NATO Review on sexual harassment and sexual violence in the military

After years of being on the comparative margins of social media, the #MeToo movement really hit headlines in 2017 following revelations about the sexual abuse and misogynistic behaviours of the Hollywood film producer Harvey Weinstein, exposing widespread toxic behaviour in the film industry. Whilst these behaviours are unfortunately not new, the social movement helped to raise the issue across media and other sectors. Other institutions have also been exposed as complicit in covering up, and in some cases, engaging in sexually abusive behaviours. For example, the Catholic Church, the Boy Scouts of America (international) and the BBC have all been involved in sexual violence scandals. And the military has not been immune.

Over the last few years, there has been a series of revelations about toxic behaviours at the highest levels of the Canadian military. A recent report by the UK Defence Select Committee has also exposed a misogynistic military culture, with senior officers adopting the trope that “boys will be boys” as a response to complaints. Instances of rape and sexual harassment in the military have been reported in the media in the US, Germany, and Spain to name a few. So is it safe to say that there is a pervasive culture of sexual abuse within Allied militaries?

To help answer this question, in 2019, the NATO Science and Technology Organisation established a research group to consider the challenges posed by sexual violence and sexual harassment across NATO. The final report was recently published. The group, comprised of experts from seven countries (Canada, UK, Germany, Sweden, United States, Croatia, and Romania), took a wide and considered view of international legislation, policies, procedures and reporting methods, as well as the prevalence of sexual harassment and violence. In line with research findings, the group recommended three practical steps that could help challenge misogynistic and sexual violence cultures within militaries, in the context of joint exercises or operations:

Military culture is underpinned by a set of values that are enshrined in doctrine, with each country adopting a slightly different nuance. Officers are meant to uphold superior virtues, standards and values that set them apart from civilians. In the UK military, for instance the values and standards of the British Army are underpinned by what is known as the Service Test: “Have the actions or behaviour of an individual adversely impacted or are they likely to impact on the efficiency or operational effectiveness of the Service?”

So why is it that certain behaviours that fall short of the standards enshrined in military doctrine appear to be endemic in our militaries? Indeed, rates of sexual misconduct across Allied militaries are alarming, though estimates vary considerably. Military Sexual Trauma (MST) – defined by U.S. Veteran’s Affairs as “sexual assault or sexual harassment experienced during military service” – is thought to impact between 20% and 45% of serving personnel. Servicewomen are particularly at risk, with research estimating that 33% American (2021), 36.7% of French (2021), and 44.6% of Canadian (2022) servicewomen experienced some form of MST during the 12 months preceding the studies. Given the association between MST and various poor mental and physical health outcomes, including depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, substance misuse and personality disorders, as well as an increased likelihood that the victim will leave the military, these figures are particularly concerning.

Although women continue to make up just a small proportion of serving personnel in militaries globally, worrying trends have repeatedly shown that they tend to be significantly over-represented as victims of sexual offences. In the UK for example, women make up just 11.8% of serving personnel but account for 83% of sexual assault complainants in the service justice system. Likewise, reports from the Canadian and US armed forces respectively have shown that female personnel are four to almost six times more likely to report experiences of sexual assault during service than their male counterparts.

But why do such stark gender disparities exist? What are the experiences of servicewomen in the male dominated military environment? And ultimately, how does the military respond to such high rates of sexual violence against servicewomen?

In addition to the work of the NATO Science and Technology Organization’s research group, complementary research is being conducted through the Centre for Military Women’s Research (CMWR) at Anglia Ruskin University in the UK. The Centre has examined the experiences of female veterans who were victims of sexual violence during their military careers. These women represented all branches of the UK military, varying ranks, lengths of service and service periods (from 1970 to 2021). And all, unfortunately, recounted similar stories of widespread and frequent sexual misconduct during their military careers. The findings illustrate various challenges for women in the armed forces, from the normalisation and trivialisation of inappropriate sexualised behaviours, to distressing accounts of sexual offences with little to no repercussions for perpetrators, and victims routinely left feeling unsupported.

