Defence Forces Review 2010

The Niemba Ambush: A Reappraisaltheir experiences led them to believe in future the UN would task a specific contingent withtransport. In fact the UN adopted this policy for later missions. 74 The 33rd battalion arrived inthe Congo with ten Land Rovers and five jeeps, found this number insufficient and receiveda loan of Bedford trucks, Land Rovers and saloons from the Pakistani transport platoon.However these vehicles had previously been with the Ethiopian and Swedish contingents. 75This is further evidence of different contingents pooling resources and discredits the assertionthat the Irish contingent had been less equipped than others. The 33rd battalion experimentedwith vehicle modification. Steel armour caused unbearable heat in the climate and engineersprotected the exposed sides of jeeps and trucks with wooden panels. This may seem ludicrous,however, since the vehicles needed to provide arrow proof and not bullet proof armour, thinwooden panels proved practical in terms of reducing vehicle weight and temperature. Irishtroops borrowed bows and arrows from local natives and experimented with different types ofwood and thickness in front of an ‘amazed native population.’ 76FirepowerThe 32nd battalion’s report of its weaponry described the Lee- Enfield .303 bolt action rifle as‘inadequate for the conditions of modern warfare.’ It viewed the gun as ‘robust and troublefree.’However after firing each bullet a user had to manually reload by manoeuvring a bolt.This resulted in a ‘seriously lacking’ rate of fire. Many of the foreign contingents in ONUCwere equipped with the Belgian FN FAL rifle which was common amongst NATO membersand considered to be one of the best rifles of the period. This weapon had a semi-automaticfire mechanism which allowed a user to simply press and depress the trigger in order to loadthe weapon. The Irish army’s report described troops armed with this weapon as at a ‘greatadvantage.’ All other weapons of the battalion were described as satisfactory. 77 Interestinglydespite the 32nd battalion having experienced a relatively peaceful mission in the Congo, itrequested more offensive weaponry, possibly because the political situation deteriorated andthe battalion anticipated the likelihood of armed conflict.The consensus states the nine men of the 33rd battalion who died in the Niemba ambushdid so because they used the Lee-Enfield, regarded as an obsolete rifle. The British armyonly replaced their Lee-Enfields for the FAL in 1957. Therefore Irish soldiers were notequipped with a ridiculously obsolete rifle. Statements given by Private Fitzpatrick andPrivate Kenny, the only survivors of the ambush, detailed the weapons carried by thepatrol. Private Fitzpatrick’s statement, made to Commandant Liddy, the Legal Officer ofthe 32nd Infantry Battalion, clearly detailed the armament of the patrol as having five CarlGustav sub-machine guns, two Bren light machine guns, and four Lee-Enfield rifles. 78 Thisis extremely important because it reveals that the majority of the patrol carried automaticweapons, and more men carried the Gustav sub-machine gun than the Lee-Enfield rifle.Therefore when one attempts to analyse the importance of the arms carried by the patrolin terms of understanding the patrol’s defensive/offensive capability, one must examinethe Gustav sub-machine gun. The Gustav has been described as the ideal weapon for bush74 For UNIFIL there were eight infantry battalions and three logistics battalions. See Katsumi Ishizuka, Ireland and International Peacekeeping Operations1960-2000, A Study of Irish Motivation, (London, 2004), p. 105.75 MA, 33 Inf Batt, ‘Transport Section History’ and Unit History 32nd Inf Batt, Chapter IX, p. 79.76 MA, 33 Inf Batt, ‘Equipment’, ‘Wooden Armour.’77 MA, Unit History 32nd Inf Batt, Chapter IX, Ordnance, Report on Weapons, Ammunition, Equipment, Section 5 Weapons.78 MA, 33 Inf Batt, Chapter 5, Niemba, Section 178.17