FRAGMENTS:
Towards a True History of Military Service
by Aly Renwick
William Shakespeare: his recognition of combat-related PTSD
From very early times physical conflict between peoples has induced shock among many of the combatants and problems can also occur for veterans long after the conflict has ended. Many centuries ago Roman historians, like Suetonius, had recorded incidents of the adverse reactions of some soldiers to battle. In the US Civil War (1861-65) a condition called ‘nostalgia’, ‘soldier’s heart’, or ‘camp disease’ was noted that was marked by a ‘lassitude of the spirit’, which veterans might be ‘laughed out of’ by his comrades, or by ‘appeals to his manhood’.
Sixty years later, during WW1, over 300 British soldiers were shot at dawn by firing squads from their own side. A few were accused of crimes, but most had been charged with cowardice and desertion. Due to the horrific nature of the warfare, however, many were suffering from ‘Shellshock’ - the name used then for PTSD.
In the decade after the ending of WW1, pension boards examined over 100,000 cases of former front-line troops suffering from psychological disorders. Many of the worst cases were kept out of sight, often locked away in mental institutions till they died. At the start of WW2, the British Government was still paying £2 million pounds a year towards shell-shocked veterans of the First World War.
Five centuries before William Shakespeare (1564 -1616), who is often called the greatest writer in the English language, did not have a name for this condition that affected many veterans, but he knew and wrote about it. In his Henry IV - Part One, Act 2, Scene 3, Shakespeare has Lady Percy express concern about her warrior husband Hotspur:
“O, my good lord, why are you thus alone?
For what offence have I this fortnight been
A banish’d woman from my Harry’s bed?
Tell me, sweet lord, what is’t that takes from thee
Thy stomach, pleasure and thy golden sleep?
Why dost thou bend thine eyes upon the earth,
And start so often when thou sit’st alone?
Why hast thou lost the fresh blood in thy cheeks;
And given my treasures and my rights of thee
To thick-eyed musing and cursed melancholy?
In thy faint slumbers I thee have watch’d,
And heard thee murmur tales of iron wars,
Speak terms of manage to thy bounding steed,
Cry ‘Courage! To the field!’ And thou hast talk’d
Of sallies and retires, of trenches, tents,
frontiers, parapets, of cannon,
Of prisoners’ ransom, and of soldiers slain,
And all the currents of a heady fight.
Thy spirit within thee hath been so at war,
And thus hath so bestirr’d thee in thy sleep,
That beads of sweat have stood upon thy brow
Like bubbles in a late-disturbed stream;
And in thy face strange motions have appear’d.
Such as we see when men restrain their breath
On some great sudden hest.
O, what portents are these?
Some heavy business hath my lord in hand,
And I must know it, else he loves me not.”
Those close to a veteran are usually the first to see how different they can be after conflict, from how they were before they went off to war – and close family members often think it is a stranger who has returned to them. So, Lady Percy was expressing anxieties often felt by family members on the return of a veteran from conflict and her description of Hotspur’s condition indicates that:
He was anxious, tense and preferred to be alone and had lost his appetite for food and sex.
He appeared depressed, was easily startled and his mind was still in ‘a heady fight’.
He was experiencing problems sleeping and when sleep came it was troubled, with murmurings and nightmares about the wars.
All these suggest that he was suffering from post-battle trauma, which we would now call combat-related PTSD. This condition was not recognised during the time of Shakespeare, but he did provide us with one of the first detailed accounts of this type of psychological disorder. We now know that combat-related PTSD can often occur among those who fight in brutal conflicts and you can listen to Lady Percy’s dramatic speech here:
The Jekyll & Hyde of Soldiering: from Costas Georgiou to Colonel Callan
In 1886, one hundred and thirty-nine years ago, Robert Louis Stevenson’s book, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, was published. In his book, Stevenson explored the idea was that most people, especially men, have competing impulses within them: Good vs Evil, Truth vs Lies, Love vs Hate and Friendliness vs Aggression.
Stevenson’s book depicted the kind and caring Jekyll drinking a special potion and changing into the inhumane and violent Hyde. At the start Dr. Jekyll, who’d developed the concoction, can control his conversions into Mr. Hyde. Later, however, he begins to lose control, and the transformations increasingly happen in an involuntary manner.
Perhaps, the potion Dr. Jekyll took acts in a similar way to army training? After all, many family members often comment how a spell in the army has changed their son, husband, father etc. - ‘It’s made a man of him’, they often say. They usually regard this as a good thing, but can start to question it, if they experience the sudden turn-ons to violence many veterans return with, especially after serving in conflicts.
