THE POLITICAL ACT OF REMEMBRANCE?

Why the nation selectively remembers it's War Dead.

It was the renowned satirist and American politician Benjamin Franklin who once so eloquently said: “Of two things in life you can be certain, death and taxes.”

To this list he could also have added a third certainty – war, for it seems, wherever man has tread, war has never been far behind.

 There are few places on earth that conflict has not touched at some moment in history and the world we live in today is shaped by conflict and continues to be so.

 Wars have begun for many different reasons throughout history whether it be religious, territorial, political or even, in the case of the infamous four day conflict between El Salvador and Honduras, over a football match.

 For whatever reasons there have been and where ever conflict has arisen there is also more certainty – there will be victims and lives will change forever.

 The traditional act of remembrance in this country has assumed more relevance in recent times as the casualty list grows from Afghanistan, with many people tiring of Britain’s involvement in a war that, in all honesty, surely cannot be won.

 Far off places such as Helmand and Sangin have become familiar names to a war-weary public – as has the small Wiltshire market town of Wooton Bassett, which its steady flow of returning flag-draped coffins.

The annual November parade of old soldiers, clad in an array of medals, first comes to mind when we think of Remembrance Day, as these men march in unison to pay respect to fallen comrades.

 But what of those victims who go largely forgotten at this time of year? Those veterans with unseen wounds as in the case of Gulf War soldier Andy P? What of those soldiers executed over 90 ninety years ago in such controversial circumstances? And how many wreaths are placed at the cenotaph for the volunteers who defied the British government and fought against fascism in Spain?

Those who have been killed or had their lives touched by war whilst outside the parameter of what is militarily acceptable seem less likely to be remembered.

 That is not to say those remembered every year are not deserving of the tributes they receive – these men and women warrant the upmost respect for their sacrifice and I challenge anyone to remain unmoved if they walk among the graves of a British war cemetery in France or Belgium, but what is undeniable is that many veterans do not receive the same focus.

When Andy P came back from the gulf in 1991 his life had changed more than he realised and instead of taking his place as a proud veteran among his comrades, he was kicked out of the army for drug taking.

 The fact that he was suffering from the experience of combat was not taken into account and he was left unsupported until finally securing a pension 15 years later with the help of the charity Combat Stress.

 Andy’s story is probably not an isolated case – and it would be interesting to see how the army’s treatment for combat veterans has evolved over the past 20 years.

 Despite this, there can be no doubt that those suffering from combat related psychological injuries today are better understood than those shellshock victims of the First World War.

 It is clear that a large number of the men executed by firing squad during that war were suffering from varying degrees of combat stress and the manner in which they were tried by courts martial was wholly inadequate.

 These soldiers were victims of circumstance in a period when the psychological effects of battle were not fully appreciated. They were also governed by army regulations that seem archaic by modern standards.

 The treatment these men received from the army was shocking and their deaths brought great shame and hardship to their families for many years after.

 The pardon granted to them in 2006 was, although welcome, little comfort as it came almost 90 years after the shameful events and the majority of those family members most affected have long since died.

It was a politically uncomfortable situation for both the government and the army following the war, and the victims went largely forgotten until the pardons were granted.

Politics also explain why the International Brigade veterans receive little national remembrance. They acted out of personal political conviction on the whole and defied the official government stance of non-intervention.

 The fact that many of these volunteers paid the ultimate sacrifice in a stand against fascism, is overlooked and it becomes more important when we see what happened when fascism brought the world into conflict soon after they had returned from Spain.

Ultimately it seems the national conscience of remembrance has been shaped by what has been politically and military acceptable to the higher echelons of power.

Many veterans are conveniently forgotten during these times of remembrance but they warrant the same respect as their former comrades who march with such pride every November for, after all, they are surely all victims of war.