All Quiet On The Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque

In all honesty, this is a book that I probably would not have read, had my brother not bought it for me for Christmas. But, as I have found recently, sometimes the most enjoyable books are the ones that would not think of buying for yourself, but when someone else does, you’re sure glad that they did!

The title of this book has passed into everday usage. In 1930, the film adaption of the book won an Oscar for Best Picture. Originally published in 1929, it came at a time where the patriotism of the Great War was a distant memory, and hindsight could be applied. Never the less, it was still recent enough to recall the conditions of the time. The author himself was wouded serving in the German Army on the Western Front, and it would be naive to think that his experiences did not shape the tone of the novel.

We follow the life of Paul Baumer, a young German who along with the rest of his class volunteers to fight shortly after the start of the First World War. Along with his friends he is sent to the Western Front, where they experience frequent battles, and endure dangerous and squalid living conditions. This is not a story of heroism or bravey, but of the monotony of war, and its many costs.

First-person fiction is a brave choice for any writer to pursue – I talk from experience here. While third person historical fiction calls for a lot of research, first person is a whole different ball game. We do not rely on a narrator to buffer between the story and the reader; the thoughts, mannerisms and language of the primary character have to be spot on, or the whole plot founders. It is a brave choice, and Remarque pulls it off here with aplomb.

This is a very useful book for trying to get to grips with the human experience of the soldier on the Western Front. It also adds another dimension to our understanding: we hear a lot about Tommy, but what about Fritz? From a psychological and sociological point of view, it is also fascinating to observe the attitudes towards the war, and the loyalties that develop in the crucible of front-line service. Reading this book made me think, which can never be a bad thing,

But what really strikes me the most about All Quiet On The Western Front, is that if you were to change the German names, the German food and other cultural references, these could be any solders, anywhere. If their names were Bill, Tom and Fred and they were to eat Bully Beef instead of Sauerkraut, they could quite easily be British. And I think that is the salient point about this classic book – that the fortunes of the average soldier are almost always the same, and that despite the attempts of Propaganda, very often the men facing eah other in the front line have more in common than they do with their own Generals.

Coastal Forces at War

With the recent news that an RAF Rescue Launch and a Motor Torpedo Boat are to be moored at Gunwharf Quays, I thought it might be appropriate to take a look at men from Portsmouth who died whilst serving on these kinds of craft in the Second World War.

Coastal Forces had a very eventful time during the war. Hundreds of small powerboats were operated by small crews, often reservists, who engaged in a swashbucking kind of war, conducting hit and run raids on occupied Europe, patrolling the Channel and the North Sea, escorting convoys, and guiding the invasion fleet towards Normandy on D-Day. Their war was the kind of what that Nelson was surely have approved of.

Lieutenant Oliver Manning was serving on HM Motor Launch 156 when he was killed on 7 November 1941. 28 and from North End, he is remembered on the Plymouth Naval Memorial. ML156 was a Fairmile B Class Boat.

Chief Petty Officer Frank Hopkins, 38 and from Southsea, was serving onboard HM ML133 when he died on 11 May 1943. He is buried in Port William Cemetery, Scotland. She was also a Fairmile B Class Boat.

Leading Seaman William Warren died on 16 September 1944 while onboard HM ML258. 23 and from Portsea, he is remembered on the Portsmouth Naval Memorial. Once again, she was a Fairmile B Class.

Motor Mechanic John Ladmore, 19 and from Southsea, is buried in Highland Road Cemetery. He was a crew member of HM Motor Torpedo Boat 201, and died on 15 June 1942. MTB201 was a 71ft Craft built by JS White. She was badly damaged by gunfire from German surface craft off Dover and foundered whilst under tow on 15 June 1942.

Petty Officer Arthur Wright died on 14 September 1942. A crew member of HM MTB38, he was 25 and from Buckland, and is remembered on the Portsmouth Naval Memorial. MTB38 was an early Vospers Motor Motor Torpedo Boat, and was 71 feet long. Interestingly, she had been built at Portchester.

