DOCSLIB.ORG

How Private Military Companies Challenge Global Governance, Erode Accountabilin and Exacerbate Conflict

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
How Private Military Companies Challenge Global Governance, Erode Accountabilin and Exacerbate Conflict MARKETIZED SOLDIERING: HOW PRIVATE MILITARY COMPANIES CHALLENGE GLOBAL GOVERNANCE, ERODE ACCOUNTABILIN AND EXACERBATE CONFLICT by Gregg Blakely Hon. B.A., University of Toronto, 2002 PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS In the Department of Political Science O Gregg Blakely 2006 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY All rights reserved. This work may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. APPROVAL Name: Gregg Blakely Degree: Master of Arts, Department of Political Science Title of Project: Marketized Soldiering: How private military companies challenge global governance, erode accountability and exacerbate conflict Examining Committee: Chair: Dr. Laurent Dobuzinskis, Associate Professor Department of Political Science Dr. Douglas A. Ross, Professor Senior Supervisor Department of Political Science Dr. Stuart Farson, Adjunct Professor Supervisor Department of Political Science Dr. Benjamin J. Muller, Limited Term Professor Internal Examiner Department of Political Science Date DefendedIApproved: December 4th. 2006 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY~ibra ry DECLARATION OF PARTIAL COPYRIGHT LICENCE The author, whose copyright is declared on the title page of this work, has granted to Simon Fraser University the right to lend this thesis, project or extended essay to users of the Simon Fraser University Library, and to make partial or single copies only for such users or in response to a request from the library of any other university, or other educational institution, on its own behalf or for one of its users. The author has further granted permission to Simon Fraser University to keep or make a digital copy for use in its circulating collection (currently available to the public at the "Institutional Repository" link of the SFU Library website <www.lib.sfu.ca> at: ~http://ir.lib.sfu.calhandle/18921112~)and, without changing the content, to translate the thesislproject or extended essays, if technically possible, to any medium or format for the purpose of preservation of the digital work. The author has further agreed that permission for multiple copying of this work for scholarly purposes may be granted by either the author or the Dean of Graduate Studies. It is understood that copying or publication of this work for financial gain shall not be allowed without the author's written permission. Permission for public performance, or limited permission for private scholarly use, of any multimedia materials forming part of this work, may have been granted by the author. This information may be found on the separately catalogued multimedia material and in the signed Partial Copyright Licence. The original Partial Copyright Licence attesting to these terms, and signed by this author, may be found in the original bound copy of this work, retained in the Simon Fraser University Archive. Simon Fraser University Library Burnaby, BC, Canada The rise of the modern private military industry in the 1990s is explained and claims about the benefits and hazards of privatized military force are evaluated from a public interest perspective. Evidence about the cost effectiveness of employing private military companies (PMCs) is found to be inconclusive, although outsourcing has the potential to increase military flexibility and provide states with newly emerging capabilities in the short run. Governments are shown to have "hidden" motives for outsourcing military functions. It is argued that most benefits of privatization are conditional and that PMC-related hazards threaten to do long-term damage to the rule of law (both nationally and internationally), to the militaries which most rely on private contractors and to the fabric of constitutional democracy. Keywords: private military companies, democratic accountability, contractors, military outsourcing, Iraq FOR GRANDPAGINO I thank my supervisors, Dr. Douglas Ross and Dr. Stuart Farson, for their dedication, guidance, and careful review of my manuscript. Thanks also to everyone in the SFU Department of Political Science - faculty, staff and fellow students -for encouraging the curiosity that underlies all meaningful research. My gratitude to Laura Sparrow in particular, for being the answerer of all questions, and for helping me always to get my ducks in a row. Special thanks are of course owed to my family, the great bunch that they are, and especially to my parents for their faithful support during my university years. Finally, I offer my respect and adoration for Sally, fountain of ideas and loveliest of creatures, for everything under the sun. Approval ............................................................................................................. ii ... Abstract .............................................................................................................. 111 Dedication .......................................................................................................... iv Acknowledgements ............................................................................................ v Table of Contents ..............................................................................................vi .. Tables ................................................................................................................VII CHAPTER I: Introduction .................................................................................. 