Annual Review 2016–17 Annual Review 2016–17 1

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Annual Review 2016–17 Annual Review 2016–17 1 Reflecting on a historic year of change Annual Review 2016–17 Annual Review 2016–17 1 The National Army Museum is a The leading authority on the British Army Chairman’s and its impact on society, past and Statement present. We examine the Army’s General Sir Richard Shirreff KCB CBE role as protector, fighting force and Chairman of the Council General Sir Richard Shirreff 2017 marks a truly historic year A valuable resource KCB CBE was until 2014 in the Museum’s development – At the same time, the Museum peacekeeper from the British Civil NATO’s Deputy Supreme Allied the most momentous, perhaps, Commander Europe and since continues to play an important part then has forged a career since its foundation and move as a crucial resource for academic Wars to the modern day. Through as an author and in business. to Chelsea in 1971 under the researchers and military historians, auspices of Field Marshal via the Templer Study Centre and In a varied Army career, General other research facilities. our collections we preserve and Sir Richard has commanded on Sir Gerald Templer. operations at every level from The reopening of the Museum Throughout this period of transition, platoon to division, including in March this year marked the we have had access to the constant combat in the Gulf War as a support and encouragement of the share stories of ordinary people tank squadron leader and culmination of six years’ planning, National Army Museum Council, counter-insurgency operations involving five years of fundraising in Northern Ireland, as well and of course, three years creating and of our donors and supporters with extraordinary responsibilities. as active service in Bosnia, the new building itself. who have played a major part in Kosovo and Iraq. He then went the re-creation of the Museum on to command the Allied Rapid As a result, the National Army as it is today. Reaction Corps before his final Museum, more than ever before, tour of duty as Deputy Supreme acts as a communication channel A royal presence Allied Commander Europe. between the Army, in its past and present form, and the wider public. We were privileged by the presence General Sir Richard is now Its new immersive, interactive of Her Majesty The Queen at the a partner in Strategia Worldwide, approach brings to life, uniquely Royal Preview in March; a proud a consultancy advising on the day for all who had experienced management of strategic risk. and compellingly, the experiences – as well as the weapons and equipment at close hand the transformation The National Army Museum – of the serving soldier through the of the Museum. This was a fitting is most fortunate to have ages up to the present day. celebration of the achievements General Sir Richard’s personal of the past six years – a celebration involvement and support as Our close connection with the which is continued daily, by the it moves into the next exciting British Army has given us unique presence of so many of the general phase of its development. access, not only to objects associated public who are now able to connect with its history, but to the personal with the history and experiences reminiscences of those who served – of the British Army and its and continue to serve – in its ranks. personnel as never before. 2 National Army Museum Annual Review 2016–17 3 Director General’s Statement On a A year to remember – personal The National Army Museum note… My tenure as Director General is now coming to an end after seven Janice Murray extraordinary years in Director General the life of the Museum. During that time we have seen it develop into a resource A re-envisioned Museum in an academic resource, but to use them to that will reach out as never before to a wider public, and a new building with a new provide a unique experience to the wider public. Importantly too, their display tell the untold stories behind purpose, designed for the the histories: the experiences needs of the 21st century. would strengthen our bond with the British Army and its serving personnel, of the men and women who as they saw their own experiences made up – and continue to A new vision mirrored in those of earlier times. make up – the British Army. By 2011 we knew that the old building, Our work in Chelsea was only part My thoughts, thanks and best while appropriate for the 1970s, had of the story. We took the opportunity, wishes are with the Museum, outlived its usefulness both in terms during closure, to ‘turn ourselves and everyone who contributed of capacity and public resource. inside-out’ – to access a wider audience to making it what it is today, In particular, we saw that with the 100th than we had previously enjoyed by but particularly the staff anniversary of the outbreak of the First extending our Outreach Programme who have worked so hard World War in 2014, our visitor numbers across the UK. This enabled us to to make it happen. would overwhelm the building as it was. develop new ways of connecting I also want to thank those The vision went beyond a simple with the public and reach new many friends of the Museum matter of capacity, we also saw it as an audiences throughout the UK. in so many walks of life who opportunity to engage new audiences have offered their support, as well as enhancing the experience The building as an asset friendship and advice and of our existing friends, whether The new building defines the wider who I know will continue