The Wootton Bassett effect

The Prime Minister has announced that Wootton Bassett is to be given the title 'Royal' in recognition of their honouring of the UK's war dead. The residents of the town have lined the streets to show their respect for the victims as they are driven between RAF Lyneham to John Radcliffe hospital in Oxford. Mr Cameron told the Commons, "Their deeply moving and dignified demonstrations of respect and mourning have shown the deep bond between the public and our armed forces." He reported that the Queen had agreed to the tribute as "an enduring symbol of the nation's admiration and our gratitude to the people of that town."

 

The ceremonies began shortly after the military complained the UK did not have a similar reverence for war dead as demonstrated in the USA. What started as a simple tribute by the local British Legion, from one generation of the armed forces to another, grew into a widely observed and slightly more formal event: the lowering of Legion banners, a minute's silence and the tolling of the bells at St Bartholomew’s and All Saints Church.

The most surprising aspect of the proceedings were that they should happen at all in this quintessential Cotswold town. After all this is 'Middle England' and adopting public rituals for what was traditionally a private affair would be more in-keeping with the 'remember the Alamo' patriotism of Texas than Wiltshire. However, there is little doubt that the proceedings came from a sense of respect and sadness for the loss of the servicemen. Indeed, uppermost in the minds of the community was the question of how to maintain the dignity of the occasions as media coverage brought more attention and people to the events. 

Following the repatriation of eight servicemen in July 2009 and the huge crowds that attended, many local people voiced their concern that the tone had changed. In the Times an ex-paratrooper explained, "Local people are staying away, not out of disrespect, but because it’s becoming something else.” It was an opinion echoed by another local who said, “I thought it was a three-ring circus,” she said. “It started as a spontaneous thing, but it’s grown like Topsy, and we’ve lost something . . . it’s become an event, trailed in the news ... almost as if it was advertised. Personally I think some people came just to see it, like grief tourists.”

Adrian Beeby, a local resident and blogger questioned the motives behind the extensive reporting. He noted that the media attention on Wootton Bassett coincided with reporters being given greater freedom to observe how the bodies were dealt with in the war zones:

'the military is allowing reporters greater access to some of its most emotive and solemn moments and suggests that growth in coverage of the repatriation ceremony may well be at the instigation of the military. The question one is forced to ponder is: why? Are the prospects of military budget cuts or possible problems in the Middle East influencing their thinking? Are we seeing the results of a campaign to increase public sympathy for our fighters? Or have the media discovered that demonstrating support for our troops goes down well with their readers and viewers?'  

Meanwhile, amidst the disquiet, local people did their best to maintain the dignity of the original aims. 'Red Fridays', the brainchild of local businessman Brian Pickering, a campaign to encourage shops and people to be dressed in red to draw support for all military personnel was resisted, as a typical response to a local paper illustrated,

"Everybody wants to up the stakes of Wootton Bassett. The present repatriation vigils are for the fallen not active service personnel. Why can't these people leave things as they are. I certainly would not want to see the neutrality of the people of Wootton Bassett compromised." 

Neutrality is a very interesting word and gets to the heart of my concerns. The fact is that amongst the millions of people who campaigned against the recent conflicts, only a few extremists would welcome British deaths. However, the focus on dead 'heroes' by the media and military PR created an atmosphere where criticism of the campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq became identified with criticism of the soldiers. This is clearly nonsense and it is to the credit of Wootten Bassett that the debate, locally, recognised the thin line they were walking between being used as military propaganda and maintaining a dignified focus on the dead servicemen.

Cameron told the Commons that Wootten Bassett "did not ask for any recognition, they did not ask for any form of preferment." This is not true. The truth is that the townsfolk went further than that and actively said that they did not want to be officially recognised. Wootton Bassett's Mayor, Steve Bucknell, told the press, it was 'not what local people would want, preferring to just honour the dead with no expectation of thanks.' So, ignoring the express wishes of the people of the town - the government and Royal family have pressed ahead with the 'honour'.

Why impose an 'honour'? I think the reason can be seen in the response to Islam4UK's proposed march through Wootten Bassett. Islam4UK, a Muslim anti-war campaign group, proposed to parade empty coffins through the town. Their controversial spokesman, Anjem Choudary, openly accepted that Wootten Bassett was chosen to generate the maximum level of publicity. He pointed out,

"the sad reality of the situation is that if I were to hold it somewhere else it would not have the media attention that it has now. If I am to balance between the sensitivity of having it in Wootton Bassett and the possibility of continuing the quagmire and cycle of death in Afghanistan, then quite honestly I'm going to balance in favour of the latter."

The proposal, the police never received an application to march, generated massive levels of 'outraged' press coverage. All the party leaders condemned Islam4UK. Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary at the time, said he was prepared to ban the march. He told the BBC, "The idea that anyone would stage this kind of demonstration in Wootton Bassett fills me with revulsion. I find it particularly offensive that the town, which has acted in such a moving and dignified way in paying tribute to our troops who have made the ultimate sacrifice for their country, should be targeted in this manner."

How often do you get a political consensus? The far-right were rubbing their hands with glee. All the parties agreed that freedom of speech for British Muslims was less important than the sensitivities of 'Middle England'. Of course, there are a lot more votes from 'Middle England' than Afghan dead and 'Middle England', 'Worcester Man', 'Mondeo Man' or whatever you want to call him, is the key to electoral success. All the parties recognise this and hence the consensus.

This courting of 'Middle England' inevitably ends with populist moves like 'Royal' Wootton Bassett. Such a contrived vote winner would be laughable if it was not related to the deaths of British troops. Can the Tories and Royal Family sink any lower? Clearly they are both at a low ebb but not since 'Royal' It's A Knockout in 1987, has a PR stunt been so tacky and distasteful.

The 'honour' cheapens and politicises what the ceremonies were about. This was the reason Wootton Bassett residents resisted such a step. But then the reward is not for the town. It's a rather cynical attempt to arrest the flagging support for the the Tories and Royal Family. But, this time, the PR machine has got them playing with fire. At a time when nationalist parties are once again rising in influence, aren't Victorian calls to the flag, the army and dead 'heroes' legitimising other political parties that use those images extensively?

Just as interesting during the Islam4UK debate was the absence of a wider discussion about what the servicemen had died for? It was as if Al Murray's character, the 'Pub Landlord', was suddenly setting the editorial policy for the British media. I wonder what the response to empty coffins carried by 'white' Britons would have been? The 'Wootten Bassett' effect had successfully deflected any talk of why so many British soldiers were and still are dying.

Did those young people make the 'ultimate sacrifice for their country' or were they sacrificed by their country?