Why India needs women in national security leadership roles

The presence of Wing Commander Vyomika Singh and Colonel Sofiya Qureshi alongside the foreign secretary in security briefings after the May 7 military strikes is a welcome step for gender representation. But it risks being symbolic if not matched by genuine participation in decision-making.

The absence of women from national security leadership is not just a representational gap – it’s a structural weakness that affects both our preparedness and democratic integrity.

Despite India’s constitutional commitment to equality, women are underrepresented at the highest levels of government. In Lok Sabha, women account for 14% of the Members of Parliament and in Rajya Sabha, the figure is even lower – 13%.

State assemblies are similarly lopsided.

Kerala, often hailed as a model for social indicators, is no exception: women make up more than half of the electorate and dominate grassroots governance in panchayats with over 50% representation, but in the state assembly, women legislators have never exceeded 10% in six decades, according to Ministry of Women and Child Development.

The disconnect between grassroots empowerment and top-level exclusion is stark and consequential.

Research from democracies worldwide is unequivocal: when women participate in decision-making, especially in equal numbers, outcomes are more balanced, inclusive and sustainable. A 2024 Inter-Parliamentary Union report found that countries with higher female parliamentary representation are more likely to adopt peaceful, inclusive policies and avoid escalation in conflict situations.

Rwanda’s post-genocide recovery, led by a female-majority parliament, is a testament to the transformative power of women’s leadership.

The risks of male-dominated “testosteronic” decision-making are well documented in psychology and behavioural economics. Groups composed mainly of men, particularly under stress, are more likely to take aggressive, high-risk actions driven by groupthink and a desire to project strength. This can lead to escalation, moral oversights and a narrowing of policy options.

The Cuban Missile Crisis, for example, remains one of the tensest moments in modern history, when the world stood on the brink of nuclear war. The all-male Executive Committee (ExComm) advising US President John Kennedy, ultimately chose a path of restraint and diplomacy, averting catastrophe. Historical analyses reveal that their deliberations were riddled with intense pressure, groupthink and near-misses that could have led to disaster.

Experts in psychology and conflict resolution have since demonstrated that diverse groups, especially those including women, tend to challenge prevailing assumptions more effectively, consider a broader range of perspectives, and are less prone to escalation. The absence of women from such critical moments in history represents a lost opportunity to enrich the decision-making process with voices that might have introduced additional caution, empathy, and creative alternatives.

This is not to diminish the courage or wisdom of those men but to highlight that gender-diverse leadership teams are statistically more likely to produce balanced, thoughtful, and sustainable outcomes- qualities that India urgently needs in responding to crises like the Pahalgam massacre.

Women leaders are statistically more likely to seek collaborative solutions, prioritise humanitarian impacts and consider the long-term consequences of action. During the Covid-19 pandemic, countries led by women-such as New Zealand’s Jacinda Ardern and Germany’s Angela Merkel-were praised for transparent communication, empathy-driven policies and effective crisis management.

These leaders demonstrated that decisiveness need not come at the expense of compassion and that empathy is not a weakness but a strategic asset.

In Kerala, despite low numbers of women in the state assembly, women have played a pivotal role in crisis response and public health at the administrative and grassroots levels. During the 2018 Nipah virus outbreak, Health Minister KK Shailaja, dubbed “The Coronavirus Slayer”, led a swift, science-based response that contained the deadly virus before it could spread further.

When Covid-19 struck, Kerala was the first Indian state to set up rapid response teams, open control rooms and deploy medical officers at airports under Shailaja’s leadership. The state imposed a partial lockdown before the World Health Organization declared a pandemic and its contact tracing and isolation protocols became a model for the country.

Kerala’s response was not just the presence of a woman at the helm but the integration of women at every level of the response. From district medical officers to frontline health workers – the Accredited Social Health Activists, ASHAs – and community leaders in Kudumbashree collectives, women were the backbone of Kerala’s participatory, humane approach to crisis management.

The result: Kerala achieved one of the lowest Covid-19 mortality rates in India, avoided overwhelming its health system, and maintained public trust through transparent, empathetic communication.

The value of a balanced group is clear when both men and women contribute; communication strategies are more likely to resonate across the social spectrum, fostering unity rather than division.

Psychology and conflict resolution evidence further underscores the value of women’s participation. Studies show that women are more likely to actively listen, seek consensus, and incorporate diverse perspectives essential in complex, high-stakes situations. In peace negotiations worldwide, the presence of women has been linked to more durable agreements and a greater focus on rebuilding social cohesion.

Yet, in India’s elected chambers, women’s voices remain marginalised. In Kerala, women constitute 51.6% of voters, but their representation in Parliament and the state assembly remains abysmally low. Political parties continue to nominate far fewer women than men, and even when women do contest, their chances of success are slim. This exclusion is not merely a reflection of social attitudes but a deliberate structural choice that undermines the quality of governance and the legitimacy of democracy.

In moments like the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack, the country’s response is shaped by those in the room. Without women, there is a risk of decisions that are more aggressive, less inclusive, and less attuned to the human cost of conflict.

India stands at a crossroads, not just in its response to terrorism but in its commitment to democracy and equality. The absence of women from the top decision-making tables is a risk the nation can no longer afford. The path to a safer, more just and more resilient India begins with ensuring that every voice is heard, especially when the stakes are high.

Sunoor Verma is the president of The Himalayan Dialogues and an international expert in leadership, strategic and crisis communication and global health diplomacy. His website is www.sunoor.net.