Kristen is the author of The Australian Airmen of Stalag Luft III.

Notes

Dr Kristen Alexander previously joined The Lens of History to chat about The Australian Airmen of Stalag Luft III.

https://thelensofhistory.substack.com/p/kriegies-the-australian-airmen-of

Notes

Find out more about the Warfare Mastery Institute:

https://www.warfaremastery.com/

Thanks for reading The Lens of History! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Armies in Retreat: Chaos, Cohesion, and Consequences edited by Timothy G. Heck and Walker D. Mills.

Armies in Retreat is split into three topical sections: Chaos, Cohesion, and Consequences. Also, contributors provide historical strategic and operational analysis across individual chapters. So, the reader's familiarity with the subject matter will depend upon their particular military history interests. Moreover, the Spanish Civil War (1936-39) and Polish defensive efforts (1939) are under-documented among "English-speaking peoples." [2]

However, the authors provide historical context to the reader, so familiarity with the related timeframes is optional. But this reviewer sounds a cautionary note: Jeff Rutherford's The German 7th Infantry Division and Retreat from the Rzhev Salient, February–March 1943 is factually accurate.[3] Yet, in light of Nazi atrocities, the reader might find Germany's fresh approach to feeding civilians (slave labour) puzzling. [4]

The reader potentially faces a decision between further study of the German war effort and puzzlement around a sensitive issue. So, despite space and topical constraints, clarification or pointers to in-depth resources covering those matters is an avenue to smoothing the reader's experiences/understanding of the subject material. * Although this reviewer's judgement is clouded by his late grandparents' wartime lives in German occupied the Netherlands.

Overall, Armies-in-retreat plants the seeds for understanding how ground (and cyber) forces react to adverse battlefield conditions. Also, that is where the student of military history finds a breadth of topics useful for reference purposes or the traditional cover-to-cover approach to reading books.

References

[1]

https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/Research and Books/2023/ArmiesRetrt-HeckMills-2023.pdf

[2]

[3]

Armies in Retreat Chaos, Cohesion, and Consequences

[United States] Army University Press, 2023

Page 207

(Page numbers correspond to the PDF version of Armies in Retreat).

[4]

ibid, 215

*

See Adam Tooze's The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy

https://www.amazon.com.au/Wages-Destruction-Adam-Tooze/dp/0143113208

Thanks for reading The Lens of History! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

A Virginia class submarine in service with the United States Navy.

A bushmaster after an IED strike in Afghanistan.

Thanks for reading The Lens of History! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

This article is part two of a series covering the Bushmaster vehicles' odyssey during the Australian Army's involvement in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. Also, part one is available to the reader who is new to this topic. [1]

The Bushmaster's versatility was apparent to soldiers serving in Iraq. [2] The Bushmaster's climate control system wasn't a luxury but permitted soldiers laden with body armour to recuperate from the heat and return to their tasks. Also, in a tractor-type role, Bushmasters towed eight-ton trailers with ease. [3]

But the Bushmaster's V-shaped hull/IED protection shined in Iraq and Afghanistan, and roadside bombs killed no Australian soldiers inside those vehicles. [3] Moreover, comparatively, American and British forces employed "soft-skinned" vehicles during the initial phases of the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts. [4] So, in one instance, in southern Iraq, thirty-seven British soldiers were killed in action, operating in vulnerable "snatch" Land Rovers. [5] Also, U.S. troops resorted to improvised "Hillbilly Armour" in that country. [6]

Yet the Bushmaster's ongoing success is owed to matters away from the battlefields. First, a feedback loop encompassing an Australian contribution to the U.S. and UK led efforts to counter the mounting IED threat. [7]. Still, the insurgent IED makers came close to winning the innovation race, yet the coalition developed countermeasures.[8]

Moreover, data collected from blast sites in Afghanistan was fed into a database and computer modelling. [9] Engineers and scientists assessed that info, and blast testing confirmed the results. Bushmaster vehicles under production and in theatre are modified to meet the emerging threats. [10]

Second, Australia discovered the value of controlling the Bushmaster variants under construction. For instance, if an ambulance or command and control variants are required, there are no obstacles to obtaining those vehicles. [11] Also, how Australia owned the Bushmaster's intellectual property and possessed the related engineering skills base was a novelty. [12]

In a strange coincidence, Bushmasters were ideal for operating in Iraq and Afghanistan's desert environments. Moreover, an infantry section employed Bushmaster's equipment storage capacity to expand the number of daily tasks undertaken by the soldiers. Also, planners used the Bushmaster's off-road capabilities to avoid the predictable and IED-infested routes. Unfortunately, the heavier British Mastiffs and U.S. Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles were more road-bound. [13]

The Bushmaster was the ugly duckling turned into a swan. The initial scepticism and perceptions that dogged that vehicle died slowly in the face of the Australian Army's experiences with IEDs across post 9-11 wars in 2005 – 6. [14] So the army's ability to manoeuvrer with fewer causalities compared to their coalition counterparts was enabled by the Bushmaster odyssey.