Stoker 1st Class Bernard Bartlett, 28 and from Portchester, died on 17 July 1943. He was serving onboard HM MTB316. He is also remembered on the Portsmouth Naval Memorial. 316 Was a Fairmile C Class Boat, much bigger at 110 feet long. She was lost after a direct hit from the Italian cruiser Africano Scipione in the Strait of Messina on 17 July 1943.

Lieutenant-Commander John Cole, 32 and from Wickham, was commanding HM MTB41 when he was killed on 14 February 1941. He is remembered on the Portsmouth Memorial. MTB41 was sunk by a mine in the North Sea. 41 was a 72ft craft built by JS White.

Finally, Chief Motor Mechanic Wilfrid Gitsham DSM was the only Coastal Forces man from Portsmouth to win a gallantry award in the Second World War. He died on 8 May 1943, when he was on the crew of HM MTB637. His DSM was gazetted on 7 January 1944 for gallant and distinguished services in a daylight sweep against enemy shipping in the Mediterranean while serving in light Coastal Craft. MTB637 was a Fairmile D Class Boat, one of the famous ‘Dog’ Boats. The were 115 feet long. MTB637 survived the war, only to sink between Malta and Alexandria in 1946.

The role of Coastal Forces has been largely forgotten, so hopefully the protection of these two important boats should go some way to giving these little ships the credit that they deserve. And perhaps it is just me, but wouldn’t these fast, hard-hitting ships put the fear of god into pirates?

The Syria-Lebanon Campaign of 1941

The roots of the Syria-Lebanon Campaign were sown in the aftermath of the First World War. Britain was given a League of Nations mandate to govern Palestine and Jordan; France, meanwhile, was given one to occupy Lebanon and Syria.

With the fall of France in 1940, there were fears that the Vichy French authorities, nominally neutral but sympathetic to Germany, would allow German forces to use these French territories as a springboard to attack Palestine, Egypt and the Middle East. In May 1941 Admiral Darlan signed an agreement allowing German forces access to French bases in Syria. Against the backdrop of a pro-German coup in Iraq, it was essential for British forces to prevent the Germans gaining a foothold.

Under General Henry Maitland Wilson a plan was drawn up. Four lines of attack were envisaged – on Damascus and Beirut from Palestine, on northern Syria from Iraq, and central Syria, also from Iraq. What followed was a cucial campaign, which has been virtually overlooked in the history of the Second World War.

The campaign began on 9 June 1941 at the battle of the Litani river, the natural border between Palestine and Lebanon. By 15 June British forces were at Kissoue, on the outskirts of Damascus. In the fighting there Private James Hurst, from Southsea and of the Hampshire Regiment, was killed. On 22 June Lieutenant-Colonel Hugh Greatwood, Commanding Officer of the 6th Raputana Rifles, an Indian Army unit, was killed Merdjayoun. On 11 July 1941 Private Frederick Swift, of the 2nd Battalion of the Queens Regiment, was killed during the advance on Beirut. He was 27 and from Stamshaw. On the same day Private William Kingswell, of the 2nd Battalion, Kings Own Royal Regiment, was also killed. He was 29 and from Southsea. All of these men are buried in Damascus War Cemetery, Syria.

A ceasfire was finally called on 12 July 1941, with British and Commonwealth forces in control of Syria and Lebanon. Many figures who would later go on to win fame took part in the campaign, including a certain Major-General William Slim, and a certain Lieutenant Blair ‘Paddy’ Mayne, who fought with 11 Commando at the Litani River. Mayne would later go on to command the SAS and win 4 Distinguished Service Orders.

The Forgotten Few – the Polish Air Force in World War Two by Adam Zamoyski

One of the saddest and most tragic stories of the Second World War has to be that of Poland. The vey reason that Britain and France went to war – Polish independence – was betrayed at the Yalta conference in 1945. But the story of Polish tragedy has a long history before and after the Second World War – Poland has at various times been occupied by France, Austria, Germany and Russia. In fact, it is only really from 1918 and 1939 and the fall of Communism in 1989 that Poland has controlled its own destiny.

After the all of Poland in 1939 thousands of Polish men somehow made their way by various routes to France, and then to Britain. The Poles made a significant contribution to the Allied war effort – an Armoured Division after D-Day, more Army units in Italy, a Polish Parachute Brigade fought at Arnhem and Polish Navy ships supported the D-Day landings.

