The security gap

Deborah Haynes

Right, so, welcome, everybody, to this event which is on the record and online and offline, as well, with everybody here. My name’s Deborah Haynes. I’m the Defence & Security Editor at Sky News, and very much an advocate of women in Defence. So, the – today’s panel discussion is all going to be about “The Security Gap” and the role of women in modern militaries. It’s taking place on International Women’s Day, as I’m sure you’re all aware, and it forms part of Chatham House’s output on the impact of women in the field of international relations.

And we have got a very esteemed panel, both here and also remotely, as well, who I will introduce you to all of them. Coming up first will be Dr Andrea Ellner, who is at the Defence Studies Department at King’s College, and she also works at the Joint Services Command and Staff College at Shrivenham and has acted in advisory roles to a lot of practitioners in the UK and internationally. We are then going to be joined by a very distinguished guest, Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze, and I’m sorry if I got your pronunciation wrong, I did practice, who is a senior member of the Ukrainian Parliament and very much an advocate of the role of women.

We also are joined by Dr Hanna Ketola, who is a Research Associate at the University of York, and has a particular interest in the role of ex-fighters in South Asia, which sounds very interesting and exciting. And last, but definitely not least, we are very lucky to be joined by Colonel Hannah Stoy, who is the Deputy Assistant Chief of Staff Personnel at the Headquarters Field Army, an experienced Army Officer, who will be able to give you the – very much the current lived experience of being a woman in defence.

Each person has five minutes, and I will be keeping to a strict timecode. If you have questions afterwards, raise your hands, please. If you are online, and there are some instructions about online, you can, you know, you can submit your questions through the Q&A box, and I will unmute – you will be unmuted, I hopefully won’t have to do that, and ask your question directly. So, yeah, there we go. So, without further ado, I will hand over to Dr Andrea.

Dr Andrea Ellner

Thank you very much. First of all, thank you for inviting me to speak this evening. It was a great surprise, and I’m really pleased to be here, so hopefully, we’ll have a very good discussion. I think all of us have discussed things and talked about what we might be talking about in the background already, so it’s shaping up to be an interesting and varied range of themes that we, hopefully, will talk about.

So, very briefly, I think it’s probably useful to look a little bit back to how we got to where we are. So, most Armed Forces – so, my regional expertise is very much located in the transatlantic space, European, UK, to some degree American Armed – well, quite to some degree, American Armed Forces, as well, gender, military ethics, gendered perspectives on conflict and peacekeeping operations. So, that’s, sort of, my civil military relation, that’s where I sit after doing some things on the Navy and for some material security, and now I’ve moved to people, which is much more interesting.

And so, if we look at how we ended up with a reasonably large number of women in the Armed Forces in the NATO space, there are, particularly in the Anglo-American sphere, several waves of opening up roles to women. Each wave was accompanied by huge controversy – controversial debates and detractors arguing that “Women could never do this, women don’t really know how to do this,” whatever “this” was. It wasn’t necessarily combat, and close –ground close combat, but women couldn’t do it. Now, women have always proven those detractors wrong and every time there was often a need for increased recruitment, then women were then admitted against the better advice that – ‘better’ in quotation marks, that we heard earlier, about how they couldn’t do it.

Since the end of the Cold War, we then have three waves. We have a relatively large opening of roles to women, which in the last few years, then, also translated into opening ground close combat roles, not just the Air Force and the Navy, but ground close combat roles in the Army, but women do, of course, a lot more than ‘only’, in quotation marks, that. Opening ground close combat roles was important because it was one of the ways in which one might see women as being equal to male – their male peers, because at least they were eligible. It wasn’t prejudged that they couldn’t do what men were admitted into doing.

The second element to that was that, then, in 2001, Afghanistan and Iraq made it culturally necessary to have women much closer to the frontline, whatever the frontline was at the time, than previously, so women were willy-nilly involved in ground close combat, sort of, operations.

And the third element was Women, Peace and Security Agenda from 2000, which then led the UN to promoting and calling for more women to be involved in peacekeeping operations. Now, the internal dimension is, of course, that if you don’t have women in the Armed Forces that you’ve trained to the right skillset, and you can actually have enough women to spare them to be part of peacekeeping teams, then you have a problem, as a UN member country, to contribute and to do things that you would like to do because it’s politically the right thing to – ethically the right thing to do and politically, and expedient to do it.

To conclude and then hand over to my – to our next speaker, for me, the inclusion of the effective inclusion, not just diversity, but the inclusion of women, gender inclusion, which we – which means transforming military culture into something different than it was when it was mainly shaped by men, has an inter – has that internal dimension, but it also has an external dimension. And that is if you can see gender and the need to acknowledge different gender experiences within your everyday life, you are more likely to then be able to translate that into your conflict analysis and then – and understanding the drivers of conflict, and hopefully, you’ll be able to also find more nuanced, maybe cleverer, ways of addressing conflicts and resolving them and leading them towards a more positive peace than you could before. On that note, I think I’ve come in within five minutes.

Deborah Haynes

You’ve done really well. That was four minutes 29 seconds.

Dr Andrea Ellner

Phew.

Deborah Haynes

Everybody else can now take note.

Dr Andrea Ellner

Almost military style.

Deborah Haynes

Thank you very much, fascinating to see the evolution of the role of women and the importance of that. Ivanna, you’ve obviously – you’ve got – there’s a lived experience of a war in your country, where women are very much playing a prominent role alongside men. It’d be fascinating to hear your thoughts on this subject.

Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze

Well, thank you very much for having me. and including me in this conversation, and I’m also very much looking forward to it. And obviously, I’ll try to build in in this conversation our recent experience, and I think that it has been absolutely astounding, leapfrogging, for Ukraine since the 2014 year when the Russian aggression against Ukraine has started. At that particular moment, we had about 16,000 of women serving in the Armed Forces, but predominantly in the civilian positions, and since then, we’ve started to actually opening up the possibilities for military positions, for military – higher military ranks for women. We were very proud to do that back in 2016. We’ve opened up the opportunities for girls also studying in military terms, besides the abil – the possibility for women to study in the military, a higher military educational establishments.

And that all actually led to the situation that, after 2014 and with all this opportunities, we had, within couple of years, we had doubled the number of women within the Armed Forces. But also, we have seen them taking more and more senior positions in the Armed Forces, while still well below men, but at the same time, this – the number of those women have been growing. And as of start of the escalation of this war last year, on the 24th of February, you might find it surprising, but we, again, had the doubling of women presence in the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

So, right now, it’s about 62 almost – sorry, 60,000 women who are serving in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, 5,000 of them are engaged in direct combat operations at this particular moment. We have, unfortunately, already 105 women who were killed in action. We have a little bit more than 100, also, wounded in action, and we are accounting for 50 women who we cannot locate at this particular moment. I forgot – sorry, forgot how to – the phra – the term is used in English.

And that means that women, along with men, have tried to, also, enrol additionally in the Armed Forces, in the territorial defence. They have been showing their incredible capacity in new types of the technological war that is being fought right now on the Ukrainian soil, because it’s also – it – about – like, some special unmanned aerial vehicles, different – new means of communications, tactical intelligence and so on, and women have been present in all this fields. And we see that they are defending the sovereignty and independence of our country with the same resolve and same bravery as our male personnel, military personnel.

And at the same time, we still see that, irrespectively of their activities, they do have this, kind of, glass ceiling that they can still not break through, and we also see that, unfortunately, with this incredibly growing presence of women in the military field, also – you know, a couple of years ago, or, okay, a couple of decades ago, we thought that women in politics is nonsense. So, we see the, you know, growing importance of women in decision-making across the board also here in Ukraine, but at the same time, at the early stages of escalation last year, when there were some attempts of negotiations being held between Ukraine and Russian Federations we, unfortunately, did not see even one woman in the negotiation team on our side, which did not make us any different, really, from the aggressor and from the occupying power.

And I think that on a later stage, when we actually will have the possibility to come back to any peace negotiations, if the aggressor will show any real willingness to withdraw, then we have to make sure that women are present on those teams, because as we all know, that statistics that engagement of women in this negotiations will only lead to more sustainable peace deals and really possibility to ensure that there is then a, you know, a prosperity and real rebuilding effort that will have all the society on board.

Deborah Haynes

Well, thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and actually, it reminded me, I was in Ukraine last month and this Senior Army Officer was telling me about they – these Soldiers, these recruits, that were learning how to operate a tank. And one of the tank was being driven brilliantly, managed to smash the target, and then this woman, sort of, climbed out the turret, and she was operating it, and the men were like, “Woah.” But it’s – so it’s – clearly, it’s still maybe novel to an extent, but it’s incredible to hear how women representation is growing so significantly.

So, next we have Hanna, who’s going to talk about the, sort of, the less conventional type of fighters, I think.

Dr Hanna Ketola

Thank you and thank you so much for having me. I’m really excited to contribute to this extremely important conversation.

I wanted to shape the perspective slightly, building from these excellent comments and focus on women who participate in militant movements and armed groups. This is because it’s where my expertise lies, as my research explores women’s role and agency in war and post-war context, with specific focus on women ex-fighters, and my regional expertise is in South Asia, but specifically in Nepal and the Maoist movement there.

And I thought we might start by unpacking this idea of women’s inclusion by asking, why are women included? Is this merely strategic? For example, including women in armed groups could be a strategy to broaden the recruitment pool of potential fighters in order to sustain the armed insurgency in the face of the state’s counterinsurgency operations. So, if women’s inclusion is strategic, are women then merely utilised by these movements in pursuit of goals set by often predominantly male leadership?

These kind of questions have been asked by feminist scholarship, especially in relation to the movements that, sort of, say that they – crucial part of their agenda is women’s liberation or gender equality. So, there has been this debate, “Is this merely rhetoric, then?” And is thi – I think that it’s important, but it’s only part of the story, because I think we need to also ask, how do women understand this struggle? How do they understand their own role and their own contribution? How do they view it?

And I think this is where it gets really interesting, because then we move away from this assumption that women as a group would actually necessarily have a common agenda, that would be somehow easy to separate from the broader women’s goals, whether it’s liberation struggle, or indeed national defence. And we also move away from perhaps this hope that women, as a group, would have some kind of specific feminist goals. I’m not saying that might not be the case, but we can’t assume that from the outset. I think that’s what we need to research and explore.

And the second set of questions, I think, could be around this idea of, how are women included? So, how do we understand the multiple forms of women’s participation in insurgencies? And there is one particular thing that I’d like to unpack, which is this quite contested question around, who counts as a combatant? So how do we make this distinction between combatant and non-combatant roles, because this is often extremely gendered? And this is, kind of, what leads us to what we’ve been also touching upon, this idea of, how are women represented when they participate in such movements? For example, how are they represented in international policies, and discourses around peacebuilding?

