Why Critics Are Wrong About Women Cadets At National Defence Academy

The first batch of women cadets graduated from the National Defence Academy in May, marking the end of seven decades of male exclusivity at India's premier military training institution. Within hours of the passing-out parade, social media erupted with criticism focused almost entirely on perceived physical inadequacies. Videos analyzing push-up techniques, commentary on marching formations, and speculation about combat readiness dominated online discourse. The critique, however, revealed more about the critics' fundamental misunderstanding of modern military service than it did about the cadets' capabilities.

The criticism was not only premature but fundamentally misplaced. These women will only join technical and support arms of the Indian army, and not combat arms. The Navy and the Airforce have their own norms. The outsized focus on physical differences obscured the broader reality of contemporary military service and the specific roles these officers will assume.

Social media responses to the Passing Out Parade (POP) concentrated on physical performance metrics with an intensity that bordered on obsessive. A particular illustration emerged in numerous comments criticizing pushups performed by female cadets. Such unfortunate remarks exhibit ignorance. What was performed were Josh Push Ups, a spirited, symbolic form of pushups performed by Indian Armed Forces personnel, especially after achieving major milestones like POPs or successful missions. They serve as displays of high morale, discipline, and camaraderie.

The focus on observable physical differences allowed critics to bypass discussions of professional competence, strategic thinking, technical expertise, or leadership qualities—all critical components of modern military effectiveness.

Major Vijay Bhargavan, a former paratrooper whose credentials include three years with special forces and eight years serving the Electronics & Mechanical Engineers division of the Indian Army, addresses this misconception directly.

"Such perspectives reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of how the Armed Forces actually function," he explains. "Are there physical differences? Absolutely—that's biological reality, not something one can contest. Men and women possess different physical capabilities, with men generally demonstrating greater physical prowess. However, we no longer operate solely within antiquated systems completely dependent on raw physical strength. We now rely extensively on sophisticated equipment—systems like the S400, Akash missile defense platforms... these were the technological cornerstones of Operation Sindoor. Such capabilities demand combinations of skill and intellect far more than mere physical strength."

The Indian military has evolved considerably from its colonial-era foundations. Modern warfare increasingly depends on technological proficiency, strategic thinking, and sophisticated equipment operation. The branches where women officers serve—artillery, the Corps of Electronics and Mechanical Engineers, the Corps of Signals, the Army Ordnance Corps, the Army Education Corps, Military Intelligence, Judge Advocate General (JAG), the Army Medical Corps, and the Army Air Defence—require expertise that transcends physical strength.

Major Nithi CJ, an army veteran whose service in military intelligence spans years of distinguished duty, reinforces this point: "I am very against this masculinization of the army. Army is not just the infantry, it is not just the parachute regiment. There are so many other elements that make up the armed forces. Though even when it comes to combat roles, I think Operation Sindoor serves as testament enough that women can be active elements in combat situations as well. The fantastic job of the serving women officers within the AAD (Army Air Defence) should put such doubts to rest."

Major Vijay acknowledges that "physical standards mandated at academies differ between female and male cadets." He explains that "for female cadets, certain requirements are adjusted, whereas men face more rigorous physical demands. When discussing particular fighting arms of the army, understandably, there can be no compromise or accommodation."

The differential standards reflect physiological realities rather than preferential treatment. "A male cadet must complete a 5-kilometer run within 22-23 minutes, while a female cadet receives approximately 27 minutes for the same distance—a significant differential," Major Vijay notes. However, he emphasizes that "regarding Infantry, special forces, and armoured units, I wouldn't argue that women should be prohibited, but there can be absolutely no relaxation in standards for entry into such specializations. Otherwise, I see no reason why they shouldn't participate in anything equipment-based. They absolutely deserve such opportunities."

Major Nithi provides crucial clarification about what these standards actually mean in practice: "Differentiated standards don't constitute relaxation in treatment. If a male cadet must run 10 kilometers as punishment, the same applies to female cadets. We are at best allowed a few extra minutes but are made to go through the very same regimen. Moreover, combat training also encompasses firing, obstacle courses, march-and-shoot exercises... in these instances as well we train with the men and perform the same tasks."

"In the Academy everything boils down to company pride, with championships, competitions creating intense motivation, one cannot afford mistakes. Regarding drill performance, you must strike the ground harder than any male to make the parade ground resonate with that distinctive sound," Major Nithi explains.

"While minor testing differences may exist, these tests represent only a fraction of academy life. So much more occurs daily. Enduring the daily regimen is extraordinarily challenging. There's a beautiful saying among mountaineers: 'The mind gives up before the body does'. I know many men who abandoned training midway because they couldn't withstand the demands. There have been numerous injury cases, so kudos to these women. They've spent three years at the NDA, and I can visualize what they must have endured both physically and psychologically—we must appreciate that accomplishment."