Army, military historians or academic role of the National Army Museum. to help make the Museum researchers. We felt that there was a A vastly improved exterior is matched an even better resource to story to tell beyond the history of the by an interior carefully designed as explain and connect the Army as an institution, by bringing an open, airy space where people can Army with the wider world to the public mind the experiences meet, mingle and choose which of the of serving and non-serving soldiers: “ in the years to come. exhibition areas to browse. It symbolises It is for our visitors what they went through, how they lived our philosophy that it is for our visitors and sometimes died, and the record of to define their to define their experiences, rather extraordinary service to their country. than our role to define it for them. experiences, rather It was also an opportunity to build Additionally, the elegant spaces have on what was already an unrivalled been designed for use as private and than our role to collection of artefacts, written resources corporate functions, not only to raise define it for them” Janice Murray and personal accounts. This would enable awareness among opinion-formers, Director General us not just to reinforce our role as but to help grow our revenue. 4 National Army Museum Annual Review 2016–17 5 A history of With so much happening Countdown virtually every day in such achievement, a hectic and demanding year, it would be impossible to cover the achievement to launch all those activities in this Review. The following photographs capture of history Highlights some of the key events, season by season, that led up to the The story of the National Army Museum, reopening of the Museum. from its beginnings to the present day, has been a history of evolution, modernisation and development. Since its move to Chelsea in 1971, it has grown continually, both physically and in its collections, over the past 45 years. It has long been an essential resource for military historians, academics and all those fascinated by the story of the British Army from its earliest times. However, time doesn’t stand still. Changes in society, and public expectations of what a museum should offer, required a holistic look at what the National Army Museum should represent in the 21st century. The need to close and reconstruct the building gave the Council and staff a unique opportunity to re-think the purpose of the Museum – literally – from the ground up. They saw the need and the opportunity to widen the message of the Museum to the general public. Always a popular venue for the public and researchers alike, the Museum could now tell the story of the Army in ways that would create further appeal to a wider audience, while remaining an essential resource for professional historians and academics. With Army involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan and with the advent of social media, the general public became aware as never before of the day-to-day lives of the men and women who had to deal with difficult combat situations. In this environment of a new public understanding of British soldiers’ lives, a vision emerged of creating a museum which could engage new, wider audiences with the story – not just of the Army but of individual serving soldiers on a profoundly human level. The period covered by this Annual Review is itself a record of achievement. In April 2016 the new building was still in the process of completion. Just one year later, the fully-functioning, revitalised National Army Museum was visited by Her Majesty The Queen before we opened ABOVE to the public. What follows is a season-by-season summary The new building taking of what was a complex, demanding but exciting process. shape during 2014–15 6 National Army Museum Annual Review 2016–17 7 As the building work progressed, With the structure of the new our outward-facing activities continued building nearing completion, unabated.
Recommended publications
  • Re-Thinking Defence to Meet New Threats
    House of Commons Defence Committee Re-thinking defence to meet new threats Tenth Report of Session 2014–15 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 17 March 2015 HC 512 Published on 24 March 2015 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Defence Committee The Defence Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Ministry of Defence and its associated public bodies Current membership Rory Stewart MP (Conservative, Penrith and The Border) (Chair) Richard Benyon MP (Conservative, Newbury) Rt Hon Jeffrey M. Donaldson MP (Democratic Unionist, Lagan Valley) Mr James Gray MP (Conservative, North Wiltshire) Mr Dai Havard MP (Labour, Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney) Dr Julian Lewis MP (Conservative, New Forest East) Mrs Madeleine Moon MP (Labour, Bridgend) Sir Bob Russell MP (Liberal Democrat, Colchester) Bob Stewart MP (Conservative, Beckenham) Ms Gisela Stuart MP (Labour, Birmingham, Edgbaston) Derek Twigg MP (Labour, Halton) John Woodcock MP (Labour/Co–op, Barrow and Furness) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in the House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/defcom and by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the Committee’s website on the inquiry page. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are James Rhys (Clerk), Leoni Kurt (Second Clerk), Eleanor Scarnell (Committee Specialist), Ian Thomson (Committee Specialist), Christine Randall (Senior Committee Assistant), Alison Pratt and Carolyn Bowes (Committee Assistants).