So, basically, what I’m trying to get to here is, are women recognised as combatants in this policy practice? Because especially in the past, they tended to be categorised as merely camp followers, or women associated with armed groups, but then, what is this association, and weren’t we also associated as fighters or as Soldiers? What are we actually talking about here? And I think it’s important to get to this, because these kind of representations have crucial material implications in wars’ aftermath, because these are the kind of representations that direct policy, the direct access to, for example, who gets to participate in reintegration programmes.

And I think it’s not only about, can women ex-fighters access these or not, but also based on what gendered expectations? So, to put it bluntly, are women expected to run a beauty parlour or are they expected to become Engineers after the war? So, there are these gendered expectations that still underpin a lot of the policies, but also perhaps there’s a broader question of, what are these kind of inclusion women in these kind of programmes? What is it supposed to facilitate? Is it facilitating the, kind of, safe return to what was before the war, so to kind of facilitate, alleviate the, kind of, social stigma, return the women back to the community, or is it actually facilitating the, kind of, challenging of gendered hierarchies or hierarchies of caste, class, region, that might be actually underpinning the conflict? So, I think it’s these kind of questions that we need to think when we think about inclusion of women, also, in the post-war settings.

And this leads me to conclude with this question about changing attitudes, because that’s something we were asked to discuss. I wonder whether we should pause and ask whose attitudes? Because it’s not – is it the wider society, is it the military, is it the women themselves, but is it also the international organisations that are supposed to build peace? How about their attitudes? So, I think it’s, kind of, perhaps worth opening up that, as well.

And then, I’d like to conclude with the question of, how could we talk about inclusion of women, kind of, across different kinds of militaries and perhaps different kinds of wars, and how do we make those distinctions, because I think those are extremely political themselves? Thank you.

Deborah Haynes

Thank you very much. It’s really – you’re reminding me of time I spent – it’s not just all about me reminiscing about time I’ve spent doing stuff, by the way, but years ago, when I spent time with the PKK, who have, like, a – such a strong – I mean, it was – you know, there was no – they just didn’t distinguish between men and women. They were all fighters, but then, equally, women, you know, they couldn’t have children, and there was that – you know, relationships, so really strict, but it was fascinating to see.

So, last, but not least, another Hannah, who – Colonel Hannah, to talk about what life is like to be a woman in the military today.

Colonel Hannah Stoy

Thank you, and thank you to Chatham House for inviting me this evening. So, I’ve been in the Army now for 22 years, or the regular Army for 22 years, but my journey started quite a bit earlier than that, and I was 14 when I decided that I wanted to join the Army, which was a pretty unusual choice at – probably at that stage in anyone’s life, but also, at that moment in time, a good few years ago, when actually, we really didn’t see many females in the military contexts and things. But it was a dream I had early on, it was something I pursued, and I spent a very brief amount of time in the Territorial Army and then, joined the regular Army in 2000. And just a month after I commissioned from Sandhurst, of course, the global and strategic stage changed dramatically as 9/11 happened, and I remember many of us who were at the very start of our careers, then reflecting that we realised things had changed, but probably didn’t realise to what extent and what that really meant for us.

I joined the Royal Signals when I joined the Army. I didn’t have the option to join everywhere, but an awful lot of parts of the organisation were open to females, and I chose that particular cap badge for various different reasons. One was I joined the Army for an adventure, and I saw a cap badge and an opportunity and a career stream available to me that would see me travel the world. Where we had military forces deployed, we tended to see Royal Signals Soldiers, and there were also plenty of females in that particular cap badge, so they were already paving the way for opportunities for women.

I, within my first three years, deployed on my first three tours. The first one was to Kosovo and then, I went to Iraq in 2003 and then, to Afghanistan in 2004, which again was really quite early on in the conflict and the campaign through the many years we’ve spent out there. And I don’t think, if I am honest, I really considered my gender to be an issue as such. I was very much of the mindset that if I worked hard, if I built a credible reputation and delivered results, and looked after my people, then the rest would, hopefully, come with it and follow. And I remember a good few years later, when I heard of the establishment of this thing called the Army Service Women’s Network, and to be honest, I had a fairly allergic reaction to the prospect of this network of women, and very clearly wanted to stay as far away from it as I could, because I really couldn’t see that we needed anything like that.

And I, sort of, continued my career for a few years jumping in and out of Royal Signals jobs, but also being employed more widely across the organisation. And I think as I got more experienced and started to listen to more people in the organisation, I realised there was a need for such a thing, and not only was there a need for it, but there was a need for everyone in the organisation to get behind what its purpose was, in order to better the lived experience and the outputs of our organisation to improve, you know, people’s lived experience and the operational output, as well. So, when I was asked, almost three years ago, to take over as Co-Chair, I realised there was an extraordinary opportunity there to hopefully, help shape changing things within the Army and more widely, across defence.

I think, also, the one thing that you’ll all be aware of, as well, is we now have many more women in senior leadership roles across Defence, both as Senior Civil Servants, and as Military Officers, and I include the other two services there, and indeed in the Army, we’ve got our own Deputy Chief of the General Staff, who is female. But what I would want people to be clear is those people are all there not because they’re female, they’re there because they are incredibly credible. Their ability is absolutely unquestionable, and they have worked very hard, like anyone would do to get to any position of seniority. They just happen to be females, and in fact, the route that they will have taken will have been, you know, really tough, and, you know, should be acknowledged.