1 CHAPTER II: Rise of the Industry ..................................................................... 9 What are private military companies and what do they do? .............................. 9 Growth of the private military industry ............................................................. 16 Cost effectiveness and flexibility..................................................................... 25 CHAPTER Ill: Holding Contractors Accountable .......................................... 36 PMCs and international law ............................................................................. 43 The nature of the private military industry: Additional barriers to accountability.................................................................................... 47 Contract management challenges ...................................................................51 CHAPTER IV: Impact on the Military and Mission ........................................ 56 A changed military? .........................................................................................56 Impacting the mission ......................................................................................62 CHAPTER V: Hidden Motives and Options for Regulation .......................... 73 Impact on democracy ........................................................................................73 Options for regulating the private military industry ...........................................88 CHAPTER VI: Conclusions ............................................................................. 97 Bibliography................................................................................................... 107 TABLES Table 1 - TYPOLOGYOF PRIVATEMILITARY COMPANIES .. .... .. ... .. ... .. 12 vii "[Our] regulations seem to be engineered to prevent any mistake, and by so doing, they discourage any risk. But ours is a nation born of ideas and raised on improbability, and risk aversion is not America's ethic ...and more important, it must not be ours." - Donald Rumsfeld, 2001, speech to Pentagon staff' CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION Organized bodies of mercenaries date back to at least the 14'~century, when condottieri --translated literally as "military contractors" -- were commonly hired by various Italian state^.^ Since the early lgthcentury, however, the expectation has been that expertise pertaining to armed force was the exclusive domain of the state. As such, the state assumed responsibility and accountability for the conduct of military and security services. In the early 2othcentury, Max Weber formalized the idea of a state monopoly on the legitimate use of force as a political concept, arguing that the state must be characterized by the means which it, and only it, has at its disposal. The emergence of the modern private military industry, however, upsets this arrangement, revealing that the approach adopted in the modern state period no longer applies in all cases. That is, the state no longer holds a monopoly on the resources and decision-making capability related to the organized application of force.3 Some forms of private sector involvement in military affairs are, of course, long established. Defence contractors such as Boeing, Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin have for decades produced weapons and other related technology for armed forces. The United States has also periodically used private firms to assist with covert operations over the years.4 There are, however, several key differences between these activities and the present day use of private contractors. First, the number of contractors now working for states is unprecedented. During the 1990s and into the new century the private sector's role 1 Donald Rumsfeld, "DoD Acquisition and Logistics Excellence Week Kickoff - Bureaucracy to Battlefield", 2peech, September 10,2001. Eugene B. Smith, "The New Condottieri and U.S. Policy: The privatization of conflict and its implications," Parameters, US. Armv War Collecle Quarterlv, 32(4), Winter 2002-2003, 105. Christopher Spearin, "Canadian Policy: Possibilities
Load more

Recommended publications
  • DESERT KNIGHTS the Birth and Early History Of
    DESERT KNIGHTS The birth and early history of the SAS by Stephen Gallagher 2x90’ Part One Dr3 Gallagher/DESERT KNIGHTS1/1 1. EXT. KEIR HOUSE, SCOTLAND. NIGHT. We see a large, white country house in formal grounds, lights blazing from the ground floor windows. We can hear a faint buzz of dinner conversation. Over the building we super: KEIR HOUSE, SCOTLAND 2. INT. KEIR HOUSE DINING ROOM. NIGHT. A formal dinner party in full swing, sometime around the late 1920s. The women are in gowns and many of the men are in kilts and medals. 3. INT. KEIR HOUSE UPPER FLOOR. NIGHT. An empty, unlit corridor. Not lavish, but functional. A BAR OF LIGHT showing under a door. It goes out. PAN UP as the door opens a crack and DAVID checks the corridor before emerging. He's a dark-haired boy of about 12, with a dressing-gown over his pyjamas. 4. INT. KEIR HOUSE HALLWAY. NIGHT. Up at the top of the stairs, DAVID's head cautiously pokes into view. HIS POV down on the dining room doors as the butler goes in and closes them after... from the sound that's coming out they seem to be making speeches, and there's a burst of applause. Warily, he makes his way down. At the foot of the stairs, he tiptoes past the dining room. But just as it looks as if he's in the clear, he hears someone coming. He dives into the nearest cover just as... ALICE THE COOK emerges through a door from the kitchens with one of the MAIDS behind her.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Weapons of Mass Destruction an Update
