by Ofrah Lax, www.inn.co.il/besheva, translated and adapted by Hillel Fendel
Israel's Supreme Court has deferred its ruling on a case brought by several future (female) soldiers who wish to enlist in elite combat units, saying it will wait to hear the IDF's position.
It was a real "happening" last Monday outside the Supreme Court in Jerusalem. Women with placards calling for the IDF to grant gender equality, MK and former IDF Personnel Branch head (retired with the rank of Major-General) Orit Barbivai making speeches in favor of the same, and four young women and their lawyers explaining to every available media microphone why they demand to be recruited to the unit of their choice.
It almost seemed as if the event was timed to mark the 25th anniversary of the Alice Miller case, in which she demanded – successfully – to be accepted as an Israel Air Force pilot, thus paving the way for women in many more IDF combat positions.
Amidst all the festivities, the actual ruling by the judges seemed to be overlooked. Judges Meni Mazuz, Yael Vilner, and President Esther Chayot seemed to be not particularly impressed by the arguments brought by the young plaintiffs. Questioning whether the women were aware of the great responsibility involved in making such a decision, the judges declared that they could not – at least at this point – take this decision out of the IDF's hands. Five months from now, the army is to submit the findings of a committee established by Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Aviv Kokhavi on the issue of opening elite combat units to females – and the Court will then consider the matter again.
The plaintiffs, it must be said, are all in good physical health and shape, and are scheduled to enlist this coming March. They are slated to be recruited to combat positions that are open to women, but this is not enough for them: One wants to be in the Golani Elite Unit, one wants Duvdevan, another has chosen Sayeret 13, and the fourth has her heart set on the Paratroopers.
Someone reading the 43-page suit is liable to conclude that the IDF has done nothing in the past 25 years to integrate women into its forces, other than throw them a few crumbs. "The IDF is one of the few armies in the world with obligatory conscription for women," the suit states, "yet while it insists on [women's] obligations, it denies their rights, firmly refusing to allow women to be recruited into elite combat units, other than a small number of positions… The IDF wages a policy of institutionalized discrimination against women, with no just basis."
The suit mentions the word "equality" 68 times, and contains nearly 30 instances of the concept of "discrimination" - thus summing up the essence of the women's demands.
The State responded in the name of the IDF that fully 86% of combat positions are open to women. However, it added, there are positions that have been deemed by the IDF, after careful consideration, to be closed to women: "Upon the shoulders of the senior IDF echelons lies weighty and important responsibilities, including operational tasks, maintaining its operational competence, preserving the health and safety of those serving in the IDF, and tapping the full potential of all those who serve, with equality and fairness."
"The problem with this petition," says Atty. Naama Sela, "is that it can basically be summed up as, 'I want, therefore I deserve.' The opium of 'equality' has become so prevalent that no one checks the actual facts."
The IDF Fortitude Forum, represented by Atty. Sela, submitted to the judges a long and well-documented opinion impressively explaining why the plaintiffs' case should be dismissed. It includes data on the high number of injuries suffered by women serving in combat units; on the financial costs to the IDF of egalitarian combat service, by having to adapt training areas to avoid such injuries, for instance; on the lowering of military standards in order to enable women to be included in combat units; and more.
The paper emphasizes that the IDF's mission is to win wars and protect the State of Israel, and only afterwards to concern itself with equality.
While some credit the future "soldierettes" with wanting to contribute as best they can to the State of Israel, Atty. Sela says the opposite: "They see only themselves, and bring not a single argument regarding what is good for the IDF."
"We now know that opening combat units to women was a failure. 46% of the girls who join them do not complete the course, compared to only 17% of the boys. It is a waste of resources."
Justice Meni Mazuz agreed with an argument advanced by Sela ("Should the Supreme Court then run the IDF!?"), saying, "85% of the positions are open to women, and the rest are under consideration. Do you want us to abruptly order the army to recruit you to this or that position?"