I’m a mum of two little people, I’ve got a five and a six-year-old at home, and I’m married to another Army Officer, who’s in the teeth arm, so I see the organisation from a range of different perspectives, as well, and I remain exceptionally grounded because of my children, I think. But I think what we do as a network is try and act, in part, as a conscience to the organisation, and to further the discussion and help shape the policy where we can, to improve not just the lives of service women, but the lives of all of our service personnel. And some of the change that we’ve seen has, in part, been designed and thought about, initially, through the lens of female service personnel, but actually has gone on to benefit the wider organisation and men and the totality of the force.

Of course, the other major change that’s happened in my career is that now, all roles are open to women and that is an extraordinary opportunity, and we see now, in varying numbers across the Army, and indeed the Navy and the Air Force, women starting new routes and new careers in those areas. And of course, we’ve got a lot of work to continue to do to make sure that this is not just about women having the opportunities, but this is about all of our personnel flourishing and meeting their full potential across the various different roles that are available to them.

I think the final point I’d want to make at this stage is just linked to, you know, understanding that what we must do within defence is make sure that this isn’t just about those who wear uniform, but this is about Defence Contractors, this is about the policymakers and the Civil Servants we work alongside, and of course, all three services, to ensure that we are making conscious and deliberate decisions from the point of design and outset, and that we’re not finding ourselves by chance considering gender as part of the conversation. Because we know that if we get the balance and the representation right across the force, across those people that we are deploying forward, and indeed, providing significant support from the UK, then the end state and the outputs will be far better and we will be a better organisation that is relevant to the society in which we currently live, but relevant to the society in which we are operating in globally, and that is really important.

Deborah Haynes

Thank you very much. As the Chair, I see I’m allowed to have a moderator discussion for a few moments, but while I’m asking some questions, if you want to start thinking about questions, not yet, you’ve got 17 minutes of moderator discussion first, and also online. One person, Trevor Clark, has very bravely put a question up. If others would like to, please do, and we’ll come to them in a few minutes. But thank you ever so much for all of your contributions, and Ivanna, as well.

I’d be really interested to hear from you about whether you think that there will come a time when gender just doesn’t matter, and I ask that from – you know, as someone who’s – I’ve been a Defence Journalist, and I’ve been covering conflict since, you know, I was in Kosovo in 2000, so just after the Kosovo war. And I remember in 2004, when I first went to Iraq, there weren’t that many female War Correspondents. Now, in – I was in Kyiv last week, there were so many women, it’s just not so much of a thing. Clarissa Ward is there and she’s pregnant, CNN Correspondent. When I was the Bureau Chief for The Times in Baghdad, I dared to procreate and I had to go home.

So, I’m really interested if you’re seeing – is there an evolution, is gender becoming less of a thing, or is it still, kind of, something that people are focusing on, and do you believe there will come a time when it’s not a thing? So, I don’t know who wants to go. Maybe Andrea, do you want to have a…

Dr Andrea Ellner

Okay.

Deborah Haynes

…stab at that one first?

Dr Andrea Ellner

I’ll have a first dibs. I think at the moment, it still matters a great deal to recognise that gender is a thing, because it’s like ethnicity, religion, race. If you don’t acknowledge that someone from a different background has had a different life experience and started from a different starting point, then you won’t get to a proper included – properly included society, population, whatever you’re talking about.

There is this, you know, experiment that – where schoolchildren are – it is explained to schoolchildren what this means, so have social discrimination and social injustice built into the way in which we compete with each other. So, you have one starting line and the boys, sometimes maybe boys from a private school, at the starting line, girls are slightly further behind. Girls who may also be Black, for example, or Asian, start even further behind. And then you give the, sort of, starting, sort of, command shot, and then they run, and they all run roughly either at the same speed, or the people further behind need to catch up. And if you don’t acknowledge that, if you don’t acknowledge that they have to maybe run further faster in order to get to the same space, or same place, you will never get to a properly included society.

But ultimately, yeah, it would be great if it – if gender and race and ethnicity didn’t matter anymore, if it were just normalised that we have – that everyone’s life experience weighs exactly the same.

Deborah Haynes

Hannah, have you noticed any difference over the last two decades?

Colonel Hannah Stoy

So, yes, completely, but I think I really recognise what you say there, and that I think I allowed myself to believe that I needed to be better than my male counterparts in order to get an equal hearing and to be considered an equal in the organisation. Now, that was my personal, sort of, belief rather than that anybody had told me that was actually the case.

Now, it was quite a useful driving function in some respects, but I think we have to go further back and look at – you know, in society, in schools, where people are starting to shape their social interactions with one another, we need to make sure that we’re setting the conditions at the earliest possible stages, so that it’s just a natural response and reaction not to – gender doesn’t need to be a deliberate conscious thought.

I think right now, and certainly within the, you know, the Navy, Army and Air Force, you know, we want to increase the amount of women that we attract into the organisations. In order to do so, we need to very consciously consider how we make ourselves and ensure that we are an attractive employer, with all the opportunities available, and have set the conditions and culture so that everybody can flourish in the organisation. But if we want to attract females into STEM trades, for example, females are making educational decisions early on in their schooling, so it goes further back than just the start of our organisations.

A world where gender doesn’t matter? I wonder. I think it’s got to continue to matter, and it has got to be on our conscience so we are making informed choices and decisions when we’re operating across the globe and making the right choices.

Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze

May I join the conversation?

Deborah Haynes

And, sort of, more – yeah, and…

Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze

Yeah?