But perhaps the most important contribution was the Polish Air Force. Poles manned a significant number of Fighter and Bomber Squadrons, fighting in the Battle of Britain and also in the strategic Bomber offensive. After initial problems adapting to the RAF’s ways and British society, the flying Poles made not only a sterling fighting contribution, but also left an indelible mark on many Brits. In a typically British fashion the Poles were regarded as ‘hot-headed’ and too aggressive. Perhaps if RAF officers had had to flee their homeland, they might not have been quite so critical.

This book by Adam Zamoyski tells he story of the Polish Air Force with remarkable detail. Born to Polish parents and having lived in Britain for many years, Zamoyski is ideally placed to tell this story. The biblography shows extensive research, most usefully of Polish sources. The story is picked up before 1939, and describes the development of the Polish Air Force between the wars. We are then told about how the Poles made their way from their homeland to take up the fight in France and then Britain, and the long and arduous development of Polish squadrons under RAF command.

Not only is this a story of aircraft and squadrons, but it is also a very human story. Tales of young men forced from their homeland, ending up in a strange country, and not knowing what fate would befall their beloved Poland cannot fail to stir the heart. We also learn about the culture clashes between British society and the Poles. And tales of romance between British girls and Polish airmen are aplenty. As a social history, this is a fascinating read and reminds us that many other nationalities, exiled to Britain, contributed to the wider war effort. All too often their contributions are ignored. Somehow we rarely hear about the Polish squadrons who fought the Luftwaffe in 1940 – apart from condescending scenes in war films showing Polish airmen as excitable and immature.

But the saddest part of their story has to be the final fate of Poland in 1945. Agreed to be part of the Soviet sphere influence at Yalta, the Poles in British service felt betrayed. They rapidly became an inconveniece and embarassment to their British hosts, and were shamefully treated. Many of them were only given the right to settle in Britain after long and traumatic struggles. The Author gives some sad example of how British people in some cases turned against the Poles, fearing that they were stealing jobs and calling for them to ‘go home’.

This is a story of shabby treatment that deserves to rank alongside the scapegoating of Sosabowski and the Polish Paras after Arnhem. Perhaps the Allies had no choice over the Polish question at Yalta, but the authorities in Britain could at least have treated the brave Poles so much better. Hopefully this important book will go some way to rehabilitating the story of the Polish Air Force in the Second World War.

The Forgotten Few is published by Pen and Sword

Portsmouth Harbour tour #2

There were a couple of foreign warships in port this weekend, so I thought I would take the chance to go on the Pompey harbour tour and take some pics!

FGS Mecklenburg-Vorpommern

FGS Mecklenburg-Vorpommern is a German Frigate of the Brandenburg Class, and its the first time a ship of that class has visited Portsmouth. They’re very impressive ships with a 76mm main gun, Vertical launch anti-air missiles and exocet anti-ship missiles, as well as Rheinmetall 20mm cannons. They’re currently underoing an upgrade and the Vertical launch missiles are being replaced with Sea Sparrow, and the Exocets with RBS 15 Mk.3. Interesting how she looks like a German warship – high, stacked and mean looking.

HNLMS Johann De Witt

HLMS Johann De Witt is a Dutch Landing Ship. Launched in 2007, she is from a class of two ships. She can accomodate numerous landing craft, which use the stern dock to embark troops. She also has a large flight deck and hangar for up to 6 Lynx helicopters. She can carry 611 marines, 170 armoured personnel carriers or 33 Main Batle tanks – a impressive sealift capacity. The Dutch Navy and Marines can form a joint task force with the Royal Navy’s amphibious task group, so she could well operate with British ships. She’s very similar to the British Bay Class. Unlike the Bay Class however she has good self-defence – 2 Goalkeeper guns and 4 Oerlikon 20mm cannons – and the Bay Class lack a hangar.

HMS Manchester

HMS Manchester is a Batch 3 ship of the Type 42 Class of Destoyers. She’s looking her age now and her and the rest of the class are due to be replaced as the Type 45 Destroyers come into service. The Sea Dart missile system is pretty much obsolete now compared to the Sea Viper, even if it hasn’t yet been fully proven in trials. Notice also how shes longer than the earlier Type 42’s – they proved to be very poor in rough seas, so the later ships were lengthened. But this would have cracked the hull, so they had strengthening fitted along their sides.