    A NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE UNIVERSITY PRESIDENTIAL SCHOLAR’S PAPER THE FUTURE OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AN UPDATE By John P. Caves, Jr. NIU Presidential Scholar November 2019 – November 2020 and W. Seth Carus THE FUTURE OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AN UPDATE John P. Caves, Jr. and W. Seth Carus National Intelligence University National Intelligence Press Washington, DC February 2021 The views expressed in this paper are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Intelligence University, National Defense University, or any other part of the U.S. government. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS While the authors are solely responsible for the final content of this paper, they benefited greatly from the time, expertise and support freely availed to them by many knowledgeable individuals and organizations. They include Mr. Caves’ colleagues at National Intelligence University (NIU), where he worked on this paper while on a detail assignment from National Defense University (NDU). Mr. Caves expresses par- ticular gratitude to Dr. Brian Holmes, dean of the Anthony G. Oettinger School of Science and Technol- ogy Intelligence, for his leadership, knowledge, and support. Dr. Sharon Adams, Ms. Beverly Barnhart, Mr. George Clifford, Dr. LaMesha Craft, and Dr. R. Carter Morris offered helpful comments on the paper at various stages. They and Mr. Damarius Alston, LTC Jeffrey Bacon, Lt Col Frances Deutch, Ms. Thelma Flamer, Mr. Julian Meade, and Ms. Christina Sanders were among others at NIU whose assistance and support made Mr. Caves’ assignment at NIU enjoyable as well as productive. Both authors are deeply indebted to their colleagues at NDU’s Center for the Study of Weapons of Mass Destruction (CSWMD), especially Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 23 – the Rise of Fascism and Totalitarian States 1
    Chapter 23 – The Rise of Fascism and Totalitarian States 1. Introduction Click to read caption “The world must be made safe for democracy,” President Woodrow Wilson declared as the United States entered World War I in 1917. However, the Central Powers’ defeat did not produce that result. Hopes for democracy were soon crushed by the disappointing peace that followed—a peace in which even some of the war’s winners felt more like losers. Anger seethed on the losing side as well. Resentment was most prominent among the Germans, who suffered from the harsh terms of the Treaty of Versailles peace settlement. While bitterness festered, nations also struggled to rebuild war-torn economies. As a result, the peace of the 1920s was a troubled one, marked by instability within nations and between them. Unrest intensified in the 1930s, as the Great Depression that began in the United States spread around the world. The hard times that followed, when added to tensions that already existed, caused people in some countries to support autocratic leaders who promised order, prosperity, and a better future. To many, the sacrifice of freedom these leaders demanded seemed a fair price to pay for the benefits they offered. Dictatorships developed in Germany, Italy, the Soviet Union, Hungary, Portugal, Poland, Romania, and elsewhere. Themes Cultural Interaction Fascism was an ideology that placed patriotism, loyalty to strong leaders, and the welfare of the state above the rights and freedoms of its citizens. Political Systems The political and economic disorder that resulted from World War I and the Great Depression helped communism and fascism to spread and totalitarian dictators to gain power.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Private Military Companies: Continuity and Evolution of the Model
    Russia Foreign Policy Papers Anna Borshchevskaya All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Author: Anna Borshchevskaya Eurasia Program Leadership Director: Chris Miller Deputy Director: Maia Otarashvili Edited by: Thomas J. Shattuck Designed by: Natalia Kopytnik © 2019 by the Foreign Policy Research Institute December 2019 COVER: Designed by Natalia Kopytnik. Our Mission The Foreign Policy Research Institute is dedicated to bringing the insights of scholarship to bear on the foreign policy and national security challenges facing the United States. It seeks to educate the public, teach teachers, train students, and offer ideas to advance U.S. national interests based on a nonpartisan, geopolitical perspective that illuminates contemporary international affairs through the lens of history, geography, and culture. Offering Ideas In an increasingly polarized world, we pride ourselves on our tradition of nonpartisan scholarship. We count among our ranks over 100 affiliated scholars located throughout the nation and the world who appear regularly in national and international media, testify on Capitol Hill, and are consulted by U.S. government agencies. Educating the American Public FPRI was founded on the premise that an informed and educated citizenry is paramount for the U.S. to conduct a coherent foreign policy. Through in-depth research and events on issues spanning the geopolitical spectrum, FPRI offers insights to help the public understand our volatile world. Championing Civic Literacy We believe that a robust civic education is a national imperative.