Deborah Haynes

…more specifically, on – with regards to Ukraine, you described this incredible growth in the number of women in the Armed Forces since 2014. I was wondering, is the – is that increase in women and seeing women doing all of these roles and the impact that women are having, is that changing attitudes? Are you seeing, kind of, a really accelerated acceptance of women and the impor – the crucial role they play in security in the military?

Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze

Well, actually, that’s – that twist that you are putting on the question towards me, actually leads to the answer that I wanted to give, because I think that we will not get to the point when gender will not matter, and I will explain what do I mean. I mean that I hope that it will start – it will stop mattering in terms of restrictive practices or protective initiatives, but it will actually still matter in a normality in the society. And that’s, basically, what we see happening in some other fields, a little bit just stepping aside from the security field. We have been introducing quotas to women in politics, basically, to political parties to meet the quotas of 30% of women, and we started to do that in local elections a couple of years ago, and before that, we had a volunteer quota.

When I came to politics back in 2014 from the – after the Revolution of Dignity, I was coming, actually, from the analytical background in the security field, and I always competed with men based on merits, and I thought that it is humiliating to have quotas for women to ensure that more of us are actually present in the political party listings and can compete with men. But then I understood, looking at some of the experience of oth – experiences of other countries, that actually, that just helps us to make this jump, to leapfrog to this normality much faster. So, we have the population, well, at least before the full-scale war, we had the population where 55% of the population were women, and definitely they were incredibly, incredibly underrepresented in the Parliament, or in different executive positions. For example, in the previous convocation of the Parliament, we have 12% of women, and now we have 20% of women, and I believe that the activities of those earlier Politician – women Politicians have actually led to more and more women on board.

And that’s exactly the same thing, perception of normality in the society, of having women Politicians or having women in the military, having women in Police, having women in law enforcement, in different positions, and decision-making positions. That is actually going to be that way when the – when gender will matter, but in a – not from restrictive or protective point of view, but actually from a point of view that this society is inclusive, and that’s exactly what we are seeing in the Ukrainian society. There’s no one questioning whether women can fight alongside with the men right now, or whether they can roles in ensuring that economic burden that has to be taken care of in the rare – in the country can be carried out by the women. They are carrying it out on their own shoulders.

And so, we see this incredible transformation, which is by practice, the society, and actually probably during the war, it even has a – happens much faster. The society is accepting the new reality, so obviously, not through such challenges and through such terrible, barbaric wars we are going through, but in a more evolutional way. I think that everybody who is working towards having more representation of women in different fields where usually – which usually have been seen as masculine ones, will see the change, also, in the perception of the society closer towards normality, as we see it in everyday life.

Deborah Haynes

That’s really interesting. Hanna, I just wanted to ask you, from your research that you’ve done, do you have, sort of, an opinion on this whole topic?

Dr Hanna Ketola

So, I think, to me, it comes down to – a little bit to the question, also, of how do we understand gender? And so, I think I would say gender foremost as a power relation, as a structural power relation, so in that sense, it will never disappear, and I think gender goes to the core of how we mobilise people for fighting, also how we legitimise specific wars. It is often done through, kind of, constructing specific understandings of, for example, what do women do in war, what do men do in war, who do they protect?

These are the kind of constructions that we have in how to mobilise people to fight, for starters, and I think Ivanna’s points are so crucial in terms of how this kind of transformation of gender roles can be almost, like, sped up during war, and this is also about these, kind of, femininities and masculinities changing and shifting. And then, the question is, what happens in the war’s aftermath? How lasting are these changes? And this is, of course, massively varied across contexts, and I think it’s a little bit – there’s often this – maybe a slightly dangerous assumption that there is always an inevitable backlash against these changes, and I think it’s important to understand that it’s not inevitable. So, some of these changes can be, sort of, strengthened in the post-war context.

Deborah Haynes

Thank you. I figured I’d, like, hogged the questions with my one question enough, but as I open it up, the gentleman at the front here, you’ve – you’re keenly putting your hand up. If you could just give your name, please, and if you want to direct the question at someone, just say.

John Wilson

John Wilson. For 20 years I campaigned for women to have full equality in the British Armed Forces, and of course, we achieved this in 2018. I also lived during the Second World War and served with women in the Armed Forces post the Second World War. The British Arm – British Government in 1941, December 1941, brought in the British Women Constriction Act, National Service Act number two, which constricted – conscripted all British women of the ages of 20 to 40, later – who were single, later admitted from 19 to 50 as an age group.

Now, I see in today’s paper that President Zelenskyy is asking for more groups for fighting as a result of the attrition, etc., and I’m suggesting that possibly now is the time for Ukraine to bring in conscription of women. What does the panel say?

Deborah Haynes

That’s a really interesting question. Ivanna, do you want to step in with that one?

Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze

Well, first and foremost, you have to understand that conscription Soldiers are right now, not being brought to the frontline, and we are not bringing them directly to the combat experience. We are relying on the mobilised personnel, military personnel, on the professional military personnel, on the volunteer – on people volunteering at this particular moment. So, whether it’s a conscript or whether this is a well-prepared and let’s say smartly-targeted engagement campaign for women to enrol in the Armed Forces, that could be another opportunity to do that.

Now, with – and if we decide to go from a mobilisation of women, that’s a bit different from conscripts, that part of a discussion right now is – starts to happen, to take place, to take root in the Ukrainian society. Are we there yet in terms of, like, full support of the society of this idea? I don’t think so, but I think, irrespectively, you know, of whether such a decision will be taken or not, if the need arises, then that’s something that has to be understood. All of us, irrespectively of age, of capacity, of physical ability, of health, will actually take the arms and will go to protect our motherlands, and that’s something that has to be also well-understood. We are defending our land. It’s not that we are fighting. You know, in some distant areas for the goals that are not clear to us. In order to survive, we have to fight. In order to survive, we have to win this war and have to get to the victory.

