story-type: ForcesWatch comment

What lies behind Parliament’s military cosplay scheme?

A picture of MPs sitting in the Houses of Parliement where they are currently debating legislation on The Troubles.

Over the last five to ten years it has been increasingly common to see MPs playing soldiers for the camera. Usually this kind of martial dress-up garners a few laughs on Twitter, letting MPs play the patriot for a few hours and get some good snaps for their election campaign leaflets.

The truth is less clear cut. The Armed Forces Parliamentary Scheme (AFPS) fits into a broader and older pattern of militarising democracy, involving not only the military, or MPs eager to be photographed riding in tanks, but some of the world’s largest arms firms.

The Scheme

The AFPS was founded in 1989 by then Conservative MP, and former TA colonel, Sir Neil Thorne. Thorne had divined a problem in Parliament: that there were fewer and fewer politicians coming into politics with military backgrounds. As a 2011 speech by Lord Astor, for which Thorne and other supporters of the scheme were present, explains:

‘Our armed forces have been a professional, volunteer force for many years while the older generations have inexorably dwindled. Public understanding of our armed forces has declined as a result. And this matters hugely. Our armed forces rely on the support they receive from the public. They look to you, as Parliamentarians, as a weather vane’.… Read more

Scuppering access to justice for women in the armed forces

Over the coming weeks, the House of Lords will debate a range of new legislation put forward in the Armed Forces Bill, along with a series of amendments. It is expected that some of the additional proposals will get significant support, not least because of the recent publication of a damning report on the experience of women in the armed forces from a parliamentary Defence sub-committee.

The armed forces are not alone in having systemic problems with sexism and sexual harassment and assault, as recent events within the police have made clear beyond doubt. Rigid chains of command, tendency towards reactionary views, and use of force as a modus operandi, make entrenched institutional and individual bias, and negative behaviour towards women and other groups, particularly difficult to challenge.

One of the common features of all the institutional abuse that has come to light in recent years is the cover up that takes place to protect both the perpetrator and the institution. Within the armed forces, this stretches from cases currently making the news, such as the suicide of a female cadet at Sandhurst military academy and the killing of a Kenyan woman by British soldiers, to older cases, such as the historic (and recent) abuse in the cadet forces reported by the BBC in 2017.… Read more

Insights from the arms fair

DSEI 2021 shows that the UK military, the UK government and the arms trade are so deeply entangled that it is difficult at times to view them as separate entities. However, 2021 was an unusual year for the east London-based arms fair in that a few critical journalists managed to gain access. In effect, a blanket ban has operated for all but the most pliable reporters ye thankfully Matt Kennard and Phil Miller of Declassified UK and Iain Overton, of Byline Times and Action on Armed Violence, reported on what they saw inside the fair.

As Overton details in his report, there was an element of the surreal to an event that sanitised and commodified armed conflict. It is also a rare glimpse into those spaces where industry, politicians and armed forces representatives speak freely with eachother outside the gaze of public scrutiny:

‘I overheard a British arms supplier speaking to a British Army Colonel. “I want to spend my money fast,” said the officer. “I want to take your money fast,” said the supplier.’

Matt Kennard and Phil Miller were greeted into the arms fair by a retired British general who assured them: ‘We’ve got nothing to hide here.… Read more

At particular risk: women and girls in the military

The Defence sub-committee on Women in the Armed Forces last week published a damning report on the situation for women in the armed forces. They concluded that, ‘Within the military culture of the Armed Forces and the MOD, it is still a man’s world.’ (p79)

The inquiry gathered a mass of evidence from many hundreds of women, with 1 in 10 serving women making a submission – itself an indication of the severity of the difficulties they experience. However, this is not a new area of concern. Likely embarrassed by external pressure, such as from Liberty’s Soldier’s Rights campaign (and now from the Centre for Military Justice and other women who have served), the Army first conducted a Sexual Harassment survey in 2015, followed by a review into ‘inappropriate behaviours’ and how they are dealt with in the Service Complaints System, both in 2019.

It is worth quoting the conclusions of the report at length:

There is too much bullying, harassment and discrimination – including criminal behaviours like sexual assault and rape – affecting Service personnel (both male and female), and the MOD’s own statistics leave no room for doubt that female Service personnel suffer disproportionately. We were alarmed and appalled that the Army’s Sexual Harassment survey of 2018 found that 21% of servicewomen had either experienced or witnessed sexual harassment at work in the previous 12 months.… Read more

Checking in with the neocons

In the week starting 12 July 2021, UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace was in the United States meeting with his counterpart Lloyd Austin. The visit was dominated by a trip to the Pentagon and the signing of a one-year extension to the US-UK Statement of Intent Regarding Enhanced Cooperation on Carrier Operations and Maritime Power Projection .

But the trip also included a speech at right-wing think-tank The American Enterprise Institute (AEI): a hawkish organisation that unflinchingly supported the 2003 invasion of Iraq and has one of the chief architects of the war, Dick Cheney, on its Board of Trustees (Cheney and his wife, Lynne, were also Senior Fellows over the years). Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defence Secretary to Donald Rumsfeld from 2001-2005, is a visiting scholar. Yet, the AEI’s entanglement with the Bush Administration does not end there. As Bush himself stated in a 2007 speech: ‘I admire the AEI a lot. After all, I have been consistently borrowing some of your best people. More than 20 AEI scholars have worked in my administration.’