HMS Iron Duke

HMS Iron Duke is a Type 23 Frigate. She has a 4.5inch main gun, Sea Wolf verital launch anti-air missile system and Harpoon anti-ship missiles. They were originally designed as anti-submarine ships for the North Atlantic, but nowadays are more likely to be seen fighting pirates and drug-smuggles. The Iron Duke performed well in the Carribean last year, but is a Cold War anti-submarine frigate the best ship for fighting drug smugglers? She has a proper warship name though, named after the Duke of Wellington. My Great-Grandad served on the First World War vintage Iron Duke, a battleship.

HMS Invincible

Finally we see HMS Invincible, the mothballed Falklands veteran aircraft carrier. She was withdrawn from service in 2005 – technically she is in ‘extended readiness’. Not sure what the Navy means by this, as if you look on Google Earth you can see her propellers on the flight deck – I don’t think shes going anywhere anytime soon. She’s probably been robbed of parts to keep her sister ships Illustrious and Ark Royal running. My dad worked on Invincible when she first came into the Dockyard, many moons ago. She’s due to be towed to the breakers yard later this year.

RAF war dead: some comparisons

Perhaps the most evocative image of the RAF in the Second World War is of gallant fighter pilots fighting off the Luftwaffe in the summer of 1940. The Battle of Britain, in many eyes, was the RAF’s biggest contribution during the Second World War.

The RAF has always been fiercely protective of its independence, and as a result has long championed two strengths that underlines it – air defence and strategic bombing. With some small changes over time this still holds true today – witness the lavish amount of Eurofighters, compared to the shortage of Helicopters. There is something extremely glamorous about fighters. A Spitfire is graceful, a sportscar, whereas a Lancaster is a great lumbering beast, more akin to a truck.

But among all the emphasis on Spitfires and Hurricanes, are we missing something? What about the Bombers?Just as a comparison, Between 1939 and 1947 14 men from Portsmouth died whilst flying Spitfires and Hurricanes. 92 were killed flying Lancasters and Halifaxes.

Why is there such a difference in numbers? For a start, fighters had a single pilot, whereas Bombers had a much larger crew. If a plane was shot down, the losses were much higher. And while Fighter Command was extremely busy during the summer of 1940, throughout the war and particularly from 1942 onwards Bomber Command was attacking occupied Europe night after night – prolonged operations were bound to take their toll.

Given that by 1943 Bomber Command was able to launch raids consisting of 1,000 bombers, we have some impression of just how many bombers were being launched into the air offensive. Once we take into account that bombers flew night after night, and the attrition brought on by German defences, its not surprising that so many Bomber men were killed in action.

Empire of the Seas: Sea Change

I’ve just watched the last instalment of Dan Snow’s latest series.

After Trafalgar the Royal Navy was riding the crest of a wave. Dominant in all of the world’s oceans, the ironclad era and the advent of engine propulsion spurred it on to new heights.

But away from the ships, a sea change too place in the culture of those who served in the Royal Navy. Whilst still worshipping the memory of Nelson, officers began to place obedience far above initiative – the value that Nelson had tried to instill among his Captains. As the Navy became the darling of British society, it also became more stratified socially, which stifled meritocracy.

One man in the early Twentieth Century tried to change all of this. Admiral Jackie Fisher became First Sea Lord with a comprehensive plan to modernise all aspects of the Royal Navy. His mantra was ‘if you want peace, prepare for war’ – put simply, he wanted to make the Royal Navy so large and so powerful, that no-one would dare challenge it. Soon 25% of all Government expenditure was being spent on the Navy.

Chief among this spending was the new Class of Battleship – the Dreadnought. Far better armed and armoured than any ship previously, she rendered all other ships virtually obsolete. An arms race developed in Europe, with the Kaiser’s Germany attempting to challenge British Naval supremacy.

