General Richard Dannatt
Richard Dannatt has been in the news in the last few days for his Interviews, basically detailing the well known fact of the need for British troops to return home from Afghanistan/Iraq as a matter of expediency.
What he said was not unknown to anyone with common sense. The main points:
a. The presence of British troops in Iraq- in particular- was not acceptable to the sensibilities of the Native populace.
b. The manpower and logistical capability of the British Army was being seriously compromised by over-extension in these two territories..
c. There does not appear to be a proper exit strategy in place.
These issues have been covered more than once by several commentators, however this has never been done by a high ranking Commanding Officer, least of all the Chief of the General Staff, basically the Head of the British Army.
Questions raised are thus:
a. Should he have been so vocal?
b. Should he be sanctioned?
The answers to these questions may be answered by a brief bio of the General.
Richard Dannatt attended Felsted School in Essex and St Lawrence College in Kent, Durham University and Sandhurst, from where he obtained his Commission in 1971.
Dannatt through his career was first involved with the Prince of Wales Yorkshire Infantry Regiment (formerly The Green Howards) also as part of the Army Air Corps, which in simple terms is the part of the Army that flies aircraft, as opposed to the RAF.
What he said was not unknown to anyone with common sense. The main points:
a. The presence of British troops in Iraq- in particular- was not acceptable to the sensibilities of the Native populace.
b. The manpower and logistical capability of the British Army was being seriously compromised by over-extension in these two territories..
c. There does not appear to be a proper exit strategy in place.
These issues have been covered more than once by several commentators, however this has never been done by a high ranking Commanding Officer, least of all the Chief of the General Staff, basically the Head of the British Army.
Questions raised are thus:
a. Should he have been so vocal?
b. Should he be sanctioned?
The answers to these questions may be answered by a brief bio of the General.
Richard Dannatt attended Felsted School in Essex and St Lawrence College in Kent, Durham University and Sandhurst, from where he obtained his Commission in 1971.
Dannatt through his career was first involved with the Prince of Wales Yorkshire Infantry Regiment (formerly The Green Howards) also as part of the Army Air Corps, which in simple terms is the part of the Army that flies aircraft, as opposed to the RAF.
He has served with the 1st Battalion in Northern Ireland, Cyprus and Germany and commanded the Battalion in the Airmobile role from 1989 to 1991. From 1994 to1996 he commanded 4th Armoured Brigade in Germany and Bosnia. He took command of 3rd (United Kingdom) Division in January 1999, and also served in Kosovo that year as Commander British Forces. In 2000 he returned to Bosnia as the Deputy Commander Operations of the Stabilisation Force (SFOR). From 2001 to 2002 he was the Assistant Chief of the General Staff in the Ministry of Defence before taking command of NATO’s Allied Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC). In March 2005 he took over as Commander-in-Chief Land Command and he assumed the appointment of Chief of the General Staff on 29 August 2006.
A committed Christian- Dannat is President of the Army Rifle Association, the Army Rugby Union, the Soldiers’ and Airmens’ Scripture Readers Association, and a Vice President of the Armed Forces’ Christian Union.
His son is a Commissioned Officer in the Grenadier Guards and saw action in Iraq.
What is the significance of this?Well I summarise as follows:
a. He is as straight as an arrow. This is a career based on basic meat and potatoes merit. Of course some level of politicking is necessary to progress through any establishment structure, as the Army definitely is, however this chap has never been known for his Public relations savvy or double-talk. This guy is a soldiers soldier, who rightly or wrongly sees his vocation primarily as such and less as a Politician as his predecessor- Sir Michael Jackson- was wont.
b. He is a pentecostal Christian and anyone who knows anything about the Scripture Union or indeed its sister body- The Christian Union will tell you that these chaps are committed, no compromise on values or standards as they are written in the Bible, however Dannatt could not have risen through the Army without having the Intelligence to subsume his Christian values to the demand of his Job and country. Lets face it, the Army is populated by all kinds of characters from savage, psychopathic killing machines with Oxbridge degrees to moronic animals with IQ's slightly higher than Bubbles the Chimp, all of whom one is obliged to by either pay obeisance as ones Superior cadre or indeed nursemaid as one's "boys". The other analogy is that as an Infantryman your job is to kill the enemy at close quarter's. This is not necessarily a New Testament philosophy.
The two factors above would tend to explain his actions (in my view at least). To answer the questions in turn:
Should he have spoken out?
A. Following proper operational guidelines and err.. the Constitution. He ought not to have made the pronouncements without full clearance from the MOD. It does appear that he did seek some clearance. The MOD says he did not, in all honesty In a toss-up, I'd believe Sir Richard's account rather than the Civil servants, having had dealings with them in a previous life. Assuming he did not receive such clearance, he would have to be an extremely naive, fearless and/or frustrated Individual to have voiced out such opinions. To emphasise the point, you cannot as a serving Soldier- especially as a Senior Officer take a position contrary to that of the Crown to whom you have sworn allegiance. The Prime Minister and indeed the MOD represent the Crown- by the way. However if you face a situation where Soldiers are facing extended tours of duty in two Theatres within 12 months, when the MOD's operational guidelines provide that Soldiers should not face extended Combat duties in two theatres within 24 months.
