wished to join the Royal Marines but was not allowed to do so on the grounds of her sex. Her legal challenge came before the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg in October 1999. The decision went against, on the basis that although European Union rules on the equal treatment of men and women applied to Armed Forces, the Royal Marines were entitled to exclude women if sex was a relevant factor having regard to the role of the special combat unit.
That principle still governs the way in which women are deployed. They cannot serve in either the infantry or tank units, but can be on the front line with the artillery or the engineers. They also work as pilots of both combat jets and helicopters, and as medics and in bomb disposal. Various women have been killed and many more injured. One can see both from the dangers they face and gallantry awards they have won that women cannot be said to be in some way constitutionally incapable of facing or coping with the stresses and strains of military danger.
Apparently lawyers within the Army are concerned that a fresh legal challenge on the basis of human rights might succeed. Others have also suggested that the ban should go. Patrick Mercer, the Conservative MP and a former infantry officer, (not therefore likely to be generally regarded typical left-wing radical material) thinks the ban ought to go on the basis that if women are able to pass the selection tests they should be allowed to participate. Of course combat infantry carry huge amount of heavy kit and it is probable that there would be a limit to the number of women who could comply with those physical requirements (just as many men could not).
This I am afraid is to miss the point. The only issue ought to be military effectiveness. Not what looks right, or what is perceived to be fair from the viewpoint of certain individuals. If it is right for the Armed Forces, then the mere fact that that could cause injustice to a particular individual as regards their chosen career path should be neither here nor there.
The assumption that the physical tests should be applied uniformly might not prove to be correct. Once the principle of women serving in those units was accepted, if hardly anyone was ever getting through there would inevitably be pressure on the kit weights questioning whether they were really necessary. There would be a real risk of a dilution of standards.
Much more than the quality of the individuals would be the impact on the group. All-male groups operate differently from mixed groups. Whilst I have no doubt that one would easily find women soldiers prepared to kill in exactly the same way that the men do, the men might well react differently to female casualties as opposed to male ones. Whilst one can say this can happen in any unit, infantry assaults are a particularly bloody business, where large groups have to move as a cohesive team in order to achieve the necessary results. The only issue can be those things which impact upon the effectiveness of the team.
Ultimately these are matters which ought to be decided by the military not in the court room.