"A scientific difference in anatomy and physiology does not mean we are weak, we just have to figure out different means of achieving the same goal, and we are trained to do this, our grit and determination take us through," Major Nithi reiterates.

The criticism also ignores the substantial precedent for women's military service in India. Major Nithi points out that "1993 marked the commissioning of the first batch of women officers, with Major Priya Jhingan emerging as an enduring icon." It was Jhingan's prescient letter to then Chief of Army Staff, Sunith Francis Rodrigues, questioning the exclusion of women from regular army officer positions that catalyzed the acceptance of female officers at the Officers Training Academy in Chennai. Three and a half decades later, these same portals have finally opened at the NDA itself.

"The Armed Forces are hardly new to female officers, and their performance has been exemplary," Major Vijay observes. "When compared with male counterparts, they consistently demonstrate competence. I have served with them throughout my tenure, and many have outperformed their male colleagues in various courses, frequently achieving top rankings with Alpha Instructor gradings."

This track record of successful integration and exemplary performance renders the current criticism particularly misplaced. The critics are essentially arguing against a phenomenon that has already proven successful across multiple decades and various military branches.

Major Nithi emphasizes the institutional confidence behind the NDA decision: "The army doesn't waste time on such arguments. The mere fact that the military agreed to allow women in the NDA, that this batch of women has graduated, provides evidence enough that the military has thoroughly vetted their capability and competence. I can state with considerable experience and conviction that if there existed even a hint of doubt, if they believed for even a second that this experiment could lead to failure, the military would not have proceeded."

"Why has it taken the military three decades? Why weren't institutional doors opened initially? This is because the army doesn't make hasty decisions or act without proper viability analysis. It doesn't compromise national security. We're not some multinational corporation indulging in performative gimmicks to appease diversity initiatives," Major Nithi explains.

The military's conservative approach to change reflects its primary responsibility for national security, not resistance to progress.

"There exists a perpetual challenge for women regarding precedent-setting," Major Nithi observes. "The precedent has been established appropriately. That's precisely why women now serve across all these branches."

The incident involving women naval officers struggling with Lieutenant Vinay Narwal's coffin became a focal point for critics arguing against women's military service. Both veterans address this sensitively while maintaining perspective.

Major Vijay acknowledges the physical reality: "That instance highlighted physical differences between men and women. Men are built stronger than women and perhaps would have been better suited for that particular task. Anyone who has handled coffins will confirm they are extremely heavy, and that showed. Beyond this, I prefer not to comment on that specific instance, as doing so wouldn't honor the fallen soldier. I don't believe we should use such instances to score points against each other—that's not an appropriate example to advance. These days, social media is omnipresent, and people don't understand what to photograph or show, what is respectful and what isn't."

Another frequently cited concern involves the potential treatment of women officers as prisoners of war. This argument reveals both historical ignorance and strategic naivety.

Major Nithi addresses this directly: "Do people know the name Captain Saurabh Kalia?" she asks, referencing the Indian Army officer brutally tortured and killed as a PoW by Pakistani forces during the Kargil War. "The torture was so gruesome that even his genitals were mutilated. Knowing our adversary, I doubt it makes any difference to them whether the PoW is male or female. If you research our adversary's torture tactics, you'll be shocked at what they're comfortable doing to males as well. Please explain how this is better than what would happen to women PoWs?"

"From a military perspective, one isn't trained to become a PoW. We're trained to kill the enemy and defend the country. The supreme sacrifice, if it occurs, is an unfortunate consequence of war, and one is mentally prepared for it. Commando training includes escape and evasion techniques, and when entering direct combat roles, if women are ever permitted such positions, they will be thoroughly trained beforehand."

Major Vijay concurs: "Such statements are just lame excuses. In fact, I have encountered such arguments before, and my response has always been that if a lady happens to meet the required standards, without any relaxation or compromise, she should be given the same chance as any other officer."

"This PoW hypothetical makes very little sense. Those women who apply and qualify are doing so voluntarily, with free consent and complete awareness of the consequences of such deployment. Geneva Conventions apply to all POWs regardless of gender. Countries are bound by it, and those who refuse to comply are liable to be punished. We witnessed how Wing Commander Abhinandan was brought back. More importantly, within the present mandates, lady officers are not there in fighting arms, so such circumstances are unlikely to occur in the first place."