    [Show full text]
  • USAMHI Special Forces
    U.S. Army Military History Institute Special Operations 950 Soldiers Drive Carlisle Barracks, PA 17013-5021 15 Jun 2012 FOREIGN SPECIAL FORCES A Working Bibliography of MHI Sources CONTENTS Soviet.....p.1 British.....p.2 Other…..p.3 SOVIET SPECIAL FORCES Adams, James. Secret Armies: Inside the American, Soviet and European Special Forces. NY: Atlantic Monthly, 1988. 440 p. UA15.5.A33. Amundsen, Kirsten, et. al. Inside Spetsnaz: Soviet Special Operations: A Critical Analysis. Novato, CA: Presidio, 1990. 308 p. UZ776.S64.I57. Boyd, Robert S. "Spetznaz: Soviet Innovation in Special Forces." Air University Review (Nov/Dec 1986): pp. 63-69. Per. Collins, John M. Green Berets, Seals and Spetznaz: U.S. and Soviet Special Military Operations. Wash, DC: Pergamon-Brassey's, 1987. 174 p. UA15.5.C64. Gebhardt, James F. Soviet Naval Special Purpose Forces: Origins and Operations in World War II. Ft Leavenworth: SASO, 1989. 41 p. D779.R9.G42. _____. Soviet Special Purpose Forces: An Annotated Bibliography. Ft. Leavenworth, KS: SASO, 1990. 23 p. Z672.4S73.G42. Kohler, David R. "Spetznaz (Soviet Special Purpose Forces)." US Naval Institute Proceedings (Aug 87): pp. 46-55. Per. Resistance Factors and Special Forces Areas, North European Russia…. Wash, DC: Asst Chief of Staff, Intell, 1957. 387 p. DK54.R47. Suvorov, Viktor. Spetsnaz: The Inside Story of the Soviet Special Forces. NY: Pocketbooks, 1990. 244 p. UA776.S64.S8813. Zaloga, Steve. Inside the Blue Berets: A Combat History of Soviet and Russian Airborne Forces, 1930- 1995. Novato, CA: Presidio, 1995. 339 p. UZ776S64.Z35. _____. Soviet Bloc Elite Forces. London: Osprey, 1985.
    [Show full text]
  • Resort to Private Military Companies to Fight the Insurgency in Cabo Delgado: Without Transparency and with Disastrous Results
    Resort to private military companies to fight the insurgency in Cabo Delgado: without transparency and with disastrous results Introduction Obscure contracts: from Russians The Mozambican Government is going to prolong, for the second to South Africans time, its contract with the Dyck Advisory Group (DAG), a South Under cover of the law which defines direct awarding of contracts African private military company (PMC), which, since April of as the applicable regime, “if the object of the contract concerns this year, has been assisting the Defence and Security Forces defence and national security”2, the Government has, since in combatting the insurgency in Cabo Delgado. In addition to September 2019, resorted to hiring foreign private military extending the contract with DAG, the government has hired companies, without informing Mozambicans about the purpose another South African PMC, Paramount, according to reports in of the contracts, the sums involved and other contract conditions. 1 the international press this week . Although we recognize the need to protect sensitive information such as that concerning defence and security, this does not mean Under the cover of State secrets, the Government has been resorting, that the government is exempt from accountability. But the since September 2019, to hiring PMCs to help fight the insurgency Government has not provided any account about these contracts, in Cabo Delgado, without accountability to Mozambican citizens, and in a context where defence expenditure has increased either in terms of expenditure or of the benefits obtained by significantly, by about 80% between 2017 and 2020, from 8.304 resorting to private soldiers. billion meticais in 2017 to 14.957 billion by September 20203.
