Royal Marines in DEI row over women on front line
In a highly unusual move, a serving member of the elite corps has publicly raised concerns about the possible lowering of standards for female trainees – and claimed that lives could be at risk if Britain goes to war.
The commando has claimed that up to 1,000 of his fellow Marines backed a private letter to military chiefs raising fears that so-called diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI) policies were in danger of creating an 'unrecognisable, weak and compromised version of the corps'.
The letter claimed that some women at the Commando Training Centre were being 'artificially pushed through training ', resulting in what was described as 'unearned paper-passes'.
In a video subsequently posted online, the commando – who does not give his name – said: 'We believe that we have the high standards that we keep for [a] very important reason, which is to prevent Marines from being killed in dangerous situations when we go to war... We are concerned that those standards are being dropped.'
He also alleges that after raising concerns with his chain of command about the lowering of physical fitness standards for female recruits, he was treated 'like a terrorist and a criminal'.
This included being briefly held by police under counter-terrorism legislation.
'I ask them: 'Am I being detained?' They say: 'No, you're not being detained, but we're holding you here under the Terrorism Act. And I'm just shaking my head in this instance. And I said: 'Have I committed any acts of terrorism? Am I expected to commit any acts of terrorism?' And they said: 'No, we have you here because of your views,'' he states in the video.
The ban on women serving in ground close combat roles was lifted by David Cameron, the prime minister at the time, in 2016.
Two years later, Gavin Williamson, the defence minister at the time, announced that all military roles, including those in the Marines, would be open to female recruits.
The Ministry of Defence denies any positive discrimination – pointing out that to date, not a single woman has met the gruelling physical standards required to earn the coveted green beret.
However, a number of women do serve in the elite corps in other roles, while hundreds of others are attempting to enter the service.
According to the commando, there is widespread concern privately within the corps that female trainees are passing elements of Marines training based on lower standards of performance.
In an attempt to demonstrate the strength of feeling among fellow commandos, some weeks ago, he circulated an anonymous petition to his peers. He claimed that it has received a flood of support.
'Full-on witch hunt'
In the online video, he said: 'That survey exploded in the Royal Marines. Within 24 hours, I can tell you that nearly a thousand people had signed up [to] that survey. Now why do I say within 24 hours? Because within 24 hours it was deleted. That survey was taken down.'
He said that after the letter and petition reached military chiefs, he was 'cautiously optimistic' it would be taken seriously.
Instead, he has accused the MoD of launching what he describes as a 'full-on witch hunt'.
He claimed that his superiors initially tried to blame the letter on 'Russian bots' before launching an investigation to identify who was behind the letter.
During the internal inquiry, he said that colleagues were made 'to feel like they would go to jail' if they did not give up his identity.
After handing himself in to his chain of command, he was flown from his military base – thought to be in Scotland – to MoD headquarters in London for what he describes as 'two-hour interrogation'.
'They tell me that they deal with security leaks. And they essentially try and make what is a genuine issue look like it was just some uppity Marines that are just being sexist, being evil... It's absurd because we wrote that in the survey, that we were concerned that... we will be painted as sexists. And that is exactly how they treated us. Telling me that I should be concerned for my career. Telling me that I should comply for the sake of myself and my family.'
'Thousands are concerned'
He claims that military officials showed no interest in the fundamental issue he raised, despite what he described as the 'vast majority' of the Marine Corps sharing his concerns.
'I asked them explicitly. 'So thousands of Marines are concerned about this issue. I'm concerned about this issue. I'm here representing these Marines now.' And that made me feel strong, to be honest... because I've had the backing of the vast majority of the Marine Corps. And I said: 'Are you looking into our concerns at all?' ... They said: 'Absolutely not... we are here to talk about you,'' he said.
During the two-hour discussion, he was told that questioning DEI policies could 'distress' female recruits currently going through marine training, he said in the video.
After questioning, he was allowed to return to his duties. However, he was subsequently detained for questioning under counter-terrorism legislation.
He claimed that officers from Police Scotland were waiting for him at immigration on his arrival at a Scottish airport following a family holiday.
The MoD does not deny that the commando was flown to London for questioning; nor that he was detained by Police Scotland under counter-terrorism legislation.
Whitehall sources have suggested that Police Scotland was concerned he may be linked to 'extreme far-Right politics.'
However, he was never arrested or charged, and continues to serve as a Royal Marine commando.