So, it’s not even about the ideas that the political – that authorities or the executive can take, or the Parliament can come up with, but it’s more about – in our case, I believe, it’s more the understanding, then when we are needed, we’ll be there.

Deborah Haynes

Thank you. Next question, the lady over there with the checked…

Tara

Hi, thank you. My name’s Tara, and I’m a PhD student at King’s College London. Andrea is one of my Supervisors, actually, and I’m doing war studies, and this is kind of for everyone, I guess. I mean, I’m interested in how we, kind of, navigate or reconcile what Colonel Stoy mentioned about this desire for the Armed Forces to, kind of, represent and protect the society it’s meant to defend with the, kind of, ongoing scandals that we’ve seen lately related to bullying and harassment. And how do we, kind of, address those controversies with the aim of the Armed Forces in mind?

Deborah Haynes

[Pause] Oh, sorry, I was just looking at this online thing. Who would like to answer that question?

Colonel Hannah Stoy

Shall I go first?

Deborah Haynes

Yeah.

Colonel Hannah Stoy

Thanks, Tara. So, I think, I mean, you know, we shouldn’t hide from what you see in the media and some of the stories you hear coming out of, you know, the three services at the moment, so that’s absolutely clear. And there’s a huge amount of ongoing work at the moment to address some of the issues that are raised and some of which you can see and read about. Within the Army itself, we’ve absolutely recognised that we need to get after culture and our behaviours, and of – you know, the reality is these are still relatively small minorities that are then shaping and impacting on the totality of the organisation and its reputation, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t get after it and take it extremely seriously.

There is also that, then, need for cultural change and evolution, as, you know, we have opened up all parts of the organisation to everyone, to ensure that, you know, people’s experience is a positive one and that, you know, they can have full careers. And, you know, if they do leave, they leave with a positive mindset to then shape industry and society more widely. That this is a, you know, a positive employer, and what we do is important.

And I think, you know, where people need to be held accountable, you increasingly see that they are, as well, and I think that is a step change across defence, as well, that, you know, people are not getting away with stuff that they may have done 20 plus years ago. And I think that sends a very important internal message which, yeah, hopefully, shapes the opportunity and makes us a more attractive employer.

Deborah Haynes

I’m going to just – if it’s okay just with one person answering your question, ‘cause we’ve got lots of questions. I’m just going to go online. I’m very incompetent when it comes to tech, so I’m going to read the question, rather than unmute, ‘cause I don’t really know how to do it. So, there’s a question here from Enrico Beretta, who asks whether the – well, maybe for you, Hanna, do you think the inclusion of women in the military might change the relationship between gender and war? And Enrico says, “I would think a further inclusion of women in the military might help to bring a decline in violence and criminal acts committed in wars.” Do you agree to that, or do you agree with that, or what do you think?

Dr Hanna Ketola

That’s a very interesting question. So, a short answer would be no, I think inclusion of women wouldn’t guarantee less violence, and I think – but it is a really good question. So, it’s not to dismiss the question, but the short answer would be no, and the slightly longer answer would be that this idea that it would be is based on association between – assumed association between women. And peace, and this has been – decades of feminist work has unpacked that relation, it just doesn’t hold. So, maybe I’ll leave it there. I could speak about this for hours and I’m so glad this question was brought up, but perhaps I’ll leave some space for others, also, but my answer would be no.

Deborah Haynes

Does anyone disagree?

Dr Andrea Ellner

No, I ag – I also agree, my…

Deborah Haynes

Yeah.

Dr Andrea Ellner

…answer would be no. I don’t think – well, it’s also a question of who directs the use of force in a – in almost any country, or any form of government, but particularly in democracies? It is – the, sort of, civilian imperative over the Armed Forces means that the political decisionmakers direct the use of force in the first place, and then that gets translated into rules of engagement and the application of force, and you have then the jus in bello, sort of, provisions of behaviour and conduct of operations.

But the question of whether there would be fewer wars if you have more women in the Armed Forces, kind of, skirts the point, because it’s the political decisionmakers who order the use of force, and they are the only authority who can, not the military and then, the question is one of conduct. And to, sort of, conclude the point, if you really wanted women to influence anything, you need a critical mass of women who might want all – who might all be of a mindset that privileges more ethical behaviour and less violence, and that’s where Hanna said, you know, is open to debate.

Colonel Hannah Stoy

Basically…

Dr Andrea Ellner

So…

Colonel Hannah Stoy

But I do think that although having a balance of gender may not reduce the violence, having a broad and diverse representation in those people making the decisions as to what effects are going to be achieved will ensure that you’re not just going down one route. So, it won’t necessarily be linked to gender, but it is about making sure that the decisionmakers are not just going to hear the same thing in an echo chamber, and that there is a challenge function, where the opportunity presents itself, to ensure that we’re considering all the options available.

Deborah Haynes

Thanks, the lady there, with their hand up.

