CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY DAREN BOWYER JUST WAR DOCTRINE

only on the Government’s bidding and so it is conduct rather than cause that is likely to
lead to issues of public trust. Such was the case with the Iraq War.
Generally the British Army, in particular, enjoyed the support of the population, despite
the considerable public misgiving about the justification for the war. But its reputation
was undoubtedly tarnished by allegations (some subsequently proved false, others
substantiated) of abuse of prisoners (See p109). The impact of the allegations was
captured in an opinion piece in The Daily Telegraph 201 :
We have always felt that we could send Tommy Atkins abroad secure in the
knowledge that, unlike some soldiers, he would not run drugs rings or
prostitution rackets or mistreat the natives. If we can no longer make that
assumption, then the whole country is diminished. … …
The Army is, of course, a human institution, and prone to human failings (but)
(i)f soldiers have abused their positions, they should be given exemplary and
expeditious punishment. … ….
Our reputation as a country depends on our comportment abroad.
This editorial is right: the Army is composed of soldiers, who are human, and subject to
human failings. There can have been no conflict where excesses have not occurred –
both, more understandably, in the heat of combat and its immediate aftermath, and in
the treatment of civilians, the wounded and prisoners. For an insight into the nastier
side of human nature when one group comes into a position of dominance over another,
weaker (or weakened), group one need look no further than the infamous ‘Stanford
Experiment’ 202 . This is not to justify, condone or excuse such behaviour, just to say that
it is not new and should not come as a surprise. But none of that reduces its impact: the
institutional damage it does. As the UK’s Chief of the General Staff said of the
(subsequently disproved) allegations involving soldiers of the Queen’s Lancashire
Regiment: ‘If proven …. they have besmirched the Army’s good name and conduct.
…. (B)y this shameful behaviour (they) have let down the tens of thousands of British
soldiers who have worked …. in the most commendable way.’ 203
The Army – indeed all professional armed services – thrives on its reputation and that
reputation is tarnished by misconduct; soldiers feel this keenly and morale may suffer.
Beyond this, such conduct, and the damage it does to reputation, can have a negative
impact on recruiting. For the British Army the court martial of soldiers from the Royal
129