…the RAF bombed Iraqi and Afghani
tribespeople on several occasions – and met with success in repressing
uprisings in those colonies.
-
Ted Grimsrud, The Good
War That Wasn’t – and Why it Matters, referring to the time between the two
World Wars.
One hundred years and counting. Remember: they hate us for our freedom.
From the World
Future Fund (WFF):
Britain has the dubious distinction
of being the nation that did more to perfect a system of mass murder of
civilians by means of air power than any other nation on earth.
Theories on British terrorism from the air were put to the
test even as early as the Great War:
Even during the First World War, [Hugh]
Trenchard had outfitted his planes with crude bomb dropping devices and had
sent them on raids into Germany, hitting the cities of Kaiserslautern,
Frankfurt, Bonn, Wiesbaden, and Mannheim.
Who is Hugh
Trenchard?
Marshal of the Royal Air Force Hugh
Montague Trenchard, 1st Viscount Trenchard, Bt, GCB, OM, GCVO, DSO (3 February
1873 – 10 February 1956) was a British officer who was instrumental in
establishing the Royal Air Force. He has been described as the Father of the Royal Air Force.
Returning to the WFF:
After the end of WW I, Trenchard
found himself fighting a rear-guard action against politicians and regular army
officers who wanted to destroy an independent RAF. Trenchard (and Churchill) argued that air
power was an inexpensive way to subdue rebellions in the colonies and mandates,
far cheaper in fact than maintaining a large ground force.
Churchill needs no introduction. He gets credit for quickly demobilizing the
British military after World War I, with a corresponding significant reduction
in fiscal outlays. All this while maintaining
control of the various colonies. Now we
understand how:
At the time Winston Churchill was
Secretary for Air and War in the Lloyd George government. Churchill sought ways to police the empire
"on the cheap" by using air power to fight insurgents in place of
sufficient ground troops (a fateful decision strikingly reminiscent of the
strategy employed by American planners in Iraq eighty years later). Iraq, Churchill stated, provided the
opportunity to "carry out a far-sighted policy of Imperial aerial
development in the future."
Churchill was at this point willing
to use any means necessary to achieve his goals in Iraq, including poison gas
bombing, which he actually argued was more "humane" than bombing with
explosives. Writing to Trenchard on
August 29, 1920, Churchill advised "I think you should certainly proceed
with the experimental work on gas bombs, especially mustard gas, which would
inflict punishment on recalcitrant natives without inflicting grave injury on
them."
Another important British figure gained experience during
this terror campaign:
Arthur Harris, the man who would
later oversee the destruction of German cities during WW II, also saw action in
Iraq and participated in the bombing of civilians as a wing commander. He wrote of this experience, "The Arab
and Kurd now know what real bombing means in casualties and damage. Within forty-five minutes a full-size village
can be practically wiped out and a third of its inhabitants killed or
injured."
Gromsrud picks up the story from here, beginning with an
admonishment from Roosevelt:
The precise day on which Germany
invaded Poland and the European war began, September 1, 1939. President Roosevelt took to the airwaves with
an internationally broadcast speech that called upon the belligerents not to target civilians. He feared that “hundreds of thousands of
innocent human beings who have no responsibility for, and who are not even
remotely participating in, the hostilities” would be killed. Let the belligerents “affirm [a]
determination that [their] armed forces shall in no event, and under no
circumstances, undertake the bombardment from the air of civilian population or
unfortified cities.”
Roosevelt would later lose this innocence. In the meantime, his message, obviously, was
aimed at the Nazis as they were the only major hostile power on the continent
on that day. In any case, the
practitioners of terror bombing until this time were overwhelmingly British:
When Roosevelt gave this call to
respect noncombatant immunity, the Royal Air Force (RAF) of Great Britain had
been planning ever since World War I to make such “bombardments” a central part
of their strategy.
Chamberlain committed to avoid such deliberate attacks on
non-combatants. His replacement,
Churchill had seen the “benefits” in the Middle East and Central Asia of taking
the different approach. It mattered not
that the technology of the time was almost completely unreliable and
inaccurate:
Two major factors limited what the
RAF was able to do. One was the inefficacy
of bombing technology at that point in the war.
The planes were simply unable to hit their targets with any accuracy.
