MULA GABHARU IS a name largely unknown in mainland India. But in the vast Brahmaputra plains of Assam, she is a revered 16th-century warrior princess. Enraged by the treacherous death of her husband, a military general, at the hands of Turbak Khan, a famed Turkish general in the army of Sultan Nasrat Shah of Bengal, Mula took up arms. Donning her husband’s battle attire, she mounted her war elephant, Nangjing, and breathed new life into a dispirited Ahom force. She slew Khan and led the Ahoms to victory in a battle near the Bharali river in 1532, driving the invaders back to the Karatoya river, the western border of the Ahom kingdom.
The legend of Mula Gabharu, and many others like her, exemplifies the capabilities of women military leaders. Throughout Indian history, countless women warriors have commanded men and wielded swords with exceptional skill.
Yet, traditional bias against women warriors persists. What if, for instance, instead of the Indian Air Force’s Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman, it had been a female pilot whose MiG-21 Bison fighter was downed in Pakistani territory in February 2019? Would India have responded differently to Pakistanis’ capturing her? Would it have escalated to an all-out war?
How do women leaders navigate the male-dominated military, where patriarchy prevails and the “male-bonding” and “band of brothers” ethos is deeply ingrained? It is an environment where brute strength often trumps skill, and where, historically, the presence of women has been seen as a distraction.
Despite these challenges, women have fought on the front lines throughout history. However, a recent “DO” (a demi official letter, a type of written communication between officers allowing for a personal touch) has reignited the debate surrounding the role of women in the armed forces. The letter, dated October 1 and penned by Lieutenant General Rajeev Puri, general officer commanding of the Mountain Strike Corps in Panagarh, West Bengal, to Lieutenant General Ram Chander Tiwari, head of the Army’s Eastern Command, called for a “pragmatic performance analysis” of eight female commanding officers (COs) under his command.
Puri’s letter, which quickly went viral, cited “issues” such as “interpersonal relations”, “an exaggerated tendency to complain”, “over-exerting command and centralised decision-making”, “misplaced sense of entitlement”, “lack of empathy”, “low tolerance to ambiguity” and “over/lack of ambition”. He cited an instance of a female CO insisting that subordinates open her vehicle door for her to step out. “In another incident,” wrote Puri in his letter, “a woman CO specifically directed that an individual be sent to open the gate of her house at 0600 hours when she would go out for a walk…. One may argue that a few of their male counterparts have also been known in the past to exhibit these tendencies. However the sheer proportion of the woman COs involved with these issues, points towards a trend rather than an exception.”
This letter sparked a range of responses. A former lieutenant general, who wished to remain anonymous, emphasised the rigorous selection process for COs and the importance of addressing deficiencies regardless of gender. “The combined forces of eight COs would translate into a brigade-level strength, which is a crucial asset,” he said. “Every commander, the strike corps commander in this case, will speak candidly about deficiencies, if any, because he only wants the best of men and women. Gender is not the issue here. I have commanded women officers and many a time they outperform men.”
According to the lieutenant general, issues highlighted in the letter “are best understood” at the corps commander level. “It is best to be concerned, and not alarmed. Of course, the personality-based traits mentioned in the letter don’t merit much attention,” he said.
A serving male colonel pointed out that the sweeping statements in the letter was reflective of long-held perceptions. “Gen Puri’s sample size of just eight women COs is just too small to pass such statements,” he said. “It is not difficult to resolve issues when COs are appointed and assigned tasks on the basis of ability and not gender. What we need is a change in attitude, and an end to seeing everything in terms of gender.”
General Puri’s letter also analysed the potential causes of such behaviour and suggested remedial measures. It also highlighted the preconceived notion that soldiers from rural backgrounds might resist taking orders from women. “The issues highlighted above, and attributes contributing to these, are but a small part of the whole gender puzzle…,” reads the letter.
The letter was right in acknowledging the complexities of the gender puzzle that the military was dealing with. Although women were first inducted into the Indian Army in 1992, it was only recently that they were commissioned into the Regiment of Artillery, a combat support arm.
Progress is being made, though. In an exclusive interview last year, Army chief General Manoj Pande told THE WEEK that about 55 per cent of the selected women officers were already commanding units in the field and operational areas. Half of those deployed were in the northern and eastern commands, the most challenging of the Army’s seven commands.
The eligibility criteria for selection to ranks such as colonel and brigadier have been gender neutral since 2009. Women officers have been inducted as pilots in the Army Aviation Corps since June 2021, and enrolled in the Army’s military police since 2019.
In 2023, the total number of women officers in the Army (excluding the Army Medical Corps, the Army Dental Corps and the Military Nursing Service) stood at 1,733―a disproportionately low number, considering that the Army has 13 lakh personnel led by 53,000 officers.
Squadron Leader (retd) Cheryl Dutta, a former IAF helicopter pilot, highlighted the need for equal opportunities and responsibilities for women officers. She said Puri’s letter was not “an overall assessment” of women in the Army. She also raised concerns about the leaked letter, calling it a security lapse.
Dutta stressed the importance of viewing women as an integral part of the armed forces, advocating for a shift in mindset at all levels. “If women in the defence forces are continued to be seen as an experiment and are not accepted as an inherent part of the organisation, then these kind of highlighted cases will keep coming to the forefront, which is not in the best interest of the services,” said Dutta.
The fight for career progression for women officers in the military had resulted in a landmark Supreme Court ruling in 2020, which rejected the Centre’s position on “physiological limitations” of women officers and granted them permanent commission in the Army.
The debate about women in combat roles is not unique to India; it resonates in the US military as well. President-elect Donald Trump’s pick for deputy defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, is a staunch opponent of women in combat. “It (women in the military) hasn’t made us more effective, hasn’t made us more lethal, and has made fighting more complicated,” Hegseth said in a TV show. His potential appointment has ignited concerns about the future of women in the US military, where approximately 3,800 women serve in frontline combat positions across the infantry, armoured corps and field artillery. More than 2,30,000 positions could potentially be filled by women.
In 2015, the US Marine Corps conducted a study to find whether deploying women in combat units would increase “sexual tension” and adversely impact fighting capability “due to lowered morale in all-male platoons”. The study resulted in a 1,000-page report titled ‘Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force’, which concluded that morale in mixed-gender combat units was comparable to all-male units. In non-combat integrated units, it was higher.
The study, however, acknowledged differences in performance levels, fatigue, and injury rates compared to men. “Females are more likely to incur occupational injuries, resulting in reduced readiness compared to their male counterparts. Males on the other hand, are more likely to incur non-occupational injuries,” said the report.
Despite these challenges, since 2016, women in the US military have proven themselves by serving alongside men in combat zones in Afghanistan, Iraq and other conflict zones around the world. In the Indian context, the US experience points to the potential for successful integration of women into combat roles, provided that appropriate training, support, and structural and attitudinal changes are in place.
“Training and development of officers begins at the grassroots level and equal opportunity should be given regardless of gender,” said Dutta. “Change in mindset and approach also needs to happen at the very senior level, so that it percolates down to the more junior levels in the military.”