Military training is designed to mould squaddies into the Army’s way of thinking and sense of purpose - and ensure the recruits bond with their fellow soldiers. Surgeon Commander Morgan O’Connell, then a Navy psychiatrist just back from the Falklands War, explained the process to the Guardian journalist Polly Toynbee: “Yes, we indoctrinate them in the forces. Otherwise, they wouldn’t fight. That’s why we cut their hair the same, make them wear the same uniform, make the same salute, and march together. We indoctrinate them in order to enhance group cohesiveness. That’s how you get people to fight.” [Guardian, 1st Nov. 1982].
Army training and indoctrination is also intended to replace ‘civvy softness’ with ‘military toughness’, to produce soldiers who will kill, or die, when ordered to do so. Frank Percy Crozier, who became known as a WW1 ‘war-dog’ front-line army commander, later wrote about the combat training of his battalion. Describing the British soldier as ‘a kindly fellow’ he then added ‘it is necessary to corrode his mentality’ and Crozier went on to describe the part indoctrination and training took in this process: “I, for my part, do what I can to alter completely the outlook, bearing and mentality of over 1,000 men ... Blood lust is taught for the purpose of war, in bayonet fighting itself and by doping their minds with all propagandic poison. The German atrocities (many of which I doubt in secret), the employment of gas in action, the violation of French women, the ‘official murder’ of Nurse Cavell, all help to bring out the brute-like bestiality which is necessary for victory. The process of ‘seeing red’ which has to be carefully cultured if the effect is to be lasting, is elaborately grafted into the make-up of even the meek and mild ... The Christian churches are the finest ‘blood lust’ creators which we have, and of them we must make full use.” [A Brass Hat in No Man’s Land, by F. P. Crozier, Cape 1930].
This training was accompanied by a propaganda campaign in all the country that turned the Germans from friendly neighbours into ‘brutal Huns’. Stereotyping of enemies – ‘the other’ – has continued and increased in our own time. With ‘gooks’ in the Vietnam War, ‘micks’, or ‘paddies’, in Northern Ireland and ‘ragheads’ in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Warrior-Janissaries In modern conflicts, some soldiers, intensely trained and indoctrinated for tours-of-duty often became hyped-up, aggressive time-bombs - ready to explode at any minute. In his book, Shoot To Kill, Michael Asher outlines his experiences in the Parachute Regiment. In graphic detail he wrote about his tours of duty in Northern Ireland and described how some Paras were affected by the extremes that training, conditioning and alienation brought out: “One group of soldiers would hold so-called ‘gunge’ contests. They sat round in a circle and tried to outdo each other in acts of gross obscenity, like eating shit and drinking urine. During house searches they vented their anger on their victims, smashing down doors and breaking up furniture, kicking and rifle-butting anyone who resisted, making lewd suggestions to the women of the house and threatening the children.” [Shoot To Kill – A soldier’s journey through violence, by Michael Asher, Penguin Books 1991].
Throughout the period of this conflict and just before their tours of duty, soldiers were given an increasingly more intensive period of ‘upped-training’. This occurred inside ‘Tin City’ mock-ups of an Irish estate, which were built at army base-areas in Britain and across the world. First known as IS (Internal Security) training, the drills at these locations later became known as NITAT (Northern Ireland Training Advisory Team) training and many veterans have vivid memories of their time there.
In his book Asher depicted how this type of training and the circumstances of their tours-of-duty had turned them into ‘savages’: “The circumstances of our training, coupled with the peculiar nature of our existence in Northern Ireland - a blend of boredom, frustration and occasional terror - turned us into savages. We begged and prayed for a chance to fight, to smash, to kill, to destroy: we were fire-eating berserkers, a hurricane of human brutality ready to burst forth on anyone or anything that stood in our way. We were unreligious, apolitical and remorseless, a caste of warrior-janissaries who worshipped at the high-altar of violence and wanted nothing more.” [Shoot To Kill – A soldier’s journey through violence, by Michael Asher, Penguin Books 1991].
War In Angola Probably, the worst thing you can do as a civvy is to go out and kill another human being. A soldier, however, is trained to kill - and is expected to do so quickly and effectively. Costas Georgiou was a soldier who excelled at this, both before and after he became a mercenary known as ‘Colonel Callan’. Using that name, he came to world attention, when, on 10th July 1976, four mercenaries, who had fought for armed opposition groups in Angola, were tried, found guilty and executed by a government firing squad.
