ISBN: 0297846523 | Amazon.co.uk link

The history of the Great War (1914-1919) is an area which I have not as yet shown much interest in. Like many Britains of the post-war generations my knowledge of World War One is a circumstantial one, and like most I probably thought I knew most of what was pertinent about the 'war to end all wars'.

Then I read Peter Hart's book '1918: A Very British Victory', and I realized that I knew very little about perhaps the most important part of that war - how it ended.

Why the end of the war is a mystery to the British
The history of the Great War is - I think - taught very well in our schools, for the essential facts of how and when the war began and the terrible cost in human lives is well enough treated by our curriculum. But of the conclusion to this war, and any real sense that 'we won' is somewhat obscured by what has been decided has to be the main lessons from this part of our history.

To be fair, it is not so hard to understand why there is little apatite for any jingoistic self-satisfaction about our role as one of the victors. I remember my father talking about his father and what impressed me was the strong feeling that they were genuine in their conviction that that war should unequivocally be 'the war to end all wars'. How it ended was much less important than the relief in the hearts of the British public - and especially veterans - that it just ended.

1918 and it's legacy
If it was, then, enough for our forefathers that the Great War should be remembered in a particular way, then why change that?

Well, in perhaps what is understandable eagerness to 'put it all behind us', certain important facts have not so much been brushed over with regards to the true events of 1918/19 as having been completely replaced by ideas that people think should be remembered about how the war ended.

For example, we are all led to believe that it was the intervention of American troops at the end of the war that brought about the German capitulation. Peter Hart dispels this legend quite forcefully, and explains that while America's involvement was a catalyst for Germany's fateful last role of the dice in 1918, the 'Doughboys' real military effect was less than decisive and did not change the inalienable fact that Germany was heading for defeat in any case.

Learning history so that it will not repeat itself
There are many of my generation, and younger, who feel that learning history is a waste of time, that what is important is the here and now and not the past. But the old adage about history repeating itself was one of the reasons that the story (I chose the word carefully) of World War One is adhered to and why this conflict is given prominence in our History classes.

However, it is precisely because of the need to prevent old mistakes that one should take an interest in Peter Hart's book, because the way in which the end of the war was re-interpreted in the years after its end and proscribed an almost allegorical or moralistic ending is something we are in danger of repeating again today.

Above: "Their coats are plastered with mud and weigh an awful weight with the water which has soaked in. Their backs are bent, and they stagger and totter along with the weight of their packs." Captain Noel Chavasse, 1914. Photo - Lima Company, 42 Commando Royal Marines Group carry out operations in the Helmand province of Southern Afghanistan to bring security to the surrounding areas. © Crown Copyright/MOD 2009

I speak of the current involvement of the British Army in Afghanistan, and this is why this book struck such a cord in me. There is a very close corresponding ghost authorship at work, a redefining of the real history of the Afghan War, just as there was when the story of the Great War was moulded by politicians and 'historians' after that event.

The only difference between the way the decisive events of WWI and today's war in Afghanistan are being managed is that today's journalists, activists and politicians are not waiting for this war to end before they ascribe an 'end', they are re-writing its history while its happening!

Through the looking glass
Obviously the Somme is not Helmand, rather it is the treatment by armchair generals and those with an axe to grind who make '1918: A Very British Victory' a wholly relevant history with a resonance in today's recounting of the war in Afghanistan. To me, the title 'a very British victory' is a ironic play on the fact that subsequent generations have turned what was, in the end, a spectacular British military feat during 1918 & 1919 into something which has - rather - the sense of a defeat.

Philosophically, of course, any war is a defeat, but I am not taking about philosophy, I am talking about history, factual and documented 'truths' about events and undertakings.

The truth is, as far as I can see, that the British Army in Afghanistan is involved in a arduous yet spectacular campaign, which sees our understrength force of service persons WINNING military engagements day in day out. But where do the British public hear about these deeds?

Almost none of today's media sources countenance any talk of 'victory' or even courageous and dogged redoubt. All talk is of waste, incompetence and lack of political will (sound familiar yet?).

I will end with an extract from a (low-key and well hidden) BBC report on a recent battle which took place, coincidently, just as I finished Peter Harts book, and leave you to pause for thought. But before I do, I strongly recommend '1918: A very British Victory' as a superb historical account of the end of the Great War, perhaps one of the first ever true historical accounts of that period.

Headlined: 'UK forces take key Taleban bases' - Sunday 4 Jan. 2009

"Afghan and coalition forces joined 1,500 UK troops for the pre-Christmas operation around Nad-e-Ali, which cost the lives of five UK servicemen...

They fought knee-deep in mud during First World War-style trench battles...

Over the following days, K Company - known as the Black Knights - waged battles in ditches and trenches to push back insurgents as Royal Engineers struggled to build patrol bases in terrain which had been turned into a sea of mud by heavy rain...

Meanwhile on 11 December, commandos backed by the 2nd Battalion The Princesses of Wales's Royal Regiment and soldiers from the Afghan National Army captured the town of Shin Kalay, west of Lashkar Gah...

The most ferocious fighting took place during the battle for Zarghun Kalay, north of Lashkar Gah, from 17-19 December...

Troops had "yomped" 60km through mud to get to the town before fighting a "canny and determined enemy" in 360-degree hand-to-hand combat, the Ministry of Defence said."

[Link to full BBC article: 'UK forces take key Taleban bases']

...But will this bravery, resoluteness and victory be remembered in future accounts of Afghanistan? Perhaps one day Peter Hart will turn his attentions to recounting the war in Afghanistan with the same accuracy and unbias objectivity as he has applied to his book on the end of the First World War?

Milgeek rating: