There have been 402 British fatalities so far in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined. Just a fortnight ago, on Sunday 24th October at least 10, 000 Stop the War protesters descended upon central London to renew calls for troop withdrawals from these Middle Eastern war zones.
The man who was in charge of the British Army at the time of the Iraq invasion in 2001, General Sir Mike Jackson has his own opinions. ‘Those who protest – they’re perfectly entitled to do it, we’re a democracy. But that doesn’t worry the soldiers one iota.’ However, the General does acknowledge that the soldiers are not fully immune to opinions back home. ‘A sense of mums, dads and girlfriends saying ‘I’m not sure about this’ – that can have an effect.’
Nonetheless, General Sir Jackson, for one, remains utterly convinced by the need for British presence in Afghanistan. Though protesters argue that western presence heightens antagonisms and plays into al-Qaeda’s rhetoric, the General sees it differently. ‘My understanding of where the Afghan people are in their approach to their new era – a resurgent Taliban, foreign forces present – they probably regard it as the lesser of two evils. They do not want to go back to that ghastly authoritarian regime.’
The General’s army career began straight out of university in the Intelligence Corps. A Russian speaker, he combined intelligence and strong leadership, through distinguished efforts in campaigns in Bosnia and Kosovo, to reach the position as Chief of the General Staff in 2001. The General’s forthright views have ensured that, in his retirement, he has been kept busy by appearances on news and discussion programmes and as a speaker. His reputation for the brutal truth has meant that he has directly criticised the Ministry of Defence’s handling of these wars.
‘Not everything in the garden is rosy. There is no panacea.’
But circumstances have changed. ‘There were problems with equipment at the beginning of the Iraq war… But huge strides have been made and soldiers’ equipment is now quite excellent. That’s not to say that everything in the garden is rosy… but there is no panacea. There’s no magic wand, and some people think that there is.’
That’s not to say that the General’s fire has abated. He still rails against modern government, and in doing so betrays his dedication to the interests of the army. Like any leader, he fights tirelessly for his troops, ever demanding more of others to help them.
‘The difficulty we have in the politics of right now is that governments listen to focus groups, as opposed to really getting strong political leadership. We’ve got to make this thing work.’ He hones his attack. ‘The soldiers, without doubt, think they’re at war. Whether the government is putting the right amount of political effort and concentration into the Afghan campaign, I remain unconvinced.’
Not only this, but he believes that our political debate is also heading in the wrong direction.
‘We need to look at big strategic questions’ explains Sir Mike, labelling the debates on ‘what to cut’ as a ‘puerile approach’.
However, the man who consistently and unashamedly pursues the army’s interests, the man who indeed earned the nickname ‘Darth Vader’ throughout his army career, sees the need for diplomacy also. He lists ‘economists, diplomats, engineers’ as crucial to any war.
As I talk to Sir Mike, his patriotism shines through. ‘Armies reflect their nations – they’re bound to, they’re drawn from them. And they come with the values and the culture of that nation… Our shared values are those of democracy, that’s the bedrock.’ Is this problematic, given greater European integration and the presence of coalition forces? He does not believe so. ‘Brits don’t see the world through quite the same prism as the French… if it’s a problem, it’s a problem you work with. Because it’s a problem you can’t solve.’ Equally, any European force is, by nature, ‘ultimately under their national governments’, which means that these developments trouble Sir Mike little.
His passionate defence of the British Army and his unapologetic support for British presence in Afghanistan, not to mention the ‘Darth Vader’ nickname, might conjure the image of a bloodthirsty warmonger. However, General Sir Mike Jackson doesn’t strike you this way. ‘Armies’ roles arguably are more complex and broader than the traditional view of unconditional victory and all of that’, he muses. Does that mean that with terrorism changing the method of modern warfare, that we’re at a stage where armies are becoming antiquated or redundant? An unequivocal answer. ‘No. Would that we were, Heaven on Earth would’ve arrived. But we’re not there.’
For the future then, Sir Mike has different views for Iraq and Afghanistan. ‘On Iraq, my glass is half full.’ He points to the resources and education of the Iraqi people, and their liberation from Saddam Hussein, ‘It is an extraordinary country and could have a splendid future.’ However, Afghanistan has fewer resources and less education. Therefore, he sees it as ‘much more problematic.’ This is cruelly ironic, as ‘the outcome is far more important as well. The consequences of failure in Afghanistan I find to be chilling.’
Whatever our troops are bound to face, they are sure to have a dedicated champion for their causes in their former leader. Independent, forthright and fair, General Sir Mike Jackson lives and breathes the British Army, and indeed exudes its best qualities and idiosyncrasies, such as a penchant for euphemisms.
Finally, a wry smile to my provocative question: Are the British Army the best in the world? ‘How could I say anything but yes?’