    [Show full text]
  • The United States, International Law, and the Private Military Industry
    \\server05\productn\B\BIN\28-1\BIN104.txt unknown Seq: 1 11-FEB-10 7:56 GOING TO WAR WITH THE ARMY YOU CAN AFFORD: THE UNITED STATES, INTERNATIONAL LAW, AND THE PRIVATE MILITARY INDUSTRY ADAM EBRAHIM* I. INTRODUCTION ............................................ 182 R II. THE PRIVATE MILITARY INDUSTRY TODAY ............... 184 R A. Facts, Definitions, and Contemporary History .......... 184 R 1. Military Support Firms ............................ 185 R 2. Military Consulting Firms ......................... 186 R 3. Military Provider Firms ........................... 187 R 4. A Brief and Recent History ....................... 188 R B. Private Military Companies and Iraq .................. 189 R C. Recent Developments in U.S. Law ..................... 192 R 1. Criminal Law ..................................... 192 R a. The SMTJ Statute ............................. 192 R b. The MEJA .................................... 193 R c. The UCMJ .................................... 195 R 2. Civil Law ......................................... 198 R a. Contract Law ................................. 198 R b. Tort Law ...................................... 198 R III. PMCS, MERCENARIES, AND INTERNATIONAL LAW ......... 202 R A. The “Old” Mercenary Consensus ...................... 202 R 1. Hague Law and Geneva Law ..................... 202 R 2. UN Resolutions ................................... 203 R 3. Protocol I ......................................... 205 R 4. The OAU Convention ............................. 207 R 5. The UN Mercenary Convention ..................
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of the New Zealand Contribution to the Long Range Desert Group in North Africa, 1940-1943
    Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and private study only. The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without the permission of the Author. ' 1 Raids, Road Watches, and Reconnaissance. An Analysis of the New Zealand Contribution to the Long Range Desert Group in North Africa, 1940-1943 A Thesis presented in partial fu lfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Hi story at the School of History, Philosophy and Politics - Massey University By Clive Gower-Collins 1999 I Table of Contents Contents..................... ........................................ ...................... I Acknowledgements . II List of Illustrations . III Introduction . .. .. .. 1 Chapter One - Background and Conception . 5 Chapter Two - Serving Two Masters . 14 Chapter Three - Raids . 30 Chapter Four - Road Watches......... ................ ............................. 49 Chapter Five - Reconnaissance . .. .. .... 61 Conclusion . 78 Bibliography . .. ... 81 C Gower-Collins 1999 II Acknowledgements I have been the fortunate recipient of considerable assistance m the course of completing this thesis. I wish to thank my supervisor, Dr James Watson for his efforts on my behalf, and both the administrative and academic staff of the department for their assistance and encouragement. My thanks also go to Professor David Thomson for the benefit of his counsel. I also want to recognise Massey University for its generous award of scholarships in both 1998 and 1999, without which I would have been able to continue my research. I am indebted to the following people and organisations for their assistance: Esther Bullen, The New Zealand Educational Review. Mr Merv Curtis, LRDG.
    [Show full text]
  • Noncombatant Immunity and War-Profiteering
    In Oxford Handbook of Ethics of War / Published 2017 / doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199943418.001.0001 Noncombatant Immunity and War-Profiteering Saba Bazargan Department of Philosophy UC San Diego Abstract The principle of noncombatant immunity prohibits warring parties from intentionally targeting noncombatants. I explicate the moral version of this view and its criticisms by reductive individualists; they argue that certain civilians on the unjust side are morally liable to be lethally targeted to forestall substantial contributions to that war. I then argue that reductivists are mistaken in thinking that causally contributing to an unjust war is a necessary condition for moral liability. Certain noncontributing civilians—notably, war-profiteers— can be morally liable to be lethally targeted. Thus, the principle of noncombatant immunity is mistaken as a moral (though not necessarily as a legal) doctrine, not just because some civilians contribute substantially, but because some unjustly enriched civilians culpably fail to discharge their restitutionary duties to those whose victimization made the unjust enrichment possible. Consequently, the moral criterion for lethal liability in war is even broader than reductive individualists have argued. 1 In Oxford Handbook of Ethics of War / Published 2017 / doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199943418.001.0001 1. Background 1.1. Noncombatant Immunity and the Combatant’s Privilege in International Law In Article 155 of what came to be known as the ‘Lieber Code’, written in 1866, Francis Lieber wrote ‘[a]ll enemies in regular war are divided into two general classes—that is to say, into combatants and noncombatants’. As a legal matter, this distinction does not map perfectly onto the distinction between members and nonmembers of an armed force.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Military and Security Companies: Industry-Led Self-Regulatory Initiatives Versus State-Led Containment Strategies