    [Show full text]
  • The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
    Return to an Address of the Honourable the House of Commons dated 6 July 2016 for The Report of the Iraq Inquiry Report of a Committee of Privy Counsellors Volume XI Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on 6 July 2016 HC 265-XI 46561_43b Viking_Volume XI Title Page.indd 1 17/06/2016 15:34 © Crown copyright 2016 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected]. Where we have identifi ed any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at [email protected] Print ISBN 9781474110136 Web ISBN 9781474110143 ID 23051601 46561 07/16 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fi bre content minimum Printed in the UK by the Williams Lea Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Offi ce 46561_43b Viking_Volume XI Title Page.indd 2 17/06/2016 15:34 Volume XI CONTENTS 14.1 Military equipment (post-conflict) 1 14.2 Conclusions: Military equipment (post-conflict) 227 15.1 Civilian personnel 243 15.2 Conclusions: Civilian personnel 411 46561_43b Viking_Volume XI Title Page.indd 3 17/06/2016 15:34 46561_43b Viking_Volume XI Title Page.indd 4 17/06/2016 15:34 SECTION 14.1 MILITARY EQUIPMENT (POST‑CONFLICT) Contents Introduction .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Towards the Next Defence and Security Review: Part Two— NATO
    House of Commons Defence Committee Towards the next Defence and Security Review: Part Two— NATO Third Report of Session 2014–15 HC 358 House of Commons Defence Committee Towards the next Defence and Security Review: Part Two— NATO Third Report of Session 2014–15 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 22 July 2014 HC 358 INCORPORATING HC 1067, SESSION 2013-14 Published on 31 July 2014 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 The Defence Committee The Defence Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Ministry of Defence and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rory Stewart MP (Conservative, Penrith and The Border) (Chair) Mr Julian Brazier MP (Conservative, Canterbury) Rt Hon Jeffrey M. Donaldson MP (Democratic Unionist, Lagan Valley) Mr James Gray MP (Conservative, North Wiltshire) Mr Dai Havard MP (Labour, Merthyr Tydfil and Rhymney) Adam Holloway MP (Conservative, Gravesham) Mrs Madeleine Moon MP (Labour, Bridgend) Sir Bob Russell MP (Liberal Democrat, Colchester) Bob Stewart MP (Conservative, Beckenham) Ms Gisela Stuart MP (Labour, Birmingham, Edgbaston) Derek Twigg MP (Labour, Halton) John Woodcock MP (Labour/Co-op, Barrow and Furness) The following Members were also members of the Committee during this inquiry. Rt Hon James Arbuthnot MP (Conservative, North East Hampshire) (former Chair) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152.
    [Show full text]
  • EUFOR Forum 86
    Edition #86, Jan. - Mar. 2014 INSIDE: Change of Command in the Multinational Battalion in BiH Training Branch Visit to Combined Training EUFOR Chief of Staff Gender in the Defence Handover-Takeover Ceremony Sector of BiH Main Planning Conferences for Forthcoming Exercises Operation Commander Farewell Parade COM EUFOR Soldiers of EUFOR ALTHEA, and the double use of Comrades, armed forces for the As we all know, in early Feb- benefit of civil affairs, ruary legitimate demonstrations, as well as military af- that began peacefully, suddenly fairs, is the most eco- became, in some instances, vio- nomical way of doing lent. BiH took centre stage in the this. The double use of eyes of the world again as we saw forces includes the use pictures and video footage of large of armed forces and protests and burning buildings. their assets for other Nothing like this had been seen in crisis tasks, such as air this country for over 15 years. medical evacuation, emergency engineering capabili- ties, disaster relief efforts, etc. While these protests, based on social and econom- ic dissatisfaction, were not a substantial threat to the This period has also seen us reach the end of Gen- safe and secure environment (SASE) of BiH, they are eral Sir Richard Shirreff’s tenure as Operation AL- definitely a sign that security and stability does not THEA’s Operation Commander. During this tenure, simply occur naturally and without effort. As in any General Shirreff has pushed forward with the project other country and society in the world, this has to be to dispose of surplus arms, weapons and explosives created by the citizens, their elected representatives but his main effort was also in the development of our and their institutions.