Dr Nado

Hello, I’m Dr Nado. I’m a Psychologist Consultant with the United States Air Force, and I want – I have a two-part question, and I think it follows up on the issue of bullying. I don’t think we’re going to be able to achieve full gender parity and equality without effectively eradicating military sexual assault. As you said, it’s a multifactorial thing. It comes in with the culture the enlisted members bring with them, but there’s also an engrained, at least from the United States’ perspective, boots on the ground culture, that has been very intransigent to any kind of interventions that we’ve tried to do with training, awareness, outside oversight and reporting. It still remains quite a problem for us in the military.

So my question is two-part. For our esteemed Ukrainian colleague, what sorts of safeguards is the Ukrainian military putting in place for women who are now serving in the Ukrainian military? And for the larger panel, what are your thoughts about how we more effectively really work on stamping out this problem once and for all?

Deborah Haynes

That’s a brilliant question. Ivanna, do you want to go first?

Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze

Well, thank you very much for this question. That’s definitely one of the problems that we are – we need to deal with and, you know, a lot of things are changing, positively changing, but definitely, they are not disappearing just because we decided that, from today on, you know, we have women and men equally represented in the defence forces of Ukraine.

And so, we have come up with some of the changes to the legislation in terms of criminal responsibility for sexual harassment, for assault against women and – well, against not only women, against women and men in the Armed Forces, in the law enforcement, as well. But we also have learned, already, the hard way that sometimes, the laws and the provisions and the procedures, that are there are not necessarily very efficient, so laws are not enough. It is also about change of culture, it is also about some of the – of taking away of some – even though it might sound strange because, while those women who are in the – participating in the combat, they probably have not that much fear anymore, but at the same time, some certain type of fear in terms of actually raising the issue of sexual assault, of sexual harassment, happening towards you, that is still, kind of, a – kind of suppressive culture of not reporting that.

And we’ve seen these cases for different reasons, not necessarily exclusively for fear, and right now, we have, kind of, a working group, also, in the Parliament seeing how we can engage into something that is not necessarily something that has to be written in the law, because that is not yet solving the situation. So, laws are not enough. It is about culture, it is about the attitude, it is about, also, the peers, how they are taking – and how supportive or not they are for the victim of that sexual assault in the Armed Forces to go through the – this challenge. So, we see this number of, you know, of this problems and are trying to tackle them, but I cannot tell you that – and that would be wrong to say that we sorted that out as a systemic problem.

Deborah Haynes

Thank you. I was thinking, Hannah, do you want to an…

Colonel Hannah Stoy

Yeah.

Deborah Haynes

…answer that?

Colonel Hannah Stoy

Yeah, thank you. So, I think – I mean, the first point I would make, and this is really important, is that women are not the only victims of sexual assault. So, we often see it through a gendered lens, but actually, the reality is, is it affects all of our people, clearly in different proportions, but nevertheless, we must see it through both lenses. So, within British Defence, we have introduced, in the last few months, a zero-tolerance policy for sexual assault. And this is a major shift and a major change, and this should see us with very clear – well, first of all, the message is absolutely clear, there is no place for anyone in our organisations that is conducting this.

But you’re absolutely right, and Ivanna is absolutely right, you know, this is wider, this is about an organisational and cultural shift, and we are absolutely getting after that. And certainly within the Army, there’s a lot of work going on in this space, and we’ve got to ensure that there is a culture of people being prepared to call it out. Any unacceptable behaviours, you know, the sexual ones being probably the worst of them, but any unacceptable behaviours should be called out. And service personnel or wider defence community should be absolutely confident that if they either call it out or they are the victims of it, that it will be dealt with, you know, in the most extreme circumstances.

Deborah Haynes

Although it is depressing that these cases continue to happen, you know, there are – you know, I know it’s obviously much less than it was, but it’s pretty poor that it’s still an issue that women do suffer, and, like you say, you know, men, as well.

Colonel Hannah Stoy

Absolutely, and I think, you know, we probably don’t talk enough about the actual victims, and you know, the support, and there are many, many processes now, absolutely watertight, to ensure that anyone who is a victim of this behaviour receives all the welfare, medical and any other wrap that they might need in order to help them through the process, as well. So, you know, one can sometimes skew it and talk too much about the individual who’s committed the offence, as opposed to consider the victims in this, and we’re absolutely – you know, certainly, you know, in Defence at the moment, this is one of the major pieces of work that is ongoing.

Deborah Haynes

And I’m going to do another question from online, something – the WISN Network, and maybe one – Andrea, one for you. They would like to ask, “How can equity help to address the gender gaps in the senior management pipeline, particularly for ethnic minority women to enter and progress in the defence sector?” And I was also thinking about how the RAF has been in the spotlight for very much trying to, you know, sort of, put – do all it can to promote women in ethnic minorities and yet, is seeming to be translated down to the actual actions that were allegedly being – taking place were actually discriminating against White men. And it created this really unhealthy atmosphere within the RAF, where for the women and the ethnic minorities who worked so hard to achieve, as hard as anybody else, worrying that their peers are looking at them, thinking they’re only being promoted because of the fact that they are a woman or an ethnic minority, and they have this, sort of, special push. As opposed to recognising them for being, you know, as good as anyone else, better than anyone else, and that’s why they’re being promoted.

Dr Andrea Ellner

Yeah, it’s a tricky one, because one of the problems with Armed Forces is that they – you have a sort of, a career path. So, whoever enters will make their way, hopefully, up the ranks, and then it gets thinned out and you have fewer and fewer people who can actually be appointed to higher ranking positions. And the way in which reports are written and who actually reports on people as you go through your career structure, matter – can matter a lot, whether you actually have a prospect of ending up in female leadership positions or not.

I understand if white males are – feel discriminated against, but then, I would also say a lot of non-white, non-males have been – if I can lump this all together, have been discriminated against for much of their lives, whether that’s in wider society, in other jobs, or in the Armed Forces. So, there – with this adjustment comes a degree of, okay, if two equally qualified people are sitting in front of me, I will appoint the person who is from a demographic minority, because I would like to have their ideas actually filtered up into the higher reaches of defence leadership. It’s a tricky thing to do, but I think it’s – it needs to be handled carefully and the narratives need to be understood, rather than just saying, “Oh, we’ll just allow, you know, privileged people,” and of course, then you cause friction, no question about this.

If I may just add a short point on your question about how to eradicate sexual violence, because I think it – sorry, it speaks to this question, as well. I think you start really making inroads when a) it’s understood that a joke that’s sexist can communicate a command climate that’s tolerant with rape. So – and the US Army has done studies on this, there’s plenty of material out there, a joke is not a joke when it’s – when it is actually violating one or other – you know, some people in a group. And when people laugh in an environment where someone makes a sexist joke, sexists get empowered and then, you gradually have a deteriorating command climate.

So, the other end of that is that leadership sets a command climate, and so, it needs to – ideally, you start way before any kind of prosecution or victim treatment. Ideally, you don’t have victims. The problem is that if you also have, in some parts of militaries, a rise in the far right, then that undermines all these efforts, so it’s a moving target. I don’t think it’s going to be easy to eradicate military sexual violence very easily.

And the American Armed Forces had a very questionable experience of a zero-tolerance policy that has not worked, you know, plenty of congressional inquiries where the Army had said – the military has said, “Well, we have a zero-tolerance policy,” it has not made any difference. So – and it’s that – as long as that kind of climate can exist, you make it more difficult for people who are already in a weak position to then feel they can stick their neck out and say, “I want to do this job because it’s a promotable job. Therefore, I actually have a chance of becoming Chief of Staff at some point.”

Deborah Haynes

We are very short of time, but you hit – does anyone else want to have a last question?

Member

Well, I have a question for Hanna about, what constitutes a combatant? You know, are the women who are, you know, in resistance movements running messages under great risk to themselves and their children, are they considered combatants? And is this distinction between the person holding the gun and not holding the gun something that affects women, not only in these resistance armies, but in regular militaries?

Dr Hanna Ketola

Oh, what a brilliant question.

Deborah Haynes

If you wouldn’t mind answering it quickly, and then, I was thinking that everybody could have one last little comment to wrap up.

Dr Hanna Ketola

Yes, I think…

Deborah Haynes

Last comment.

Dr Hanna Ketola

Great. So, this, I think – how you framed the question, kind of, goes to the core. So, it’s – it is very fluid and contested, so not only women – so, for example, in the Maoist movement, not only women but also men would often go across, they would be Artists, then Political Organisers, then at some point, they might be a combatant, and then not throughout the war, for example, that’s already fluid.

I think what I was trying to get to was this idea that in the level of representations, in, let’s say, policy documents, women, even if they were on this, kind of, fluid sometimes combatant, sometimes not, even if they consider themselves as combatant, they are usually boxed in the non-combatant box. They become followers, or they’re merely associated with the armed group. So, it’s a complex question, and it’s not only about what do the women do, but also, how is it what they do represented, and how do they themselves understand their own role? I think that’s how I would start unpacking it.

Deborah Haynes

Thank you. Ivanna, do you have a final thought you want to leave us with?

Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze

Well, I think the final thought from my side, it’s still a little bit impacted by the actual war that we are going through right now, and I think that something that I would like to – everybody to remember, that Ukrainian society, respectively men or women, have shown an incredible resilience over this period of very challenging time for our nation. And I think that it will actually lead – you were talking a little bit earlier whether the – some slide back from some of the perceptions, or from some of the changes that are happening, will be inevitable.

And I hope that actually the good things that have been shown by the Ukrainian society, including by more inclusiveness, including by more active participation in different parts of the societal life, that will something that will stay with us and stick with us after the end of this war. That, hopefully, will also lead to some additional positive policy changes on all levels, including in the military and the security field.

Deborah Haynes

Thank you, thank you. Andrea, just a very quick final thought.

Dr Andrea Ellner

Yes, gender matters. Valuing how – you know, valuing men and women differently, with men at the top of the hierarchy and women at the bottom, is where the problems lie. So, as long as gender is associated with social power hierarchies, it doesn’t matter whether it’s society or organisations, it’s a problem. When we get to a point where we value gender capabilities and output equally, equally as in they are equally valuable for different things, then we start overcoming the negative aspects of our current gender debate.

Deborah Haynes

Hannah, one last thought.

Colonel Hannah Stoy

Yeah, well, I think I would end by saying I’m genuinely hopeful and optimistic. I think I have seen greater change in the last two or three years of my military service than I did in – I have done over the totality of, sort of, 22 years. So, I think the intent is there, and there are a lot of people, men and women, across the organisations with a lot of passion to get this right. There are always going to be challenges and obstacles in that, but I think, you know, we really are up for the challenge, and we want to make Defence better. We want to close the security gap, and ensure that, you know, for the next generations that follow, they can join a fully inclusive and really amazing organisation, and I think, you know, we might – we will certainly get further forward.

Deborah Haynes

Well, I want to say thank you to our panel for being fantastic contributors. Thank you for the amazing questions. A really fascinating session, and on a day like – you know, a day for women, thank you ever so much.

Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze

Thank you.