The civil war in Angola happened a few decades after World War 2 and occurred during the global ‘Cold War’ period. Then, there were many ‘proxy wars’, and after the country won its independence, rebel groups in Angola were armed by the CIA and backed by the US, UK, the then apartheid South Africa and Western business interests. While Angola’s Government forces fought them with the help of Russian tanks and Cuban soldiers.
Within a few years most of the mercenaries were rounded up and imprisoned - or shot by Angolan Government firing squads. Three of the executed men, Costas Georgiou (Colonel Callan), Derek ‘Brummie’ Barker and Andy McKenzie were former members of the British Army’s Parachute Regiment and veterans of the Northern Ireland conflict. The fourth man, Daniel Gearhart, was a US ex-Special Forces Vietnam veteran.
During his trial as ‘Colonel Callan’, it became clear that Georgiou had been responsible for untold deaths, both on his own side and that of the ‘enemy’. A BBC Panorama programme on the mercenaries said: “In Angola it was the psychopathic exploits of a mercenary leader, the self-styled Colonel Callan that caused public outrage. Callan, a dishonourably discharged paratrooper, ordered the execution of twelve mercenaries … when they refused to fight.”
The John Wayne Syndrome Costas Georgiou came from a family in the large Greek Cypriot community in north London and before he joined the British Army he had been described as: ‘A quiet, introspective youth’. During Georgiou’s initial army training, as experienced NCOs hammered the recruits into line, he responded resolutely and threw off his quiet, introspective side: “Once in the army … a more aggressive side to his character emerged. He seemed determined to prove himself the best soldier in the entire British Army. And, for a time, he came close to achieving his ambition: during training at Aldershot, he picked up awards as best machine-gunner, best Self-Loading Rifle shot and best al-round recruit in the camp. Not content with this, he became a fitness fanatic, soon excelling at the physical side of army training.” [Fire Power, by Chris Dempster and Dave Tomkins, Corgi 1978].
Costas Georgiou responded in kind to his training and adopted a hard persona: “He went out of his way to develop a tougher, more aggressive image than anyone else in his unit. He spent hours in front of a mirror, perfecting the toughest, meanest scowl he could devise. When off duty he adopted a solid, swaggering walk that John Wayne might have been proud of. Such stunts were crude but they paid off – his officers took notice of him. Of all the men in his regiment, Georgiou was the one chosen for the prestigious position of bodyguard to his Commanding Officer in Northern Ireland.” [Fire Power, by Chris Dempster and Dave Tomkins, Corgi 1978].
From Costas Georgiou to Colonel Callan While serving in Northern Ireland, Costas Georgiou had received a dishonourable discharge and a prison sentence in a civvy jail for an attempted Post Office robbery. He arrived in Angola a few years later as Colonel Callan, a name he’d taken from a ‘tough-guy’ TV character.
Georgiou, like most soldiers, joined the army at a young age, and the military, not having access to Dr. Jekyll’s potion to unleash his blood lust, relied on their tried and trusted training programmes instead: “The shock of the first couple of days was intentionally brutal … in a system of basic training designed to suppress individuality, restrict freedom in every possible way, install instinctive obedience without a question of any kind, increase physical fitness, and generally so depress the conscript into a common mould that he would instantly serve the force’s purposes in anything that it asked him to do: to the point of killing fellow human beings, or of offering himself to be killed. The forces had learnt how to train men quickly and intensively in the Second World War; the absolute necessity of training them to this zombie-like state had been taught in the trenches of the First, when an order over the top to almost certain death had to be obeyed instinctively or it would not have been obeyed at all.” [All Bull: The National Servicemen, from the introduction by B S Johnson, Quartet Books 1973].
Around one hundred-and-ten years ago, it was training like this, combined with indoctrination, that produced the ‘brute-like’ soldiers for Frank Percy Crozier’s ‘Great War’ battalion - and for many more conflicts since. Over fifty years ago, it was training and indoctrination, combined with a tour-of-duty in Northern Ireland, that changed Costas Georgiou into Colonel Callan and made him a good and efficient killer. And, as he walked out to face his firing squad, he had ‘MADE IN THE BRITISH ARMY’ stamped all over him.
So, what had changed the quiet Georgiou into the brutal Callan? If army training is designed to dredge up hate and aggression in recruits in order to turn them into efficient killers, perhaps, it does do what Dr. Jekyll’s potion did to produce Mr. Hyde? As well as tough and brutal training, Paras are encouraged to regard themselves as superior to other soldiers, whom they scornfully call ‘craphats’. But, if military training draws out the negative qualities in recruits, like hate and aggression, to make good and efficient soldiers, does the MoD not have some responsibility to help turn them back to more positive qualities, when they go back to Civvy Street?