Although the German Navy had less than half the amount of Dreadnoughts as Britain, in 1916 the German fleet attempted to draw the British Grand Fleet into battle. Although the Grand Fleet suffered heavy losses at Jutland, the battle was a strategic victory for the British – the sheer amount of ships flying the white ensign prevented the Germans from challenging them again. The British failings at Jutland had been caused by a slowness to adapt to the new technology of battle – poor communications combined with rigid obedience led to ships failing to act decisively, and un-necessary losses.

Although Jutland led to bursting of the 100 year ‘Trafagar bubble’, it also shook the Royal Navy out of its complacency. Never the less, after the First World War Britain was no longer the world’s dominant Naval power.

This episode ends the series nicely, but I do feel that it concludes very abruptly. British Naval power did not suddenly end after 1918 – the size of the Royal Navy in 1940 still prevented Nazi Germany from invading Britain. I would argue that it was through the symbolic loss of the Royal Oak, the Hood, Prince of Wales and Renown that Britain really lost her naval superpower status. The decline may have begun at Jutland, but it was only in the latter stages of the Second World War that the US Navy eclipsed the Royal Navy.

All in all, this has been a thought-provoking series that has discussed a key part of British history. I have been impressed with how well Dan Snow has put across some complicated ideas in very simple and understandable ways. Many of them are extremely relevant today. On the down side, perhaps it did ignore earlier and later factors outside of the series arbitrary start and end dates. An earlier episode on Tudor sea power and a later one on the Second World War would have made much more sense.

How about a similar series, looking at the British Army since Cromwell?

Catch the last episode here on BBC iplayer

Call of Duty: ‘just a game’ or a spark of interest?

Unless you happen to have been living under a stone for the past few years, you have surely seen the popularity of the Call of Duty series of games. Before that there were games such as Medal of Honour too. I have had a play on several of them, and for the large part they are impressively acurate, detailed and fun to play. There were obviously some knowledgeable historical consultants and researchers working alongside the programmers and animators.

Do games such as this encourage people to become interested in military history? I would hope so. If Call of Duty helps even a minority of players develop and interest and awareness in military history, then it has to be a good thing. It would be wrong of us to get snobby and think of it as ‘just a computer game’. Computer Games happen to be a medium that young people use and is relevant to them. In many ways players are getting as close to the experiences that men not much older than them experienced in the war. Engaging young people with history is hard as it is, so if it works, then why not?

I think looking into military history would actually help when playing these games. Knowing the strengths and weaknesses of various weapons would come in handy – knowing when to swap a Tommy Gun for a Japanese sniper rifle, for example. Looking into tatics might also come in handy – firing short burts rather than blazing away, giving covering fire, and flanking maneouvres, for example. Most of the games are based around a specific theatre of war – such as the Pacific – so it would never be a bad thing to go away and read up on it. The same kind of ideas also go for pursuits such as paintball and airsoft. How many stag do’s involve blokes running round like idiots madly zapping each other?

And we’re only watching a very small part of the experience of war. Soldiers do not spend all of their time blazing away. On a computer game you do not go through the training, the drill, the boredom of waiting around. In my mind there is something ironic about people who play airsoft or paintball but arent interested in military history. Very strange indeed. And why not put in some of the physical training that the men who do it for real undergo?

We should be mindful that while we are playing these games for fun, years ago many men did it for real and did not come home to tell the tale. We should be very careful not to ignore or trivialise their experiences. We need to be aware that the images in front of us represent real men, and true stories – unlike Wold of Warcraft, which is a complete fantasy world. These are not games like any other.

YouTube picks

Its been a while since I’ve shared some of my favourite videos from YouTube… so here are some recent videos I think you might like!

German Newsreel footage of Operation Market Garden

I’ve found this fascinating German newsreel covering the battle of Arnhem. Whats really interesting about it is that part of the footage was filmed when my Granddad was jumping at Ginkel Heath – those Germans are firing at my Granddad. Its also fascinating to see the Nazi Propaganda Machine at work.

HMS Invincible 1982

There is a pretty ridiculous conspiracy theory out there that HMS Invincible was either sunk or damaged during the Falklands. War. As this video shows, any sane human being will be able to work out that its ludicrous.