    The Centre on Conflict, Development and Peacebuilding 11 CCDP Working Paper Role and Governance of Islamic Charitable Institutions: Private Military and Security Companies: Industry-Led Self-Regulatory Initiatives versus State-Led Containment Strategies Raymond Saner 1 Contents List of Acronyms ....................................................................................................................... 2 Preface ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction ........................................................................................................4 Definitions and Use of Private Military and Security Companies ............................6 The PMSC Industry ..............................................................................................8 Self-Regulatory Initiatives by PMSCs ................................................................... 10 Countermoves by States and International Humanitarian Organizations ............... 14 Colliding Regulatory Initiatives .......................................................................... 16 Recommendations ............................................................................................. 20 Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 23 Annexes ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • B-400093.4,B-400093.5 Aegis Defence Services Limited
    Comptroller General of the United States United Stat es Government Accountability Office DOCUMENT FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Washington , DC 20548 The decision issued on the date below was subject to a GAO Protective Order. This redacted version has been approved for public release. Decision Matter of: Aegis Defence Services Limited File: B-400093.4; B-400093.5 Date: October 16, 2008 John S. Pachter, Esq., Jonathan D. Shaffer, Esq., Mary Pat Gregory, Esq., Matthew Lloyd Haws, Esq., and Richard C. Johnson, Esq., Smith Pachter McWhorter PLC, for the protester. David S. Black, Esq., Megan M. Mocho, Esq., and Jessica M. Madon, Esq., Holland & Knight LLP, for Global Strategies Group (Integrated Security), Inc., an intervenor. Roderick McCracken, Esq., Robert J. McKenney, Esq., and Derek B. Santos, Esq., Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, for the agency. Paul N. Wengert, Esq., and Ralph O. White, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, GAO, participated in the preparation of the decision. DIGEST 1. Protest that agency misevaluated awardee and protester under experience and past performance factors by downgrading protester based on its limited experience in Afghanistan, and by giving awardee credit for experience of its subcontractors, including contracts performed in Afghanistan, is denied where agency judgments were reasonable and consistent with terms of solicitation. 2. Protest that agency improperly disregarded risk posed by awardee’s low price is denied where record demonstrated that agency had compared individual fixed price line items to government estimate and to prices offered by competitors, identified those where there were significant differences, and documented the agency’s basis for concluding that the awardee’s prices were reasonable.
    [Show full text]
  • Orme) Wilberforce (Albert) Raymond Blackburn (Alexander Bell
    Copyrights sought (Albert) Basil (Orme) Wilberforce (Albert) Raymond Blackburn (Alexander Bell) Filson Young (Alexander) Forbes Hendry (Alexander) Frederick Whyte (Alfred Hubert) Roy Fedden (Alfred) Alistair Cooke (Alfred) Guy Garrod (Alfred) James Hawkey (Archibald) Berkeley Milne (Archibald) David Stirling (Archibald) Havergal Downes-Shaw (Arthur) Berriedale Keith (Arthur) Beverley Baxter (Arthur) Cecil Tyrrell Beck (Arthur) Clive Morrison-Bell (Arthur) Hugh (Elsdale) Molson (Arthur) Mervyn Stockwood (Arthur) Paul Boissier, Harrow Heraldry Committee & Harrow School (Arthur) Trevor Dawson (Arwyn) Lynn Ungoed-Thomas (Basil Arthur) John Peto (Basil) Kingsley Martin (Basil) Kingsley Martin (Basil) Kingsley Martin & New Statesman (Borlasse Elward) Wyndham Childs (Cecil Frederick) Nevil Macready (Cecil George) Graham Hayman (Charles Edward) Howard Vincent (Charles Henry) Collins Baker (Charles) Alexander Harris (Charles) Cyril Clarke (Charles) Edgar Wood (Charles) Edward Troup (Charles) Frederick (Howard) Gough (Charles) Michael Duff (Charles) Philip Fothergill (Charles) Philip Fothergill, Liberal National Organisation, N-E Warwickshire Liberal Association & Rt Hon Charles Albert McCurdy (Charles) Vernon (Oldfield) Bartlett (Charles) Vernon (Oldfield) Bartlett & World Review of Reviews (Claude) Nigel (Byam) Davies (Claude) Nigel (Byam) Davies (Colin) Mark Patrick (Crwfurd) Wilfrid Griffin Eady (Cyril) Berkeley Ormerod (Cyril) Desmond Keeling (Cyril) George Toogood (Cyril) Kenneth Bird (David) Euan Wallace (Davies) Evan Bedford (Denis Duncan)
    [Show full text]