"I commanded a sub-unit of around 300 people, with a female officer serving as my second-in-command. During my absence, when she was supposed to handle operations, some senior jawans and JCOs—many aged 50-plus who had spent years accustomed to patriarchy—found it difficult to understand that a woman could lead effectively. There was reluctance, hesitation. That's where I, as commander, had to intervene. I had to sensitise them, explaining that she earned her rank the same way I did. She completed identical exams and training modules, earning those stars, so they must respect the rank. That responsibility becomes mine—it's my prerogative how I choose to sensitise my troops, but sensitise I must. As far as I know, every officer does this."

"Combating such mindsets isn't a challenge unique to the army—it's an attitude encountered across all walks of life, especially in interior regions of the nation," Major Vijay observes.

The institutional response to such challenges demonstrates the military's commitment to integration rather than evidence against it. Effective leadership involves managing cultural transitions while maintaining operational effectiveness.

Both veterans emphasize that military service should be based on capability rather than gender, but they define capability more broadly than physical strength alone.

"If I must distill my message into one sentence, it would be: 'merit over all else' without any reservations or relaxations," he added.

Major Nithi's personal experience illustrates how merit-based selection actually works: "I joined the army right when the mandated training changed from 6 months to 11 months, at par with the male officers. I am a CDS entry and gave the combined defense services exam. We just had 15 seats all over India vis-à-vis our male counterparts who probably had 200 odd seats. I knew if I had to make it to that merit, I better be good, there is no other choice."

"Once you sit for the SSB (Service Selection Board), the standards are the same regardless of gender. You are doing the same obstacles, in the same time duration. You are climbing the same 8-foot wall. I might take a few seconds more than a male counterpart, but I know how to make up for that difference and still defend my country."

The military's systematic approach to minimizing gender-based distinctions contradicts critics' assumptions about preferential treatment. Major Nithi recalls: "There have been many occasions when I've been allocated accommodation with males due to my rank, because my name doesn't indicate gender. Rank precedes name—nobody is addressed as Ms. or Mrs. We don the same uniform, which, especially from a distance, makes gender distinction difficult. So the army as a system has eliminated things that can create differences or biases."

She shares an illuminating anecdote: "During my Junior Commander's course, there was a weapons display with a tank present. I approached the Havaldar—the NCO conducting the briefing—and asked, 'Ustaad, can you please tell me more about this?' He provided a beautiful, crisp briefing explaining ammunition placement, crew seating arrangements, etc. I then asked, 'Ustaad, where is my place in this?' Without hesitation, he pointed to the tank commander's position at the front. This, from an armoured corps Havaldar, a corps that doesn't yet have women officers. He could make that connection and had no doubt about my capabilities because he has more faith in my training than I do."

"I've had excellent Commanding Officers who never doubted my ability and sent me on tasks where I had to disguise myself as a man. I was independent then and proved my capabilities. I'm not the exception. Every woman officer who has entered is already prepared to handle any situation professionally. I tell all young women who approach me: Life in the army is raw, as one witnesses life and death at close quarters. Don't expect leniency. Make yourself so professionally capable that nobody can question you."

The criticism of the NDA women cadets must be understood within the broader context of India's military modernization and strategic needs. The Army Chief's statement earlier this year, emphasized that women officers have done exceedingly well, countering Lt General Rajeev Puri's leaked letter. The former commander of the 17 Mountain Strike Corps had raised pointed concerns about certain women Commanding Officers, flagging issues of "poor interpersonal relations," "lack of empathy," and what he termed an "exaggerated tendency to complain." His observations about sparked heated debate across military circles and beyond.

This institutional commitment to increased women's participation reflects strategic recognition of talent utilization rather than political correctness. Modern military organizations worldwide have recognized that excluding half the population from military service represents a significant waste of human resources.

"Danger doesn't see gender, neither does courage," Major Nithi concludes.

Young women today face a complex landscape. On one hand, they have extraordinary examples in the first batch of NDA female cadets, breaking glass ceilings with remarkable grit and determination. On the other hand, they confront the harsh reality of the social media age, where internet trolls cast aspersions on such officers' competence and capability based solely on biases and prejudices.

Major Vijay offers these words to young aspirants: "People will troll, they will say what they please, but the moment you step into the academy, when you don that cadet uniform, and then pass out—just like these young women did from NDA to eventually join IMA, Naval Academy, or Air Force Academy—when you finally receive those two stars on your shoulders, your confidence will be sky-high and these outside voices will cease to matter. So don't think twice—if you've decided to join the forces, go ahead. The sky is your limit."

Major Nithi addresses young women aspirants: "The mere thought that you want to join the Armed Forces distinguishes you. Times have changed dramatically from when there were barely any women officers in an entire city to now finding 3-4 in almost every unit. The organization is there to support you. The requirements are challenging, but the Indian Army's tagline is: 'Do you have it in you?' So as long as you have it, you will be selected."