In the summer of 1941, the British military studied the
efficiency of the bombing campaign and concluded:
The bombing campaign was a
massively wasteful and futile effort…Many bomber aircraft never found their
targets at all; even in good weather on moonlit nights, only two-fifths of
bombers found their targets, but in hazy or raining weather only one in ten did
so. On moonless nights the proportion
fell to a helpless one in fifteen. In all
circumstances, of those that reached their designated target only a third of
them placed their bombs within five miles of it.
Of course, if terrorizing civilians was the objective this
inefficiency probably didn’t matter a whole lot.
The second problem was inherent in the philosophy of terror
bombing itself. This came at the cost of
targeting strategic locations.
Until the summer of 1941, Britain’s official policy had been
to not target civilians – albeit until
this time most air attacks in fact hit civilians. In any case, this official policy changed on
July 9:
On that day, Britain’s War Cabinet
approved a directive to Bomber Command that switched its focus from oil and
naval targets to “destroying the morale of the civil population as a whole and
of the industrial workers in particular.”
At this point, intentional bombing of civilians became official British
policy.
State-sponsored terrorism.
In accord with this policy, Britain dropped leaflets
throughout Germany in 1942, leaflets approved by Arthur Harris:
We are bombing Germany city by
city, and ever more terribly in order to make it impossible for you to go on in
the war. That is our object. We shall pursue it remorselessly. City by city: Lubeck, Rostock, Cologne,
Emden, Bremen, Wilhelmshaven, Duisberg, Hamburg – and the list will grow longer
and longer. Let the Nazis drag you down
to disaster with them if you will. That is
for you to decide. We are coming by day
and night. No part of the Reich is safe.
The lowlight, of course, was Dresden in 1945.
Epilogue
After the war, Churchill honored many of those who
contributed to the success of the war effort.
He did not mention the RAF or Bomber Command for its efforts. Perhaps to avoid even furthering the hypocrisy
of Nürnberg.
This is a big subject. Rather than bogging down in the morality of war, there are a few historical facts that bear on particularly strategic bombing.
ReplyDeleteThe practice was initiated by the Germans during WWI when they sent first Zeppelins and then Gotha bombers in terror raids, i.e. high explosive and incendiary bombing raids against England. The loss of life caused widespread panic in London and other cities. But the British naval air force developed defensive measures that caused heavy German losses, particularly in the Zeppelins. The suffering point of view may have influenced the German lack of strategic bombers during WW2 while the English and American air forces emphasized such strategies.
The more formal concept of strategic bombing was advocated by the fascist Douhet on a theory rather like Nobel’s that terrible weapons will shorten wars. This was picked up in America by Billy Mitchell and in England by Trenchard. Of course the reality was rather different.
Terror bombing was originally incidental, the result of the inability to hit a target within a mile or two. But it was noted that the energy in combustible materials on the ground at city targets eclipsed the energy in the bombs per se. Thus mixed bombing loads of high explosives to create flammable rubble and incendiaries to ignite the rubble became standard practice. By way of example, the firebombing of Tokyo killed more people than either of the later atomic bombs, though exact numbers are not available for either.
TomO
"The practice was initiated by the Germans..." Sure, who else. Reminds me a bit of Donald Trump: "He said it first".
DeleteI know you are not going to poat this, but so what.
ReplyDeleteExcept for the interpretations and innuendo, the degeneration into bombing civilians, tgetreatment of such as Dowdibg and Churchills revisionism is discussed in Hastings and Beevor, so it is already mainstream
So your ooint is ?
My point is: you really can't spell very well.
Delete"Bomber Command went to war on 11 May, 1940. It had only been fooling with war until then," wrote James Spaight, an air-power theorist, several years later. "We began to bomb objectives on the German mainland before the Germans began to bomb objectives on the British mainland."
ReplyDeleteIn the town of Monchen-Gladbach, in Westphalia, a little after midnight, four civilians--one, as it happened, an Englishwoman--were killed by English bombs. The Germans shot down three out of thirty-six planes. The next night, more random bombing by the RAF. The night after that, more still. English planes were meandering over Germany in the dark, as they'd done with bays full of leaflets. Now they carried bombs.
Nicholson Baker, *Human Smoke: The Beginnings of World War II, the End of Civilization* (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2008), p.178.