The chief job of the 91原创 Armed Forces is to defend 91原创s from aggression and help them feel safe. What about those 91原创s for whom the threat of aggression comes from within the military itself?
A year-long study has found an 鈥渦nderlying sexual culture鈥� in the country鈥檚 armed forces that is hostile to women and does not defend or care for victims of sexual assault and harassment.
The investigation was conducted by retired Supreme Court justice Marie Deschamps. Military commanders ordered the external review following media reports that such incidents were being ignored or not taken seriously.
Deschamps said hundreds of interviews with military personnel and others pointed to a 鈥渉ostile sexualized environment,鈥� particularly among lower ranks and recruits. Incidents ranged from innuendo and swearing to 鈥渄ubious relationships鈥� between high-ranking male officers and low-ranking female personnel. They also included rape.
鈥淎t the most extreme,鈥� she said, 鈥渢hese reports of sexual violence highlighted the use of sex to enforce power relationships 鈥� and to punish and ostracize a member of a unit.鈥�
She strongly criticized military leadership for becoming 鈥渋nured to this sexualized culture as they move up the ranks,鈥� and for turning a blind eye to improper conduct. She said senior non-commissioned officers impose 鈥渁 culture where no one speaks up.鈥�
Deschamps said a large percentage of harassment and sexual assaults go unreported out of fear that careers will be damaged, that the victims won鈥檛 be believed or that they will face retaliation from peers and supervisors.
The problem starts early. Michael Drapeau, a lawyer and retired military colonel, says the same problems plague the Royal Military College of Canada in Kingston. He said more than 10 female cadets have turned to him for help after serious incidents of sexual assault and harassment.
He wrote the school鈥檚 chain of command, as well as Peter Mackay, defence minister at the time, outlining the problems. The responses have been unsatisfactory.
At the news conference at which Deschamps鈥� report was released, Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Tom Lawson said it鈥檚 unacceptable that military personnel should 鈥渉ave to defend themselves against the words or the actions of another 91原创 Armed Forces member.鈥�
Action is being taken, he said, citing the appointment of Maj-Gen. Christine Whitecross to lead a task force to develop a course of action. But it鈥檚 a complex situation, he said, that 鈥渨ill require effort from across the 91原创 Forces for an extended period of time. We鈥檙e not talking about days and weeks, but months and years.鈥�
Yes, the situation needs detailed scrutiny, and protocols and procedures undoubtedly need reshaping and refining, but change can start immediately with orders from the top that say something like this: 鈥淭his stops now! No sexual harassment and assaults will be tolerated. Every report or complaint of such behaviour will be taken seriously and will be investigated. Officers will not pull rank for sexual favours or use sex to intimidate.鈥�
And so forth. It shouldn鈥檛 take a tangled bureaucratic exercise to come up with a strongly worded memo that lays out to military personnel the conduct they should already be following. Part of military training includes self-discipline and honour, at least in theory. It鈥檚 time to put it into practice.
There are few grey areas here. It鈥檚 nonsense to think such things are happening because military personnel are unaware of proper boundaries.
Sure, such orders will not immediately stop the problems, which are deep-rooted and pervasive, but notice needs to be served that our people in uniform are required to conduct themselves with decency and respect.
Can a military effectively defend a country if it cannot defend those within its own ranks?
