- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
Regimental system going under review
Cover-ups a concern: Retired officers say age-old tradition fosters loyalty
Tom Blackwell, with files from Michael Friscolanti
National Post
Tuesday, July 02, 2002
Military officials are launching a major review of the army‘s age-old regimental system, following criticism that regiments can be paternalistic, old-fashioned and susceptible to cover-up when wrongdoing occurs.
From the Somme to Afghanistan and through numerous wars and peacekeeping missions, regiments have been the backbone of the Canadian army, offering soldiers kinship and camaraderie in exchange for loyalty to the death.
But regiments, like the one currently serving in Afghanistan, have also been criticized for fostering a culture of loyalty so extreme it may lead to silence and cover-up when wrongdoing occurs.
The review, being conducted by a Canadian cultural anthropologist based in Holland, could prompt major changes to a historic structure that, among other things, sets Canada‘s Armed Forces apart from its American allies.
"The sense that there may be problems is there," said Col. Mike Capstick, who is overseeing the project. "Our gut tells us that the regimental system is well worth retaining, but at the same time our gut tells us that, OK guys, it‘s time to get out of the ‘50s."
Most army personnel belong to regiments, relatively small units that usually have long and storied pasts, such as the Princess Patricia‘s Canadian Light Infantry (PPCLI) now serving in Afghanistan, the Royal Canadian Regiment and the Royal 22nd, known in English as the Vandoos.
Soldiers often become members of a regiment for life, maintaining the affiliation even in retirement. It has been described as a sort of family that oversees most aspects of the soldier‘s life, including his advancement through the ranks.
The thought of altering such a system -- a system that the Americans once tried to emulate -- has upset some retired soldiers.
"They can go ahead and study it, they can even go ahead and change it," said retired Major-General Lewis Mackenzie, a former Commander of the 1st Battalion, PPCLI. "But they‘ll have a hard time convincing me and a large number of other people that it doesn‘t have an important place in the Canadian military."
Maj.-Gen. Mackenzie, who was also a member of the now defunct Queen‘s Own Rifles of Canada, said soldiers perform better on the battlefield knowing they are fighting alongside "family."
"The loyalty is almost instantaneous because you have this tremendous historical legacy to live up to," he said.
Jim Hanson, a retired brigadier general and analyst with the Canadian Institute of Strategic Studies, also suggested there is little wrong with the system. Its benefits were summed up, he said, by an old general who used to say " ‘I can get ‘em to die for the Royal 22nd Regiment, but I can‘t get ‘em to die for National Defence Headquarters.‘ "
Those who have raised concerns about regimental culture cite the Somalia inquiry, which looked into the beating death of a Somali teenager by members of the Canadian Airborne Regiment, now defunct, serving in the west African country in the early 1990s.
"Many officers and soldiers spend their entire lives in a single regiment and they naturally become blind to many of its faults," said the report of the inquiry.
"Information that could tarnish the reputation of the regiment may be deliberately hidden. Whistle-blowing is frequently perceived as counter to the corporate nature of the military."
Other criticism has come from inside. Some junior officers complain that senior commanders of a regiment have too much influence over their careers, acting as an unseen hand that pre-determines how far each of them can advance, Col. Capstick said.
Others question whether the role of regiment as extended family, social club and social-safety net is appropriate today, when many officers have spouses with their own careers, children and extensive lives off the base, he said.
But even if the study by Donna Winslow, who chairs the social and cultural anthropology department at the Free University in Holland and has studied military culture extensively, finds change is needed, the forces will not do away with a regimental system that commanders still believe is the best way to motivate soldiers, Col. Capstick said.
"People generally don‘t fight or do specific things in operations for Queen, country, the grand cause, Canadian values or whatever," he said.
"They‘re motivated by the kind of cohesion that is built up at the small unit level ... within the context of the regiment."
© Copyright 2002 National Post
Cover-ups a concern: Retired officers say age-old tradition fosters loyalty
Tom Blackwell, with files from Michael Friscolanti
National Post
Tuesday, July 02, 2002
Military officials are launching a major review of the army‘s age-old regimental system, following criticism that regiments can be paternalistic, old-fashioned and susceptible to cover-up when wrongdoing occurs.
From the Somme to Afghanistan and through numerous wars and peacekeeping missions, regiments have been the backbone of the Canadian army, offering soldiers kinship and camaraderie in exchange for loyalty to the death.
But regiments, like the one currently serving in Afghanistan, have also been criticized for fostering a culture of loyalty so extreme it may lead to silence and cover-up when wrongdoing occurs.
The review, being conducted by a Canadian cultural anthropologist based in Holland, could prompt major changes to a historic structure that, among other things, sets Canada‘s Armed Forces apart from its American allies.
"The sense that there may be problems is there," said Col. Mike Capstick, who is overseeing the project. "Our gut tells us that the regimental system is well worth retaining, but at the same time our gut tells us that, OK guys, it‘s time to get out of the ‘50s."
Most army personnel belong to regiments, relatively small units that usually have long and storied pasts, such as the Princess Patricia‘s Canadian Light Infantry (PPCLI) now serving in Afghanistan, the Royal Canadian Regiment and the Royal 22nd, known in English as the Vandoos.
Soldiers often become members of a regiment for life, maintaining the affiliation even in retirement. It has been described as a sort of family that oversees most aspects of the soldier‘s life, including his advancement through the ranks.
The thought of altering such a system -- a system that the Americans once tried to emulate -- has upset some retired soldiers.
"They can go ahead and study it, they can even go ahead and change it," said retired Major-General Lewis Mackenzie, a former Commander of the 1st Battalion, PPCLI. "But they‘ll have a hard time convincing me and a large number of other people that it doesn‘t have an important place in the Canadian military."
Maj.-Gen. Mackenzie, who was also a member of the now defunct Queen‘s Own Rifles of Canada, said soldiers perform better on the battlefield knowing they are fighting alongside "family."
"The loyalty is almost instantaneous because you have this tremendous historical legacy to live up to," he said.
Jim Hanson, a retired brigadier general and analyst with the Canadian Institute of Strategic Studies, also suggested there is little wrong with the system. Its benefits were summed up, he said, by an old general who used to say " ‘I can get ‘em to die for the Royal 22nd Regiment, but I can‘t get ‘em to die for National Defence Headquarters.‘ "
Those who have raised concerns about regimental culture cite the Somalia inquiry, which looked into the beating death of a Somali teenager by members of the Canadian Airborne Regiment, now defunct, serving in the west African country in the early 1990s.
"Many officers and soldiers spend their entire lives in a single regiment and they naturally become blind to many of its faults," said the report of the inquiry.
"Information that could tarnish the reputation of the regiment may be deliberately hidden. Whistle-blowing is frequently perceived as counter to the corporate nature of the military."
Other criticism has come from inside. Some junior officers complain that senior commanders of a regiment have too much influence over their careers, acting as an unseen hand that pre-determines how far each of them can advance, Col. Capstick said.
Others question whether the role of regiment as extended family, social club and social-safety net is appropriate today, when many officers have spouses with their own careers, children and extensive lives off the base, he said.
But even if the study by Donna Winslow, who chairs the social and cultural anthropology department at the Free University in Holland and has studied military culture extensively, finds change is needed, the forces will not do away with a regimental system that commanders still believe is the best way to motivate soldiers, Col. Capstick said.
"People generally don‘t fight or do specific things in operations for Queen, country, the grand cause, Canadian values or whatever," he said.
"They‘re motivated by the kind of cohesion that is built up at the small unit level ... within the context of the regiment."
© Copyright 2002 National Post
