Wednesday, December 27, 2006

Our soldiers deserve more on which to hang their hats

Please excuse my year-end rant, but the Monarchist needs to weigh in here with an old fashioned opinion on our overly nationalized military honours.

Thousands of Canadians flew with the RAF and RCAF in the First and Second World Wars, and thousands of them won the Distinguished Flying Cross, many of them still living, yet you can't help feel that news of a young Tommy Canuck winning the DFC (see post below) for heroic services in the RAF, is diminished today as nothing more than foreign honours by a foreign country for military work in a foreign field.

Yes, even though over 4,000 Canadians have been awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross since the Great War (Ace Billy Bishop being the most famous), the DFC regrettably now only forms part of the British honours system; Canada, Australia and New Zealand dispensed with it with the modern adoption of their own national honours systems starting in the 1970s. I say regrettably because, apart from the Victoria Cross, our modern military decorations for bravery and valour have no history, and therefore no intrinsic merit. A rather unfortunate situation given the dangerous circumstances in which Canadian Forces and others find themselves operating in today.

When the first Canadian, Sergeant Patrick Tower, was awarded the new Star of Military Valour in the Fall, the second highest military commendation for bravery in the presence of the enemy, it was received by blank stares all around including from yours truly, who should have known better as a graduate of the Royal Military College, but didn't. In my defence, the new decorations for valour didn't come out until 1993, a few years after my formative training. Besides, until Sgt. Tower won the SMV, nobody even heard of it, nobody, including veterans, knew what it was. They still don't. That's because unlike the VC and DFC, there is no instinctive knowledge, no transcendent significance to the order, no inherent value that comes from a long and shared experience. Sgt. Tower is literally in a class all of his own, which is of course to his immense credit, but with nobody to share it with, the brave sergeant will spend a good deal of his time in the Remembrance Days to come explaining to people the significance of the SMV.

Had he won the Distinguished Conduct Medal, he would have joined the legions of veterans in Canada and across the Commonwealth who had also won the DCM; he would have been welcomed into their branch societies; he would have mingled and swapped war stories. In this way, the new rejuvenate the old. The heart of the old veteran warms when he discovers that his caste are not a dying breed after all, that the coming new DCM or DFC holders will eventually take their place. The young soldier in turn glows with pride, having been welcomed into their esteemed ranks. Young and old the generations are linked because they share a heritage, are connected by a common history and a common faith for the future.

The actions of Sgt. Tower is proof that this faith has not been broken, but having left the valour part to our soldiers, it is up to the nation to honour them with more than worthless trinkets. The Star of Military Valour will no doubt hold great personal value for Sgt. Tower, as it should, but there in the SMV hall of honour, he sits alone. Empty. Disconnected from history. A gallantry medal devoid of any past heroic narrative, needlessly separated from the like sacrifices of previous generations. Forgive me if some of us feel just a little underwhelmed.

Cross posted to the Monarchist

Update: Then again, Britain has also changed their honours system as of 1993. The second highest medal of valour for soldiers on the battlefield is no longer the DCM, but the CGC, the Conspicuous Gallantry Cross. So much for my dime novel bunk. The DFC stuff notwithstanding, feel free to carry on without me.

Related: Walsingham, In Defence of Pomp; Pitt the Younger, From Honours to Merit Badges

3 Comments:

Blogger The Monarchist said...

It turns out there was good reason for the change. The second highest commendation for valour was class-based. The Distinguished Service Cross for officers, the Distinguished Conduct Medal for men. This goes against our social ethos, and so the change is to be commended. The other reason though is weakert: consolidation of the service medals. Depedning on whether you were airforce, navy or army, all three services had different traditions and therefore different medals. Hence of the dispensation of the Distinguished Flying Cross for a tri-service equivalent. I think it would have still been nice for our pilots to be eligible for the DFC...

10:51 a.m., December 28, 2006  
Blogger Babbling Brooks said...

For a dissenting position, try this thread at Army.ca.

I'm afraid my remarks there were misinterpreted, but the fact that nobody else seemed to appreciate the attempt at discussion speaks volumes about this to me: the Canadianization is here to stay, the recipients are worthy, and so why bother talking about it?

The traditionalists are definitely in the minority on this topic.

11:25 a.m., December 29, 2006  
Blogger The Monarchist said...

That's fine. As an incorrigible traditionalist, I'm used to being in the minority. But the fact is such discussion furthers the education of those who wouldn't otherwise be aware. Still, it would be nice to see some attempt to link the new with the old, as opposed to starting from scratch again.

12:00 a.m., December 30, 2006  

Post a Comment

<< Home