KEY POINTS:
The involvement of women in front line combat duties is the subject of debate in a number of Western countries.
In New Zealand, women have been able to serve in any role in the defence forces since 2000, when the Armed Forces formally abandoned the policy that prevented
women from undertaking some front-line duties. Subsequently, Parliament removed the legal exemption in the Human Rights Act allowing discrimination against women in the forces.
Lianne Dalziel has just announced that New Zealand's last reservation to the relevant UN Convention (CEDAW) will be removed, meaning that we comply with our obligations under international law.
Other countries, however, have not been so ready to embrace change. The US, Britain and Australia all prohibit women being involved in combat operations, although there is a lot of debate in all three countries about whether this should change.
The Australia Defence Association is opposed to opening up 'front-line' positions to women. It said, 'For a range of operational, moral, and occupational health and safety reasons, it would not be fair to female soldiers to expect them to fight enemy male soldiers in a physical sense, directly, continually and as a permanent core part of their job. Some would win such physical confrontations but most would lose, even if only eventually.'
Given all the hazards of simply being in the more volatile areas of Iraq or Afghanistan, it seems odd that the ADF would justify this policy on the basis of occupational health and safety. As the case of the British soldier Sarah Bryant has shown, health and safety is not a concept that fits readily with the life of a soldier in a war zone.
Ms Bryant was an intelligence officer on a counter-terrorism mission in Helmand province when she was killed along with three reserve members of the SAS, when their armoured Land Rovers were hit by a roadside bomb.
This case demonstrates that in modern warfare there is often no clear front line, which can be 50 metres outside the barracks, or 50 miles away.
Lianne Dalziel says that the New Zealand Armed Forces have worked to remove the "physical and cultural barriers" to women being employed in all front-line roles, which included a programme of equipment modification to remove the 'women aren't strong enough' objection.
Even if you make an argument about the relative physical strengths of men and women, and the disadvantages that some women may face in hand to hand combat situations, these days it seems to be too difficult to distinguish between front line and support operations.
In Australia, outgoing Chief of Army, Lieutenant-General Peter Leahy, said recently that he foresaw a time when the dividing line was a person's physical ability to do the job rather than their gender.
It seems inevitable that the changes put in place in New Zealand will eventually be adopted elsewhere.
Greg Cain
Greg Cain is an employment lawyer at Minter Ellison Rudd Watts.