    [Show full text]
  • 280/287 Movement Control Squadron Royal Corps of Transport
    ‘The Phoenix Squadron’ By WO2 (Retd) Derek C Donald 287 MC Sqn RCT(V) 1939 to 1994 280 MC Squadron The Phoenix Squadron 280/287 Movement Control Squadron Royal Corps of Transport Personal Reflection and History of the Squadron by WO2 (Rtd) Derek C Donald Served January 1966 to January 1994 1 December 2020 Page 1 Foreword The views and recollections expressed in this document are those of the author and WO2 (Rtd) R Sutherland and are not to be construed as the views of any other Squadron member unless they are prepared to confirm so in writing. Acknowledgements WO2 (Rtd) R Sutherland and WO2 Bill Henderson, Perth for their notes on the pre 1966 units. Lt Col (Rtd) Bob Pow TD for the 1984 Squadron and the Officers and SNCOs photograph. Major (Rtd] Carol Campbell-Hayes for the 1993 Squadron photograph. Major (Rtd) Ray Taylor for the spur to get this down on paper. The members of the Squadron I served with for their comradeship and sense of humour in both good times and difficult times, and, Especially WO1(Rtd) Don Strange and WO2(Rtd) Jim MacCallum (RIP)for their critical reading of this work. Major (Rtd) Steve Holman TD for his updating work and the securing of the Sqn ‘Mess Tin’. Page 2 Introduction. The 280 - 287 MC [Movement Control] Squadrons, Royal Logistics Corps, which was disbanded in 1999, was the last of a proud succession of Specialist Squadrons who can trace their origins back to at least August 1939. The two units were specialist squadrons as opposed to independent squadrons, which tended to be based in a location with a drill hall.
    [Show full text]
  • Front Matter
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-04785-3 - The Direction of War: Contemporary Strategy in Historical Perspective Hew Strachan Frontmatter More information The Direction of War The wars since 9/11, in both Iraq and Afghanistan, have generated frustra- tion and an increasing sense of failure in the west. Much of the blame has been attributed to poor strategy. In both the United States and the United Kingdom, public enquiries and defence think tanks have detected a lack of consistent direction, of effective communication and of governmental coordination. In this important new book, Sir Hew Strachan, one of the world’s leading military historians, reveals how these failures resulted from a fundamental misreading and misapplication of strategy itself. He argues that the wars since 2001 have not in reality been as ‘new’ as has been widely assumed and that we need to adopt a more historical approach to contemporary strategy in order to identify what is really changing in how we wage war. If war is to fulfil the aims of policy, then we need first to under- stand war. Hew Strachan is Chichele Professor of the History of War at the University of Oxford and a Fellow of All Souls College. Between 2004 and 2012 he was the Director of the Oxford Programme on the Changing Character of War. He also serves on the Strategic Advisory Panel of the Chief of the Defence Staff, on the UK Defence Academy Advisory Board, and on the Council of the International Institute for Strategic Studies. Foreign Policy listed him as one of the most influential global thinkers for 2012 and he was knighted in the New Year’s Honours for 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • 21813746 White Thesis.Pdf
    UNIVERSITY OF READING British Defence Planning and Britain’s NATO commitment, 1979 – 1985 PhD Graduate Institute of Politics and International Studies Kenton White October 2016 Declaration I confirm that this is my own work and the use of all material from other sources has been properly and fully acknowledged. Kenton White Acknowledgements I began my thesis to the sound of several respectable academics – leaders in their fields – telling me to do a different subject. I was told either to concentrate on statistics, or to look at the development of doctrine. I chose to do neither, and without the financial support of any charity, agency or other organisation, ploughed what was at times a lonely furrow. Despite the isolation, several people actively encouraged and helped me in my endeavours. I would like to thank those people who have helped me complete this work: Jane Greaves from Milton Keynes Library and Kevin Chambers from the National Archives in Kew were instrumental in finding and providing me with the source information for my research. The academic staff at the University of Reading. I had an outstanding mentor in Colin Gray who was wise enough to leave me to my own devices when necessary, and kind enough to answer some particularly stupid questions with equanimity. Geoffrey Sloane, Alan Renwick, Jonathan Golub, Catriona McKinnon and Adam Humphries have all influenced my work. My examiners, Beatrice Heuser and John Baylis were kind enough to complement the finished thesis – their words, and those of Colin Gray, persuading me that perhaps the effort had been worth it. The Armed Forces.