In addition, the stories of severe logistical shortages are being faced by British Soldiers point to the fact that there is a crisis within the Army. I do not doubt for one second that Dannat has indeed explored Internal channels, which obviously have not met with the success he hoped for. I do not doubt that he has raised issue, its not by chance that Tony Blair went to the field only just last week to promise them anything they require to carry out their task (charming!).
Should he be sanctioned?
If he obtained clearance then the answer is no. If not then its arguable, his comments weren't exceptionally controversial, however in the background of the Insecurity of the Government on the subject there is no doubt that the comments would have attracted the amount of controversy they did. There is no doubt now that he will ot be sacked ..yet. Tony Blair has more or less accepted that this will not happen, least of all as there has been pressure from America for this to happen. It would be the singular most controversial action Tony Blair would take in the area of Defence policy. Tony is not that stupid.
Richard Dannatt, is without doubt a highly Intelligent individual and knew plainly the consequences of his making the comments he did and not only did he make them, he stood by them subsequently.
In summary I shall say that I have the highest admiration for Sir Richard Dannatt, a man of undoubted Integrity, Intelligence and honesty, one of the few possessing that combination that still exist. In the words of Paul Moorcroft- a respected Military Analyst, General's have been known to lay their lives on the line for their men, but not their jobs. This man has and should be applauded, but I would recommend he watches his back, the knives are out and the boys in Whitehall and the White House don't like to lose.
A committed Christian- Dannat is President of the Army Rifle Association, the Army Rugby Union, the Soldiers’ and Airmens’ Scripture Readers Association, and a Vice President of the Armed Forces’ Christian Union.
His son is a Commissioned Officer in the Grenadier Guards and saw action in Iraq.
What is the significance of this?Well I summarise as follows:
a. He is as straight as an arrow. This is a career based on basic meat and potatoes merit. Of course some level of politicking is necessary to progress through any establishment structure, as the Army definitely is, however this chap has never been known for his Public relations savvy or double-talk. This guy is a soldiers soldier, who rightly or wrongly sees his vocation primarily as such and less as a Politician as his predecessor- Sir Michael Jackson- was wont.
b. He is a pentecostal Christian and anyone who knows anything about the Scripture Union or indeed its sister body- The Christian Union will tell you that these chaps are committed, no compromise on values or standards as they are written in the Bible, however Dannatt could not have risen through the Army without having the Intelligence to subsume his Christian values to the demand of his Job and country. Lets face it, the Army is populated by all kinds of characters from savage, psychopathic killing machines with Oxbridge degrees to moronic animals with IQ's slightly higher than Bubbles the Chimp, all of whom one is obliged to by either pay obeisance as ones Superior cadre or indeed nursemaid as one's "boys". The other analogy is that as an Infantryman your job is to kill the enemy at close quarter's. This is not necessarily a New Testament philosophy.
The two factors above would tend to explain his actions (in my view at least). To answer the questions in turn:
Should he have spoken out?
A. Following proper operational guidelines and err.. the Constitution. He ought not to have made the pronouncements without full clearance from the MOD. It does appear that he did seek some clearance. The MOD says he did not, in all honesty In a toss-up, I'd believe Sir Richard's account rather than the Civil servants, having had dealings with them in a previous life. Assuming he did not receive such clearance, he would have to be an extremely naive, fearless and/or frustrated Individual to have voiced out such opinions. To emphasise the point, you cannot as a serving Soldier- especially as a Senior Officer take a position contrary to that of the Crown to whom you have sworn allegiance. The Prime Minister and indeed the MOD represent the Crown- by the way. However if you face a situation where Soldiers are facing extended tours of duty in two Theatres within 12 months, when the MOD's operational guidelines provide that Soldiers should not face extended Combat duties in two theatres within 24 months.
In addition, the stories of severe logistical shortages are being faced by British Soldiers point to the fact that there is a crisis within the Army. I do not doubt for one second that Dannat has indeed explored Internal channels, which obviously have not met with the success he hoped for. I do not doubt that he has raised issue, its not by chance that Tony Blair went to the field only just last week to promise them anything they require to carry out their task (charming!).
Should he be sanctioned?
If he obtained clearance then the answer is no. If not then its arguable, his comments weren't exceptionally controversial, however in the background of the Insecurity of the Government on the subject there is no doubt that the comments would have attracted the amount of controversy they did. There is no doubt now that he will ot be sacked ..yet. Tony Blair has more or less accepted that this will not happen, least of all as there has been pressure from America for this to happen. It would be the singular most controversial action Tony Blair would take in the area of Defence policy. Tony is not that stupid.
Richard Dannatt, is without doubt a highly Intelligent individual and knew plainly the consequences of his making the comments he did and not only did he make them, he stood by them subsequently.
In summary I shall say that I have the highest admiration for Sir Richard Dannatt, a man of undoubted Integrity, Intelligence and honesty, one of the few possessing that combination that still exist. In the words of Paul Moorcroft- a respected Military Analyst, General's have been known to lay their lives on the line for their men, but not their jobs. This man has and should be applauded, but I would recommend he watches his back, the knives are out and the boys in Whitehall and the White House don't like to lose.
posted by Seal67 at 1:04 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home