 |
| The woodcutters we encountered |
Whether or this is going to have any useful outcome is doubtful, but it has certainly elevated the issue on the international scene, and undoubtedly made senior commanders uncomfortable.
Perhaps the soldiers involved will see it as an opportunity to bring these senior commanders to account, and through that, be granted some vindication.
It has always seemed passing strange that they were blissfully unaware of the alleged misconduct.
Because my 1970 experience with 5 Platoon included mostly long distance patrols and ambushes in the Tan Ru, a long way from any villages, there were very few encounters with civilians, so I vividly remember this rare one. We were on a TAOR* in March 1970, when we came across a party of woodcutters in what was a free fire zone, in other words, an area where civilians were prohibited from access. They were using a very overloaded truck and when we caught sight of them, attempted to drive away from us, as they were in and on the vehicle, and our patrol was obviously on foot.
The patrol commander shot off a magazine of M-16 in the air, and they got the message and stopped. We then spent the rest of the day guarding them until the local authorities got out of bed and answered our request to have them vetted. This took all day, so we spent hours with them. They were a mix of women, old men, and quite a few children.
We treated them well, making sure they had water, and put up hootchies to protect them from the sun. This treatment was an expectation of everybody in our unit. I can't vouch for what happened outside 7 RAR, but maltreatment of civilians was not part of our behaviour.
Some of this may have been a result of what had been drilled into us through the soldier's handbook. I've included scans of the text below.
This material was taken from the excellent From Nui Dat to Discharge (Adrian Taylor & Karl Metcalf), April 2020, which is a compilation of material collected from members of 4 platoon B Coy, 7RAR.
It makes interesting reading. Some extracts -
You must observe these rules whether or not the enemy does likewise...
And
Remember always treat your prisoners in a humane manner...
And
All the persons in your hands, whether civilians or battle captives, must be protected against violence, insults, curiosity, and reprisals of any kind...Now I'm not going to pretend that there were never any incidents of mistreatment of prisioners in Vietnam by ADF personnel, but I never saw it, and when it did happen, a blind eye was not turned. It was also rare. It was certainly light years from what is alleged in Afghanistan.
So what has changed in 50+ years?
I'll venture some suggestions, gentle reader.
The first is a growth (probably cancerous) in our military culture that there exists such a notion as a "warrior class", for whom the normal rules of conduct do not apply. This culture seems to have unfiltrated OR's (and some NCOs) in the SAS regiment. The results are clear to see. Apart from the unfortunate Afghans who encountered it, usually to their cost, it has killed a lot of Afghan veterans who were traumatised by it, and have taken their own lives since. It is a sick and sad culture.
The second is the progression to an all volunteer ADF.
Conscription, with all its evils (particularly when it is selective and not universal) leavens the culture of any unit by including a cross section of individuals who don't necessarily see military service as a career choice. Professional military units always attract a sprinkling of psychopaths seduced by the notion that they are free to kill, and if not weeded out after enlistment, they can do enormous damage to the culture of any unit.
At least the all volunteer force deployed in Afghanistan included sufficient well balanced individuals with backbone who blew the whistle on the few psychopaths who did all the damage.
The question remains - why were the senior commanders unaware?
*Task Force Area of Responsibility - Routine overnight patrols out to Line Alpha from Nui Dat,.
3 comments:
You may have been the only reader to absorb the information from your handbook. I for one do not recall being issued with one or being given one to read. The story about the hootchies for detainees seems a little at odds with my experience also. Our platoon did not carry them. Unless in a sheel scrape we slept above ground and ready to move at a moment's notice. With that in mind even ground sheets were surplus to needs unless you needed to construct a stretcher. Stop trying to sanitise things, Bobby. Like the newbies, with the press doing a number on diggers, you will not be believed.
Every soldier was supposed to be issued a handbook which covered a range of things, including treatment of prisoners, and some basics about interacting with the locals. I had mine for years, but lost it in one of the many moves we made as a family when being transferred from school to school post Vietnam.
This was an overnight TAOR out to line Alpha and we didn't have much to carry, so a few of us packed groundsheets. You seem to suffer from the misapprehension that every unit behaved in exactly the same way. My interviews for my thesis with ex-Nashos has taught me that words to avoid when describing the experience include "every", "never" and "always". Every soldier's tour was different and unique.
The press didn't "do a number" on the diggers. They were reported by individuals with backbone within their own ranks. The psychos amongst them "did a number" on the ADF.
Once again....not publishing articles that question your beliefs and lack of knowledge.
signed...Fellow 7 RAR 1970 SVN tourist.
Post a Comment