Grenadier Guards Band in 1940

Heres a British Pathe clip of the Grenadier Guards Band playing in Trafalgar Square in 1940. Fittingly, they’re playing ‘British Grenadiers’.

Biffy Clyro – Many of Horror live

And finally, something from the best band in Britain today…

Pompey POW’s: Prisoners of the Germans

Prisoners at Stalag XIB, April 1945

Recenty I looked at the large amount of Portsmouth men who were captured by the Japanese, and subsequently died in captivity.

Many servicemen were also captured by the Germans. As well as Army personnel captured at Dunkirk, many men were also captured when their aircraft were shot down over Germany. Many men were also captured on Crete, in Greece, in North Africa – particularly at Tobruk. Later in the war over 6,000 men were captured during the battle of Arnhem, including my Granddad.

Although there were isolated cases of brutality and atrocities, the Germans generally treated their British prisoners in accordance with the Geneva Convention. Although conditions deteriorated as the war drew on, fatalities did not reach the rate of those held by the Japanese.

Signalman Alfred Richards, of I Corps Royal Signals, died on 4 June 1940. Interestingly, he is buried in Cadzand War Cemetery in Holland. Why Holland? Well, Holland had been invaded by the Germans in May and quickly over-run. But British forces hadn’t set foot in Holland at all in 1940. Whats more, the Dunkirk evacuation ended on 4 June. It looks very much like Signalman Richards had been captured during the fall of France, and died on his way to a Prisoner of War Camp in Germany. Richards was 31 and from Stamshaw.

Guardsman David Lyons, 32 and from North End, was serving with the 3rd Battalion of the Grenadier Guards. He died on 13 October 1940, and is buried in Enghien, Belgium. Given that the battle of France had ended in June, it would seem that Guardsman Lyons was a POW. Perhaps he had been too badly wounded to be moved to a camp in Germany?

One Portsmouth man died after reaching a Prisoner of War Camp. Gunner Kenneth Lanyon, 26 and from Southsea, was captured serving with 194 Battery, 60 Heavy Anti-Aircraft Regiment Royal Artillery during the Battle of France. He died on 30 December 1940, and is buried in Cracow Rakowiki Cemetery in Poland. Several Prisoner of War Camps were close to Cracow.

Remarkably, it seems that none of the Portsmouth men who died whilst serving in the RAF were taken prisoner. Evidence tells us that of the several hundred Portsmouh airmen who’s planes were shot down over Europe, all of them were killed. This demonstates just how dangerous the air war really was.

One Portsmouth man was a victim of German war crimes. In November 1942 Sapper Ernest Bailey of the 9 (Airborne) Field Company, Royal Engineers was captured during a glider-borne raid on a heavy water plant in Norway. He was captured by the Germans and murdered on 19 November. Bailey – 31 and from Paulsgrove – is buried in Stavanger War Cemetery.

Some Prisoners died even shortly after the war in Europe was over and they were released. Private William Starling of the Royal Army Ordnance Corps died on 14 May 1945, and is buried in Prague War Cemetery, Czech Republic. He probably died in a Prisoner of War Camp in the region.

Defence Green Paper predicts tough choices and big changes

The Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth today published a Green Paper ahead of the upcoming Strategic Defence Review. It can be read in full here.

Titled ”Adaptability and Partnership: Issues for the Strategic Defence Review’, the paper sets the terms of reference for the tough review on Defence spending and policy that is due to take place after the next General Election.

Obviously, the more discussion, debate and thinking that goes into shaping the review, the better. I do question how worthwhile Defence-based discussion will be, as the review is bound to be driven by Treasury policy. None the less, It is important for the Government, the MOD and the services to take a serious look at the issues involved.

Key Questions outlined are:

• What contribution can the Armed Forces make to internal security within the UK?
• How can the Armed Forces be more effective in supporting conflict prevention?
• Do our international relationships need rethinking?
• How closely should our armed forces integrate with allies?

The paper seems to conclude that the Armed Forces will have to become leaner and meaner, and to not become too focussed on specific threats but be able to react to new ones. The paper also underlines firmly that the days of the UK acting alone are long gone, and that in future all operations will be in partnership with allies. This will involve building closer links with the US and Europe in particular. This represents a huge change in sovereignty as we know it – the UK is no longer able to defend itself alone. Is this a reflection of changing international circumstances? Clearly, however, some big changes will have to take place.