It is certainly true that, after conflicts, some veterans back in Civvy Street struggle to retain the Jekyll part of their old selves, but find the Hyde part keeps turning up instead. Some may even be proud of what their army training has turned them into. As a fellow veteran viewing the case of ‘Colonel Callan’, however, all I feel is anger and sadness - mainly, for his victims in Ireland and Angola, but also, for the loss of that ‘quiet, introspective youth’, the pre-army Costas Georgiou.
One of the initial tests for the Paras is called ‘milling’, when recruits fight each other for a set period. Win or lose, they are expected to show sustained aggression and will be rejected by this elite unit unless they do so. Click below to view a milling session:
Lynda La Plante & her TV Drama, Civvies
In Britain, anyone raising the issue of combat veterans who are suffering from psychological problems, or who carry out violent acts in Civvy Street after their tours of duty, can expect to face hostility from the military establishment. The Defence Ministry even take umbrage about newspaper articles, and especially TV programmes, that touch on the problems that many veterans go through. In 1992, Lynda La Plante’s TV drama, Civvies, was a good example of this occurring.
La Plante, a former actress, is an award-winning author and screenwriter, who is best known for writing the Prime Suspect TV crime series, which starred Helen Mirren as DCI Jane Tennison. In 1993 and 1994, La Plante received two Emmy Awards for Outstanding Mini Series for Prime Suspect and in 2001, she was presented with a BAFTA - the Dennis Potter Award - for television writing. In 2008 La Plante was awarded a CBE in the Queen’s Birthday Honours List for services to Literature, Drama and Charity.
Previously, in 1992, La Plante had written Civvies after some ex-Para Northern Ireland veterans had done some building work in her home and told her about themselves. Civvies was based on the violent lives of these Para-veterans, as they tried to adjust to their return to Civvy Street. It was first published as a paperback, then became a TV series.
Towards the end of 1992 the Guardian newspaper published an interview with the director of the Civvies TV series, Karl Francis, who said he believed that: ‘Civvies reflected a much bigger real life story, which had yet to be told’. And that as a self-styled radical film maker, Francis admitted to finding the theme of Civvies a challenge: “Instead of looking at the hearts and minds of the communities the soldiers have tried to conquer, it looked at the minds of the soldiers themselves - trying to conquer their own demons and live with them afterwards. ‘I’ve got cousins and friends who’ve been in the army’, he says. ‘I’ve heard how they try and deal with the stress - their wives have told me. I’ve met the soldiers who ended up pill-poppers and drug addicts. I’ve listened to the awful stories of their dreams. People respond to soldiering in different ways. Being a soldier doesn’t make you a good or a bad person. The lads in Civvies came out of the army still fighting, they were all wounded emotionally, they wanted healing’. He does not lean towards sentimentality: ‘They were screwed up. And yes, they were victims. But they dished it out as well, and if you deliver hell, sometimes it comes around on you and you have to live with it’.” [Guardian, 4th Nov. 1992, The mind as combat zone, by Martin Collins].
Lynda La Plante had made friends with the group of ex-Paras she had based her drama Civvies on and she tried to help them settle back into civilian life. By the time the show was broadcast on TV, however, every single one of the soldiers she’d met and found jobs for was in prison. La Plante then stated: “It made me deeply angry … the show was an angry plea to the Government to do something about PTSD.”
Civvies proved to be La Plante’s most difficult and controversial series. Because, while her subsequent work received widespread acclaim, Civvies was denounced by the military establishment. It was described as ‘offensive’ by the Defence Ministry, and as ‘inaccurate, belittling and will demoralise the troops’ by the Parachute Regiment.
Later, Lynda La Plante answered back at these critics: “Civvies is an open wound ... Nothing in Civvies hadn’t happened. It wasn’t a fictional drama. It was fact, all of it. Yet I was vilified and abused by everybody.” [Observer Life, interview by Andrew Billen, 10th March 1996].
In the Observer interview La Plante also mentioned: “The shoals of letters I still get: ‘That was my brother, that was my father, that was my uncle, that was my husband’.”
The military establishment wants the problems that are suffered by many veterans - like combat-related PTSD and/or installed aggression - to remain hidden. But, in the screen depiction of the Para-veterans in Civvies, many viewers had seen aspects of their own family members traumatised and often violent behaviour, after they had returned from tours of duty in Northern Ireland. You can view some of the action from Lynda La Plante’s TV drama Civvies here:
……………………………………… Articles by Aly Renwick, a veteran who served for 8 years in the British Army (1960-8).