High-profile hawks from that administration, including John Bolton and Richard Perle, were AEI alumni. In fact Bolton, a veteran of the Reagan administration and also National Security Advisor to Donald Trump, left the Government in 2006 to return to the AEI as a Senior Fellow, only leaving again on his return to government with Trump.… Read more

Embedding the Covenant

This week (21-25 June) the Armed Forces Bill has been back in the Commons for debate. As with the Committee stage (which we report on here), none of the proposed amendments passed and the chance to make progressive change on a range of issues was lost. These include hearing cases involving the most serious offences in civilian courts, creating an Armed Forces Federation, and reparations for those who suffered historical and ongoing injustice as a result of the ban on homosexuality in the forces until the late 1990s (see notes).

Timed to coincide with Armed Forces Week, perhaps the government’s most far-reaching aim with the 2021 Bill is to further enshrine the Armed Forces Covenant in law, a decade after it was first put on the statute books. As a formal commitment or ‘pledge’ to support the armed forces community the Covenant already represents a significant change to civil-military relations in the UK.

For the last ten years the Defence Secretary has been legally required to report to Parliament annually on progress made supporting the armed forces community, largely in the areas of housing, education and health. The government have also used the Armed Forces Community and Corporate Covenant to enlist the support of local authorities, health bodies and many others providing local services and employment.… Read more

Pinkwashing War: Pride and Militarism

June is Pride Month in the UK and whilst the pandemic has forced many parades off the streets, LGBTQI+ communities across the country are taking part in online events. Yet, amongst the celebration of diversity and rejection of the violence that LGBTQI+ communities have endured – and in many places continue to face – across Britain and beyond, the armed forces and defence industry are once again trying to use Pride as an opportunity to sanitise their own violent image. Coupled with using Pride as a prop for masquerading as progressive and inclusive, this is what our partners at the Peace Pledge Union (PPU) call pinkwashing.

Sponsorship of Pride events varies because each city has its own commission or organising committee that seeks funding from national and local sources, and thankfully defence industry sponsorship is not wide spread. But one example does stand out in 2021. Perhaps unsurprisingly for a city with a Naval base and former Veterans Minister Johnny Mercer as an MP – not to mention Shadow Defence Minister, Stephen Morgan MP – Portsmouth Pride’s Gold Sponsors include defence manufacturers BAE Systems and Airbus.

It’s not the first time the defence industry or the British armed forces have used Pride to pinkwash the violence of their respective institutions and attempt to present themselves as diverse and inclusive.… Read more

The Armed Forces Bill: lost opportunities and some dubious proposals

Every five years, new legislation concerning the armed forces, and amendments to existing laws, are put forward under an Armed Forces Bill. This is an opportunity for civil society to raise concerns in parliament about how the UK’s military institutions operate. ForcesWatch and our partner organisations have usually focused on fomenting debate about raising the age of enlistment and the terms of service for young recruits.

The current Armed Forces Bill also proposes important changes to the military justice system, will make civil society obligations under the Armed Forces Covenant a legal duty, and has provided an opportunity for MPs who support establishing a representative body for serving personnel to further their cause.

The Armed Forces Bill reached Committee stage at the end of March. Whilst the Bill still has to go through a Third Reading in the Commons and is yet to pass through the Lords, the process thus far suggests it is likely to pass into law in its current form such is the size of the Conservative majority. Here we review the discussions that took place when the Commons Select Committee on the Armed Forces Bill conducted its line-by-line review of the Bill and look as some concerns both with the legislation and the Committee process.… Read more

The Integrated Review: enmeshing and strengthening the military

The government’s Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy was published on 16th March to considerable clamour. Following close on its heels, the publication of a Defence Command Paper announces a series of additional measures relating to the future of the armed forces.

The Integrated Review includes a pledge to increase the number of nuclear weapons, new approaches to state rivals like China and Russia, an expansion of cyber operations, and a general foreign policy reset for the post-Brexit Age. The Command Paper reduces the size of the armed forces in favour of the development and use of high-tech equipment and weaponry, and increases the size and use of special forces across the world.

Launched by Boris Johnson with familiar rhetoric of making ‘the United Kingdom stronger, safer and more prosperous while standing up for our values’, the Review puts forward a vision for the country’s relationship with the rest of the world which is often contradictory and ill-thought through in terms of translating rhetoric into reality; the document feels more like a manifesto than a plan.  Its title recycles a popular policy trope and combines it with a sense of renewed belligerence: Global Britain in a competitive age.… Read more

A tough year but business as usual

Covid

As a vaccine is being rolled out, the UK has in effect entered a third lockdown. Over 69,000 deaths and around 2 million cases are estimated to have occurred in the UK. The crisis has been militarised in some significant practical and cultural ways. From the high-visibility use of the army for crisis response and building Nightingale Hospitals, to the rise of Captain Tom Moore, the 100 year old WW2 veteran who has become an establishment-approved cause célèbre after he raised over £30 million for the NHS. Now knighted, he has also been appointed honorary colonel of the Army Foundation College, the military training establishment for under 18 year olds. While the armed forces have used Covid response as a recruiting tool, the British Legion conflated it with remembrance.

One positive response to the pandemic was the UN Secretary-General’s dialogue around the need for a global ceasefire. The 75th Anniversary of VE Day in May also provided an opportunity for reflection on what we can learn from the ideals and hope that flourished after the Second World War for a post-Covid world:

‘It may appear that the hopes and ideals held by those who 75 years ago wanted war to be limited by law, wanted broader access to healthcare, who preferred dialogue to armed force, have been lost to history.… Read more