The most perplexing conclusion of the review is that foreign policy, defence and international development should be more closely integrated. Why has this been dreamt up all of a sudden? The Iraq Inquiry has shown just how disparate these Government Departments have been. Especially when dealing with asymetric threats that require civil and military co-operation. This is especially sad, as the UK had long led the field in low-intensity warfare.

Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth said: “There is no more important function for Government than Defence. This Green Paper will stimulate debate about the future of Britain’s defence ahead of a Strategic Defence Review in the next Parliament. Afghanistan is the top priority today but we must also ensure that our Armed Forces are ready to confront the challenges of tomorrow. The current and emerging threats we face are characterised by uncertainty and will require a more flexible response from an adaptable Armed Forces.”

Chief of the Defence Staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, said: “I welcome this Green Paper. It is a first and a significant step on the road to the forthcoming Defence Review that will shape our security in the years ahead. The issues the Green Paper raises are of fundamental importance to all citizens of this country, and I look forward to a vigorous and widespread debate on them in the coming months.”

One does wonder, however, just how much input Sideshow Bob and His Airship Sir Jock will have into the review – for one, the Defence Secretary after May will probably be Tory. Will the Treasury simply hand the MOD cuts and expect them to make them? Probably. It is particularly galling for Ainsworth to talk about Defence as the most important function for the Government – this is not borne out in spending or decision making.

All the same, there will probably be some sharp debates over the next few months. Given the tribal nature of British armed forces expect to see the heads of the Navy, Army and Air Force to attempt to outdo each other. While this loyalty is admirable, it comes at the expense of a broader ‘UK Defence’ thinking. Loyalty should not come before objectivity. Units such as the RAF Regiment, for example, should not escape just because the RAF stamps its feet to keep it. Current expectations are that the RAF and Navy will bear the brunt of the cuts, but who knows what clever lobying may bring about?

Fierce debate over UK Defence spending

The Prime Minister had denied that he ‘guillotined’ the Defence budget while British forces were fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. An ex-MOD civil servant had earlier made the claim while giving evidence at the Iraq Inquiry.

Conservative Leader David Cameron said: “Isn’t it becoming clear from the Chilcot inquiry that the government in general, and you in particular, made a series of bad decisions that meant our armed forces were not equipped properly when they were sent into harm’s way?”

Former Ministry of Defence permanent secretary Sir Kevin Tebbit called the £1bn cut “arbitrary”, and that “I think it’s fair to say that the Treasury as a whole didn’t want us to get as much as we got.” It would seem increasingly that the Government was willing to make huge commitments, but not to fund the armed forces to carry them out.

It is also broadly accepted that Gordon Brown, as Chancellor, had more control over public spending than any of his predecessors. Not only was he able to control spending, but Government policy by default. Gordon Brown’s denials come after a stream of witnesses at the Iraq Inquiry have stated that preparation for the war was severely hampered and inadequate.

It would not be in the Prime ministers interests to admit that he did not fund the armed forces properly: politicians are rarely blessed with honesty over such matters. But why ignore the clear findings of an Inquiry, that he ordered, before it has even finished?

Lieutenant Frederick Wood

Frederick Wood, aged 48 and from Southsea, and died while serving at HMAS Ceberus II – an Australian shore establishment – on 16 January 1941. He is remembered on the Portsmouth Naval Memorial. He was a Lieutenant… hang on, isn’t 48 quite old for a Lieutenant?

After a little more digging, it transpires that Wood initially enlisted in the Royal Navy either prior to or during the First World War. Not only does this mean that he served in two World Wars, it seems like he was commissioned from the ranks. For somebody who was a Petty Officer in 1916, to be a Lieutenant by 1941 is quite impressive.

In 1916, as a Petty Officer, he saved the life of a man who had fallen overboard.

At 11.30 a.m. on the 20th November, 1916, a man fell overboard from his vessel in the Estuary of the Thames, the sea being choppy and the vessel going 12 knots. Frederick J. Wood, Petty Officer, and C.R. Walker at once jumped after him and kept him afloat till they were picked up.