The MoD denies that as many as 1,000 Marines backed the petition. A Whitehall source described the figure as 'unverified'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
11 hours ago
- BBC News
Plymouth marines participate in Sydney training
A Royal Marines unit helped swoop on a passenger ferry in Australia during anti-terrorism training in view of tourists visiting Sydney Opera part of Australia's largest-ever military exercise marines from Plymouth-based 42 Commando worked with counterparts from the host nation, the US, Japan and Singapore in Sydney training saw allies work on boarding operations, which the Royal Navy said aimed to perfect the skills needed to hunt down smugglers, terrorists and pirates around the training in Sydney finished with the recapture of an iconic green and yellow New South Wales ferry using US Black Hawk helicopters among other specialist vehicles. The 42 Commando unit was recently involved with the seizure of 1.5 tonnes of illegal narcotics in the Middle East.
The Guardian
18 hours ago
- The Guardian
Trump is fighting to kill off DEI – and the corporate cowardice over Gaza shows he's winning
I have been working in diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) for more than six years. This year, more than ever, I have started to question what the purpose of it really is. Though I've been celebrating companies that took a stand against Donald Trump's anti-DEI executive orders, under the radar I have noticed an insidious censorship rearing its head. Since 2023 we have been witness to one of the worst atrocities of our lifetimes. Livestreamed to our phones, we have seen the slaughter of at least 58,000 Palestinians, more than 17,000 of them children, and many of them in hospitals, schools, refugee camps and food queues. We have seen the denial of water, electricity and medical supplies, the obliteration of communities, mass manmade starvation, and continued calls by Israeli ministers for the permanent expulsion or eradication of Palestinians in Gaza. Israel's plans for a so-called humanitarian city to be built on the ruins of Rafah has been described by the former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert as a 'concentration camp'. Yet, although more than 200 companies released statements after the Hamas attack on 7 October 2023 – wholeheartedly condemning it and donating money to relief funds – since then, there has been a relative silence in the face of the ongoing destruction in Gaza. One senior manager I spoke to said he had received an email telling him to remind staff they weren't allowed to wear 'political' badges during the Gaza conflict. Another company leader firmly stated, 'We're an apolitical company. Our staff need to remember that.' Last year, 50 employees were fired by Google after protesting against its and Amazon's $1.2bn (£900m) Project Nimbus cloud infrastructure contract with the Israeli government. And just last weekend we saw an official at the Royal Opera House attempt to snatch the Palestinian flag from a cast member who unfurled it on stage after a performance. All these organisations have DEI agendas. They say they are committed to inclusion and equal opportunity, and to enhancing business growth through diversity. Yet it seems this commitment is conditional on people's silence. You can belong, as long as you don't make us uncomfortable. We value your identity, as long as it's not political. Yet the companies themselves are not devoid of politics. A recent report by the UN special rapporteur for Palestinian territories, Francesca Albanese, backed by a number of high-profile economists, exposes the vast number of businesses who have been enabling or profiting from the Israeli military operation in Gaza. 'The report shows why the genocide carried out by Israel continues … because it is lucrative for many,' it says, highlighting not just arms manufacturers but also the complicity of big tech, household brands and even educational institutions. and Airbnb have been listing properties in illegal Israeli settlements, enabling profit from stolen land. And, in the most stark cases of corporate hypocrisy, companies such as BAE Systems, which is directly tied to the Israeli military machine and dehumanisation of Palestinians, proudly brand themselves as champions of dignity and respect. For the first time, I have found myself questioning not just how we do DEI work, but whether it means anything at all. If DEI is about rewiring unjust systems, how can companies silence staff who speak out or, worse, actively profit from a brutal war machine, and still claim to be inclusive? What is the role of DEI, if not to embed values and basic humanity within the company? What is even more frustrating is that we have a direct blueprint of how business leaders can approach this. Since the invasion of Ukraine, more than 1,000 companies have voluntarily curtailed operations in Russia as a recognition that they don't stand for war crimes, the murder of civilians or the ensuing humanitarian crisis. They hung Ukrainian flags on their buildings, donated tens of millions to humanitarian organisations, offered housing and created fast-track hiring schemes for Ukrainian refugees. The Royal Opera House itself published a statement in support of Ukraine, lit up its building in the Ukrainian flag colours, and for a period of time played the Ukrainian national anthem before every performance. For many staff, this contrast makes the corporate silence on Gaza feel even more pointed. It's not 'apolitical', it's a choice. And it is a failure of DEI, which at its core is about challenging systems that breed inequality. It is rooted in values of fairness, dignity and respect for all. This isn't simply about respecting racial or religious difference on an interpersonal level, it's about who you invest in (or divest from), what you choose to speak out on, how you balance profit with