    [Show full text]
  • GLOBAL STRATEGY FORUM Lecture Series 2014 - 2015
    GLOBAL STRATEGY FORUM Lecture Series 2014 - 2015 www.globalstrategyforum.org General Sir Richard Shirreff and Lord Lothian Professor Jeremy Farrar and Lord Lothian Lord Lothian and Martin Wolf Baroness Warsi Major General Noel I. Khokhar and Lord Lothian Lord Ashdown of Norton-sub-Hamdon www.globalstrategyforum.org GLOBAL STRATEGY FORUM Lecture Series 2014 - 2015 3 www.globalstrategyforum.org 4 www.globalstrategyforum.org GLOBAL STRATEGY FORUM President Johan Eliasch is the President of Global Strategy Forum. He is Chairman and CEO of HEAD (the global sporting goods group), Chairman of Aman Resorts, Equity Partners, London Films, Co-Chairman of Cool Earth, non-executive Chairman of Investcorp Europe, non-executive director of CV Starr Underwriting Agents. He is an advisory board member of Brasilinvest, Societe du Louvre, Capstar, the Centre for Social Justice, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Foundation for Renewable Energy and Environment and a member of the Mayor of London’s, Rome’s and Jerusalem’s International Business Advisory Councils. He is Patron of Stockholm University and a trustee of the Kew Foundation. He is the Chair of the Food, Energy and Water Security programme at RUSI. He is the Founder of the Rainforest Trust which is conserving 400,000 acres of rainforest in the Amazonas. He was part of the Conservative Shadow Foreign Office team as Special Advisor on European Affairs (1999-2003) and responsible for foreign relations (2003-2005). He was Conservative Party Deputy Treasurer (2003- 2007). He is the former Special Representative of the Prime Minister of the UK for Deforestation and Clean Energy (2007-2010). Chairman Lord Lothian is the Chairman of Global Strategy Forum.
    [Show full text]
  • Counter Insurgency Operations, and Uses the U.S
    CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY COLONEL ALEXANDER ALDERSON THE VALIDITY OF BRITISH ARMY COUNTERINSURGENCY DOCTRINE AFTER THE WAR IN IRAQ 2003-2009 DEFENCE ACADEMY COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY PhD THESIS CRANFIELD UNIVERSITY DEFENCE ACADEMY COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED SCIENCE, SECURITY AND RESILIENCE PhD THESIS Academic Year 2009-2010 Colonel Alexander Alderson The Validity of British Army Counterinsurgency Doctrine after The War in Iraq 2003-2009 Supervisor: Professor E R Holmes November 2009 © Cranfield University 2009. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written permission of the copyright owner Abstract This thesis analyses whether the British Army’s doctrinal approach for countering insurgency is still valid in the light of the war in Iraq. Why is this important? Insurgency remains a prevalent form of instability. In the absence of a major conventional threat to British security, it is one which is likely to confront the Army for the foreseeable future. If British doctrine for counterinsurgency has been invalidated by the campaign in Iraq, this will have profound implications for the way the Army approaches, and is organized, equipped and trained for counterinsurgency in the future. If the doctrine is found to be valid, another explanation has to be found to account for the conduct and outcome of British operations in Southern Iraq between 2003 and 2009. Using historiographical techniques, the thesis examines the principal influences on extant British doctrine, developed in 1995. It analyzes the principal British manuals, the influence on doctrine of the campaigns in Malaya and Northern Ireland and the theories of Sir Robert Thompson and Gen.
    [Show full text]
  • An Attack Against Them All? Drivers of Decisions to Contribute to NATO Collective Defense
    An Attack Against Them All? Drivers of Decisions to Contribute to NATO Collective Defense Anika Binnendijk, Miranda Priebe C O R P O R A T I O N For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR2964 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0277-6 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2019 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover: U.S Army photo by Sgt. James Avery, 16th Mobile Public Affairs Detachment. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and military operations in Eastern Ukraine have prompted renewed discussion about the possibility of a Russian attack on a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ally, particularly in the Baltics.
    [Show full text]