For this brave act he was awarded the Royal Humane Society’s Bronze Medal.

The Riddles of Wipers by John Ivelaw-Chapman

I’m a big fan of social history. Which isn’t always an area of study that sits easily with military history. Too often in the writings about wars and battles, we hear all about the Generals and the politicians, but not about the ordinary fighting man. Yet ever since men fought each other, the human impact of conflict has been sigificant. So why is it that we rarely hear about it? What puzzles me is that there are plenty of sources available to study the experiences of the fighting man during wartime.

Perhaps one of the most incedible of these sources is The Wipers Times. A typically British corrupion of the pronouncation of Ypres. This book by John Ivelaw-Chapman serves as a very useful introduction to this uniquely British institution.

The back of the book describes The Wipers Times as ‘the Private Eye of the Ypres Salient’, but I would argue that it was much more than that. Although it was edited by a Battalion commander of the Sherwood Foresters, its contents were almost completely contributed by rank and file Tommies. Hence there was something uniquely democratic and representative about it – nothing is lost in translation. At times cryptic and couched in Edwardian sensibilities, and its riddles can take some deciphering – hence the title of the book – but that was the language of the time. To take the language out of the message would be to take The Wipers Times out of context.

It demonstrates a typically British sense of humour, in its poetry and cartoons. It tells us much about the men who shaped it, and their views on the War, the British Army and the World. Whats more, its not some kind of ‘top-down’ view, but in their own words, and their own language. A lot of myths have built up regarding Trench Warfare in the Great War, and book such as this are very important at helping a degree or reality to shine through.

This book is well illustrated with pages from The Wipers Times , and some interesting and illuminating analysis from Ivelaw-Chapman. Perhaps at times the text does not flow easily and maybe we do not need to know so much about the authors own experiences – The Wipers Times speaks for itself.

But never the less, books such as this make a very important contibution to our understanding of the social history of warfare. To listen to a lot of historians, we would think that the average Tommy was constantly worrying about whether Haig was a good General. Mud, Gas, Shells, Fear, Courage, Humour and Bitterness probably occupied Tommy’s mind much more.

The Riddles of Wipers is published by Pen and Sword

Mo Mowlam remembered

I watched the docu-drama Mo on Channel 4 last night. It’s a portrayal of the last years of Mo Mowlam’s life, from just before the General Election of 1997 until her untimely death in 2005.

I know its only TV, and although its as a documentary element its not necessarily 100% accurate, but by all accounts her friends who were involved in making it regarded it as very true to life. Julie Walters was fantastic as Mo, and the screenplay was dramatic, moving and heartfelt. Mo’s story tells us a lot about the past 15 years in Britain. Its maybe too early to look at the New Labour era objectively, but with the Labour Government seemingly sloping towards an election defeat in May it seems natural to look back on those early days.

The way that Tony Blair undermined Mowlam after her standing ovation at the Labour Conference was nothing short of a disgrace. In an almost Stalinist manner, it was not acceptable for a Minister to be too popular. In a Government full of figures intent on following a political career rather than staying true to their beliefs, someone like Mo Mowlam was always going to stand out. But there seems little doubt that amongst ordinary people she remains the most popular and likeable Labour politcian of the past 13 years. Isn’t the Labour party supposed to be about representing ordinary people?

In hindsight it would seem as well that Downing Street attempted to marginalise Mowlam during the Northern Ireland negotiations. This fits in with the controlling, unconstitutional style of Government that is rapidly being exposed by the Iraq Inquiry. Despite attempts to steal the limelight, it has to be said that peace in Northern Ireland – largely brought about by Mo Mowlam – is the greatest achievement of the Labour Government.

But most importantly, Mo was herself. And among a cabal of faceless New Labour functionaries, that was refreshing. The way that she handled her illness was an inspiration. It does seem wrong that while Mo Mowlam suffered like she did, somebody like Peter Mandelson keeps bouncing back like a rubber ball and we have a Prime Minister ill at ease with people and vainly clinging onto power.

Her story tells us about much that is right and wrong about British politics, and budding politicians would to well to watch and learn.