References

[1]

https://thelensofhistory.substack.com/p/the-bushmaster-odyssey-part-one?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2

[2]

https://ad-aspi.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/2019-12/The%20Bushmaster_from%20concept%20to%20combat.pdf?VersionId=QDYuS1qI3O4nSPaZ7NBfrSlK6gLVpyz1 (PDF download)

Brendan Nicholson The Bushmaster: From concept to combat (The Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited, 2019), Page 58

[3]

Ibid, 57

[4]

Ibid, 27

[5]

Ibid, 57

https://www.eliteukforces.info/uksf-gear/land-rover/

[6]

https://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=312959&page=1

[7]

Brendan Nicholson The Bushmaster: From concept to combat (The Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited, 2019), Page 63 – 64.

[8]

Ibid 66

[9]

Ibid 88

[10]

Ibid, 88 – 89

Ibid, 92

[11]

Ibid

[12]

Ibid, 114

[13]

Ibid, 124

Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles:

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/mrap.htm

Mastiff vehicles:

https://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/protected-patrol-vehicles/

[14]

Brendan Nicholson The Bushmaster: From concept to combat (The Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited, 2019), Page 92

Thanks for reading The Lens of History! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Dr Kristen Alexander stops by to discuss her new book, The Australian Airmen of Stalag Luft III. Also, Bella, the cat, makes an appearance. 

Note to the listener: The RAAF documentation and film referred to during that discussion are Air Publication 1548 and Interrogation of Prisoners.

Thanks for reading The Lens of History! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

First, Simon highlights successive governments permitting Treasury's long-standing negative impact on defence spending/ investing in the New Zealand Defence Force's capabilities. Also, the New Zealand Defence Force's handicaps, including tiny size and logistics/sustainability, ensure a two-day limit on combat operations. [3]

Second, Heather argues elements are absent from the national security puzzle. So the requirement to break down the silos among government agencies is non-existent. Yet the same applies to appointing an interdepended National Security Advisor to the government. [4]

However, Defence Minster Andrew Little's deliberate and careful wording concerning New Zealand's strategic environment stands out in Heather's commentary [5] and independently to this author. Little left no wriggle room concerning New Zealand's strategic situation is no longer a bed of roses (my wording).

Helen Clark, the former New Zealand Prime Minster's social media meltdown/reaction to New Zealand's defence and foreign policies reflects extremely poorly on her. Unfortunately, Clark's response to New Zealand likely joining Aukus Pillar Two doesn't mirror Kiwis debating national security issues. [6]

Also, Helen Clark, the former New Zealand Prime Minster, blocks people on X/Twitter who disagree with her politically.

My argument: Little's wording contains nuisances easily overlooked by the reader. An introduction to Kiwi's indirect nature might be helpful for the international reader's benefit. For instance, and concerning unrelated matters, "She isn't exactly ugly" is typical "Kiwi Speak" for "She is hot!" So Little's comments aren't a kick in the guts but the equivalent of getting knocked out by Mike Tyson.

The Defence Policy and Strategy Statement 2023 authors embrace the Indo- Pacific concept. [7] Yet to demonstrate the Indo-Pacific fallacy, that geographical concept lumps the Pacific and Indian oceans with India and Japan in the same basket. In a single instance, India and Japan aren't culturally and linguistically identical.

Granted, geographical boundaries in our lexicons are enviable and occasionally worthwhile. But extending those informal borders to the extent of the Indo- Pacific robs New Zealand of the opportunity further our understanding of areas critical to our economic and defence interests.

On balance, Little and Christ Hipkins' government deserve credit for the correct diagnosis concerning New Zealand's strategic environment. But the absence of treatment (rebuilding the New Zealand Defence Force's depleted personnel numbers [8]and delayed renewals of existing capabilities and ignoring broader national security issues) for the illness remains deeply disturbing.

References

[1]

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/roadmap-for-future-of-defence-and-national-security-released

Defence Policy and Strategy Statement 2023

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2023-08/Defence%20Policy%20Strategy%20Statement%202023.PDF (PDF Download)

Future Force Design Principles 2023

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2023-08/Future%20Force%20Design%20Principles%202023.PDF (PDF download)

National Security Strategy, Secure Together

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2023-08/National%20Security%20Strategy%2C%20Secure%20Together%20-%20To%20Tatou%20Korowai%20Manaaki.pdf (PDF download)

* I acknowledge the ties between New Zealand's defence and foreign policies. But New Zealand likely joining Aukus Pillar 2 falls beyond the scope of this article. 