purpose. To stay silent in the face of mass violence sends a clear message: some lives don't matter. What gives me hope is the people-powered movements within companies. Staff are holding their leaders to account. Be that employees at the Boston Consulting Group who shared a letter to the company's top management demanding an end to its involvement in the development of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, staff at the Berlin-based retail company Zalando protesting against the dismissal of an Arab employee who criticised its support of Israel, or the more than 100 BBC staff who spoke out against censorship in its reporting of Israel/Palestine. These ordinary workers are taking up the mantle where DEI is failing. We need to move away from this current sanitised, apolitical version of DEI towards one with meaning. Core values of dignity, humanity and fairness need to be integral to business decisions, not just corporate buzzwords. If you stand for nothing, you will fall for anything. And that's not a DEI I want to be part of. Jinan Younis is the founder of diversity, equity and inclusion agency WeCalibrate and former assistant politics editor at gal-dem magazine
The Guardian
18 hours ago
- The Guardian
The real winners from Trump's ‘AI action plan'? Tech companies
Donald Trump's AI summit in Washington this week was a fanfare-filled event catered to the tech elite. The president took the stage on Wednesday evening, as the song God Bless the USA piped over the loudspeakers, and then he decreed: 'America must once again be a country where innovators are rewarded with a green light, not strangled with red tape, so they can't move, so they can't breathe.' The message was clear – the tech regulatory environment that was once the focus of federal lawmakers is no longer. 'I've been watching for many years,' Trump continued. 'I've watched regulation. I've been a victim of regulation.' As Trump spoke to the crowd, he addressed them as 'the group of smart ones … the brain power'. In front of him were tech leaders, venture capitalists and billionaires, including Nvidia's CEO Jensen Huang and Palantir's chief technology officer Shyam Sankar. The Hill and Valley Forum, an influential tech industry interest group, co-hosted the confab, along with the Silicon Valley All-in Podcast, which is hosted by White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks. Dubbed 'Winning the AI Race', the forum was an opportunity for the president to deliver what he called the 'AI action plan', which aims to loosen restrictions on the development and deployment of artificial intelligence. The cornerstone of that plan are three executive orders that Trump said will turn the US into an 'AI export powerhouse' and roll back some of the rules put in place by the Biden administration, which included guardrails around safe and secure AI development. 'Winning the AI race will demand a new spirit of patriotism and national loyalty in Silicon Valley – and long beyond Silicon Valley,' Trump said. One executive order targets what the White House calls 'woke' AI and requires any company receiving federal funding to maintain AI models free from 'ideological dogmas such as DEI'. But the other two focus on deregulation, a major demand of American tech leaders who have taken an increasingly bullish stand on government oversight. One of those promotes the export of 'American AI' to other countries and the other eases environmental rules and expedites federal permitting for power-hungry data centers. To get to this moment, tech companies have been forging a friendly relationship with Trump. The CEOs of Alphabet, Meta, Amazon and Apple donated to the president's inauguration fund and met with him at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida. Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, which makes ChatGPT, has become a close ally of Trump, and Nvidia's Huang has also cozied up with the president with promises of investing $500bn in AI infrastructure in the US over the next four years. 'The reality is that big tech companies are still spending tens of millions of dollars to curry favor with lawmakers and shape tech legislation,' said Alix Fraser, the vice-president of advocacy for the nonprofit Issue One. In a report released on Tuesday, Issue One looked at lobbying spending in 2025 and found that the tech industry has spent record-breaking sums. Eight of the largest tech companies spent a combined $36m – that's an average of about $320,000 per day when Congress is in session, according to Issue One. Meta spent the most, $13.8m, and has hired 86 lobbyists this year, according to the report. And Nvidia and OpenAI saw the biggest increases, with Nvidia spending 388% more than the same time last year, and OpenAI spending 44% more. In the lead-up to Trump's unveiling of his AI plan, more than 100 prominent labor, environmental, civil rights and academic groups countered the president and signed a 'People's AI action plan'. In a statement, the groups stressed the need for 'relief from the tech monopolies' that they say 'sacrifice the interests of everyday people for their own profits'. 'We can't let big tech and big oil lobbyists write the rules for AI and our economy at the expense of our freedom and equality, workers and families' wellbeing, even the air we breathe and the water we drink – all of which are affected by the unrestrained and unaccountable rollout of AI,' the groups wrote. Meanwhile, tech companies and industry groups celebrated the executive orders. Microsoft, IBM, Dell, Meta, Palantir, Nvidia, Anthropic, xAI and others praised the plan. James Czerniawski, the head of emerging technology policy at the Consumer Choice Center, a pro-business lobbying group, heralded Trump's AI plan as a 'bold vision'. 'This is a world of difference from the hostile regulatory approach of the Biden administration,' Czerniawski concluded.