Several of the women interviewed described feelings of “isolation” that emerged as a result of being a woman (often the only one) in a “toxic” male-dominated workplace. They told stories of routine sexual harassment and inappropriate sexualised narratives in the workplace, highlighting a problematic culture of acceptance of sexual violence. This echoes findings of substantial previous international research which has linked male-dominated, hypermasculine cultures to a higher prevalence of sexual harassment and assault.

The women we spoke to also described hesitance in reporting MST to military leaders and colleagues, fearing, for example, that their allegations would not be taken seriously, that they themselves would be blamed, or that nothing would be done in response to their allegation. While this mirrors many well established barriers to reporting that we see in the civilian world, we also found several barriers specific to the military that seem to compound these challenges. For example, there was a common perception that you should not speak out against your own regiment and frequent concerns that making a report of MST could provoke negative career and/or social repercussions within the close-knit military community.

We are told that service personnel are held to a higher standard than the civilian population, however, in what civilian office would you expect to see a noticeboard of women’s underwear, or floor-to-ceiling pornographic images on the walls? These were the experiences described by participants. It begs the question: are everyday military cultures discordant with the values and ethics that militaries internationally purport to uphold?

With this in mind, it is perhaps unsurprising that the women interviewed also shared stories of more severe forms of sexual assault, which were almost as commonplace during service. Examples include inappropriate touching, groping, exposure, competitions centred around which male could have sex with a servicewoman first, unwanted sexual advances, rapes and gang rapes. Sexual violence was therefore seen as an everyday aspect of these servicewomen’s lives.

Though military leaders from around the world are seemingly beginning to challenge these attitudes, with several pledges of zero tolerance to sexual violence within military institutions (e.g. UK, US, Canada), ultimately, actions must speak louder than words to truly challenge the pervasiveness of sexual violence across military institutions.

This means not only implementing policies and procedures, but effectively combatting inappropriate cultures and providing a meaningful and just response where sexual violence does occur. Precipitating this cultural change requires challenging the acceptability of sexual misconduct, however nominal or low-level these behaviours are perceived to be. No longer can militaries be environments in which sexualised banter is considered normal, or whereby men are praised for their sexual conquests. Instead, inappropriate sexualised behaviours must be called out, messages from senior leaders must conform to the organisations’ commitment to change, and the rhetoric of zero-tolerance to sexual misconduct must be comprehensively and holistically enforced.

The NATO Science and Technology Organization’s recent work has investigated the approaches taken by different Allied militaries and gained a common understanding of the mechanisms and challenges involved in eradicating sexual harassment and violence within the military. The panel has provided recommendations on the approaches to measurement and has developed a set of principles to define sexual harassment/violence as well as reporting mechanisms to ensure the issue is addressed consistently across NATO. This work provides the command structure with the tools to address and minimise the problem, thus improving effectiveness and operational readiness.

Regrettably, the findings of our research in the UK mirror those found by researchers internationally, and this is therefore not a problem attributable to one single military or a couple of “bad apples”. Like the scandals uncovered in the Catholic Church and the film industry, do these shortcomings expose the military as another institution complicit in covering up cases of sexually abusive behaviours? Perhaps now, in the wake of #MeToo, we have reached a watershed moment for militaries across the world to not only implement meaningful responses for those who suffer sexual abuses, but crucially, take a stand against institutional cultures and attitudes that allow such behaviours to persist.

The outcome of the CMWR research and that of the NATO group was that cultural challenges do persist as part of a wider military culture, and these are systemic rather than limited to one single military or country. Though we are not claiming that everyone in every military is complicit, a key message of this article is around the systemic, cultural challenges that persist across militaries in relation to MST.

The full report of the NATO research group was published in January 2024. We hope that the lessons from this work, other research and the experiences of women personnel who have been brave enough to expose toxic cultures, can help us to tackle endemic sexual misconduct head on. In the era of high-profile scandals about the engrained nature of sexual misconduct in various institutions, it is now the time for Allied militaries to take a clear stand against sexual misconduct in service, challenging misplaced social and cultural norms to shape a better, safer future for women in the military.

Further publications about the work conducted by the Centre for Military Women’s Research at Anglia Ruskin University is currently under review and anticipated to be published imminently. Please visit the CMWR website for more details.

—