Justice Wilner, too, seemed to rebuke the petitioners, saying, "Do you at all understand the great responsibility you want us to take upon ourselves? These are serious issues for professionals."
MK Matan Kahane (Yemina), a former high-ranking IDF officer who served in the Matkal Elite Combat Unit and was a combat pilot, has this to say about the matter: "[The plaintiffs] are wonderful young women who want to contribute more. But if they get their way, it will harm both the IDF and the integration of women in the IDF. Unlike the progressive position, the fact is that there is a difference between women and men. Where this difference is irrelevant, such as in flying planes, the IDF is right in actualizing women's potential and drafting them to these positions. But where extreme physical exertion is required, the inclusion of women will harm either the women themselves, or the IDF units by having to lower the bar."
MK Kahane received a Twitter response from MK Barbivai saying, "In your party of darkness, they talk equality but turn the lights off on women. No more." Kahane was non-plussed: "Their answer is always that we're dark and misogynistic, because they can't deal with the points themselves. Health and physiological experts have clearly determined that the health price that myriads of women will pay for this social expert will be too heavy to bear."
One woman who unexpectedly submitted a brief to the court is Rabbanit Michal Nagen, head of the pre-military women's academy "Tzahali." She has many years of experience with girls who enlist in the IDF, and Supreme Court President Chayot was sufficiently impressed with what she wrote that she advised the army committee to include her in its deliberations. Rabbanit Nagen herself was happily surprised that her "middle of the road" approach was sought out in the midst of a debate that she felt had turned to the extremes.
"The call for equality in elite units," wrote Rabbanit Nagen, "must be balanced with a call to pay full and continuous attention to the welfare of the male and female soldiers, in terms of their mental and physical health… The picture that I am well aware of regarding women in combat positions in the field is very complex. Despite the army's efforts and good will in this regard, I know of significant difficulties that still exist regarding the integration of women in combat units. Unfortunately, in many cases satisfactory solutions for these hardships have not yet been found. I say this based on much experience and many testimonies by female soldiers in the field."
These difficulties, the Rabbanit states, include not only physical injuries: "There are issues of damage to the intimate and personal space of both female and male soldiers, especially in the field units and during training." She warned of a blanket opening of special units for women without a thorough review and "before correcting the known deficiencies in the roles that are currently open to women."
She also related to other issues: "One lone female soldier in an almost-entirely male unit that is required to remain out in the field under operational conditions, can be expected to undergo mental and practical difficulties due to the nature of the situation… The elite and special units are small units with special characteristics that stem from the crowded conditions [and more] that induce and motivate cohesiveness, both physical and mental – and this is not consistent with the mixing of the genders."
Barely anyone relates to the issue of mixing the sexes from the women's standpoints. The general public ignores this totally, and the religious public seems to refer only to the male standpoint.
MK Kahane: "Anyone with eyes in his head understands that this is something that must be addressed. We have here values that clash with each other, such that ideology alone cannot direct us in these moral dilemmas. Those who were interviewed on Monday spoke in the name of feminist ideology, but the army is not responsible only for enabling equality; it is also responsible for the people themselves. Separate living arrangements must be provided, for instance, and possibly also all-male or all-female teams, as in the armored corps. If the appointed committee does not deal with this in advance, the army will have to deal with it individually with countless calls coming in from the field… The problem of a woman alone in a group of males has not yet been solved in all cases."
Rabbi Itai Asman, Chairman of the Torat Lechimah [lit., Military Theory; a play on the word "Torah" gives it its religious orientation] organization says that though this is far from an exclusively religious issue, "the religious sector gets blamed in the end anyway." He noted that because it is also a Halakhic issue, "for every talented woman who gets accepted into these units, dozens of religious soldiers will be lost to them – soldiers who will choose to adhere to the general Halakhic line that does not permit mixed service of this type. For the army, it's manpower that's important, and so, it will have to decide whether the equality issue is more important than the manpower issue."
Purportedly, in five months' time we will know what the army has decided.