[2]

Simon Ewing-Jarvie:

https://twitter.com/UnclasKiwi

Heather Roy:

https://twitter.com/HeatherRoyNZ

[3]

https://www.patreon.com/posts/87333122

[4]

https://onesock.nz/2023/08/09/national-security-strategy-glass-half-full-or-half-empty/

[5]

ibid

[6]

https://www.newsroom.co.nz/ideasroom/nz-needs-a-debate-not-tweets-on-foreign-policy

[7]

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2023-08/Defence%20Policy%20Strategy%20Statement%202023.PDF (PDF download)

P12

[8]

https://unclas.wordpress.com/2022/03/02/high-price-for-nzdf-op-protect/

Thanks for reading The Lens of History! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Thanks for reading The Lens of History! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

This article will briefly examine the Bushmaster vehicle's odyssey from the outset until the vehicle's initial overseas deployments. 

The Bushmaster [2] is an IED/landmine-resistant troop carrier capable of transporting nine personnel plus a driver. Bushmasters have a range of 800km and storage for three days of supplies and equipment. Also, the Bushmaster's V-shaped hull is designed to deflect blasts away from the occupants.

Yet the Bushmaster's origins are found in the Defend Australia doctrine. [3] Defending Northern Australia against lightly equipped forces required self-supporting land forces capable of travelling across a vast, underdeveloped and hostile terrain. So replacing the Army's Vietnam-era M113A1 armoured personnel carriers with a vehicle meeting those capabilities was initiated. [4]  

But the Australian Army's experiences with the landmine threat in Namibia and Cambodia shaped the Bushmaster's design. Australian forces employed South African mine-resistant vehicles. [5] Specifically, those troop transports contained V-shaped hulls to counter mine blasts.

Moreover, Lieutenant General John Sanderson, the commander of the UN Transitional Authority [6] [Cambodia], witnessed the impact of mines on his force's manoeuvrer capabilities. So, the horrors generated by that threat sapped his force's morale and deterred troops from leaving their bases. Yet deploying the mine-proof vehicles empowered soldiers to travel beyond the wire. [7]

Unsurprisingly, Sanderson advocated for the Australian Army to acquire armoured troop carriers. [8] But the marriage between the Bushmaster concept and that capability wasn't obvious to observers. The Bushmaster was tarred by association with the unpopular, unreal and underfunded Defend Australia policy. [9] 

The Bushmaster survived development hell: Contractual issues, lousy quality control, cost overruns, and underestimating the complexity of the design haunted the Bushmaster project. A reduction in the number of vehicles from Thales, the manufacturer, played a role in ensuring the project avoided extinction. [10]

The Iraq and Afghanistan IED-rich environments presented an immediate issue for Australian military planners. The upgraded armoured personnel carriers and Australian Light Armoured Vehicle [11] lacked protection against the predominant roadside bomb threats. So the risk of an undeployable army emerged in the post 9-11 era.

In May 2005, Operational necessity dictated the first ten Bushmasters deployed with Australian forces to Iraq. In August of that year, Bushmasters were dispatched to special forces operating in Afghanistan. [13] But Bushmasters remained an unknown quality, so the Army worked with Thales to ensure spare parts supply. [14]

References

[1]

https://www.findmypast.com/articles/anzac-day-stories/resources-military-history-articles/military-history-origin-of-the-term-digger

[2]

https://www.army.gov.au/our-work/equipment-uniforms/equipment/vehicles/bushmaster

[3]

https://www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-08/wpaper1987.pdf (PDF download)

Page 19

The page number for the 1987 Australian Defence White Paper corresponds to the PDF version.

[4]

https://ad-aspi.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/2019-12/The%20Bushmaster_from%20concept%20to%20combat.pdf?VersionId=QDYuS1qI3O4nSPaZ7NBfrSlK6gLVpyz1 (PDF download)

Brendan Nicholson The Bushmaster: From concept to combat (The Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited, 2019), page 9

[5] Ibid, 21 – 25

Australian troops in a Casspir armoured personnel carrier:

https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C268757

[6]

For more on the UN Transitional Authority in Cambodia:

https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/mission/past/untacbackgr1.html

[7]

Brendan Nicholson The Bushmaster: From concept to combat (The Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited, 2019), page 24

[8] Ibid, 25

[9] Ibid, 11

[10] Ibid, 31 – 40 

[11]

https://www.army.gov.au/our-work/equipment-uniforms/equipment/vehicles/australian-light-armoured-vehicle

[12]

Brendan Nicholson The Bushmaster: From concept to combat (The Australian Strategic Policy Institute Limited, 2019), page 50 

Ibid p52

[13] Ibid p52

[14] Ibid p51

Thanks for reading The Lens of History! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.