- Joined
- Jul 11, 2004
- Messages
- 1,184
- Points
- 103
Corporal Bryan Budd won a posthumous VC in Afghanistan, but the medal quota is strict
A WHITEHALL quota system that restricts the number of medals given to soldiers in wartime has resulted in more than half the recommendations for awards for bravery in Afghanistan being turned down.
Many senior serving and retired officers claim the system is outdated, fails to recognise the intensive fighting seen by British troops in Helmand and has resulted in hundreds of servicemen and women being denied recognition for their courage.
The Ministry of Defence places limits on the numbers of medals that can be awarded for each six-month tour of duty, meaning only about one in 100 soldiers deployed can be rewarded for bravery.
Opponents argue that the generals who run the medals system have little or no experience of intense combat of the kind seen in Afghanistan over the past four years.
“Commanding officers are lucky to get a 50% strike rate for their medal recommendations due to the conservative nature of senior officers who sit in London and decide these things.”
Service chiefs have expressed fears that if they did not place limits on the numbers issued, this would “undermine” the value of those given for valour such as the Victoria Cross and the Military Cross.
The controversial quota system dates from the first world war and involves a set number of medals of each type being awarded for campaigns, depending on the number of troops involved and whether the conflicts are classed as full wars, peacekeeping missions or operations within the UK.
Only two or three Distinguished Service Orders for outstanding combat leadership are now usually awarded to officers in each brigade and no more than 19 Military Crosses for bravery have been awarded for any six-month period in Afghanistan.
As a rule, just two Distinguished Flying Crosses for bravery in the air have been awarded for each six-month period since 2007.
The highest-profile decoration won in Afghanistan was the Victoria Cross awarded posthumously to Corporal Bryan Budd of the Parachute Regiment, who was killed in August 2006 while defending his section from a Taliban attack.
According to senior officers who have been involved in the awarding process in Afghanistan, the situation has become increasingly unjust. Many no longer submit all the recommendations they believe their troops deserve because only a fraction will be successful.
One former commander of British troops in Afghanistan said that in 2006 army commanders submitted recommendations for 173 medals for members of 16 Air Assault Brigade, yet only 77 decorations were awarded later in the year.
Critics have pointed out anomalies such as the fact that soldiers who fought in the first Gulf war were entitled to medals in the similar ratio as those in Afghanistan, although the intense fighting on the ground in 1991 lasted just a few days.
Colonel Bob Stewart, former commander of British troops in Bosnia, described the quota systems as “very irritating”. He said: “There are huge inequalities in the medal system and the way it operates.”
Recommendations from field commanders go to the heads of the individual services in London and then to a committee of senior officers, before going to the Cabinet Office and Buckingham Palace for final approval.
One senior officer involved in the process defended it. “The fear is we will end up like the Americans and people will get a medal for putting their boots on in the morning,” he said.
“We study recommendations very carefully and always err on the side of caution.”
Kemp said: “Medals are good for morale. They encourage people to go that extra mile. The army is too precious.
“The opinions of regimental commanding officers and brigade commanders on the front line should carry more importance than at the moment.”
The Ministry of Defence said: “While honours are awarded according to individual merit, commanders are guided by a flexible quota system based on numbers of people deployed on each mission and the intensity of combat.”
A WHITEHALL quota system that restricts the number of medals given to soldiers in wartime has resulted in more than half the recommendations for awards for bravery in Afghanistan being turned down.
Many senior serving and retired officers claim the system is outdated, fails to recognise the intensive fighting seen by British troops in Helmand and has resulted in hundreds of servicemen and women being denied recognition for their courage.
The Ministry of Defence places limits on the numbers of medals that can be awarded for each six-month tour of duty, meaning only about one in 100 soldiers deployed can be rewarded for bravery.
Opponents argue that the generals who run the medals system have little or no experience of intense combat of the kind seen in Afghanistan over the past four years.
“Commanding officers are lucky to get a 50% strike rate for their medal recommendations due to the conservative nature of senior officers who sit in London and decide these things.”
Service chiefs have expressed fears that if they did not place limits on the numbers issued, this would “undermine” the value of those given for valour such as the Victoria Cross and the Military Cross.
The controversial quota system dates from the first world war and involves a set number of medals of each type being awarded for campaigns, depending on the number of troops involved and whether the conflicts are classed as full wars, peacekeeping missions or operations within the UK.
Only two or three Distinguished Service Orders for outstanding combat leadership are now usually awarded to officers in each brigade and no more than 19 Military Crosses for bravery have been awarded for any six-month period in Afghanistan.
As a rule, just two Distinguished Flying Crosses for bravery in the air have been awarded for each six-month period since 2007.
The highest-profile decoration won in Afghanistan was the Victoria Cross awarded posthumously to Corporal Bryan Budd of the Parachute Regiment, who was killed in August 2006 while defending his section from a Taliban attack.
According to senior officers who have been involved in the awarding process in Afghanistan, the situation has become increasingly unjust. Many no longer submit all the recommendations they believe their troops deserve because only a fraction will be successful.
One former commander of British troops in Afghanistan said that in 2006 army commanders submitted recommendations for 173 medals for members of 16 Air Assault Brigade, yet only 77 decorations were awarded later in the year.
Critics have pointed out anomalies such as the fact that soldiers who fought in the first Gulf war were entitled to medals in the similar ratio as those in Afghanistan, although the intense fighting on the ground in 1991 lasted just a few days.
Colonel Bob Stewart, former commander of British troops in Bosnia, described the quota systems as “very irritating”. He said: “There are huge inequalities in the medal system and the way it operates.”
Recommendations from field commanders go to the heads of the individual services in London and then to a committee of senior officers, before going to the Cabinet Office and Buckingham Palace for final approval.
One senior officer involved in the process defended it. “The fear is we will end up like the Americans and people will get a medal for putting their boots on in the morning,” he said.
“We study recommendations very carefully and always err on the side of caution.”
Kemp said: “Medals are good for morale. They encourage people to go that extra mile. The army is too precious.
“The opinions of regimental commanding officers and brigade commanders on the front line should carry more importance than at the moment.”
The Ministry of Defence said: “While honours are awarded according to individual merit, commanders are guided by a flexible quota system based on numbers of people deployed on each mission and the intensity of combat.”
