Scan barcode
A review by adrianhon
The Changing of the Guard: the British Army since 9/11 by Simon Akam
4.0
An extraordinarily well-researched book investigating the deep-seated failures of the British Army in Iraq and Afghanistan, from the ground all the way up to the most senior officers. Akam has an impressive grasp of the military and despite his obvious views, goes out of his way to be fair to all perspectives.
Given the utter failure of the war in Afghanistan, one might assume the British public would have realised the limitations and problems of the army, and Akam's book would not be necessary. However, the continued calls from both the left and right wing that we should "go back in" suggests that people still incorrectly think the British Army can do... anything meaningful at all in terms of nation-building. So this really is an essential read and, at the very least, demonstrates why the US could not give a single shit what the UK thinks with regards to any military endeavour whatsoever.
Unfortunately, there are a few stylistic issues with this book that I suspect will limit its reach. Akam's insistence on proving his military bona fides is understandable, but becomes utterly exhausting to general audiences after you've read the 500th acronym. His use of the present tense throughout is propulsive, but also wearying after a while – especially when combined with his elongated garden path sentences (and chapters, really). I didn't quite get his obsession with the orientation of buildings relative to each other, either.
More seriously, Akam pulls his punches in terms of the most senior military staff. Yes, he thinks they should have been fired or made to resign – but he never quite spells out why, unlike the highly detailed treatment he gives to more junior figures. Maybe I skipped over it, but I would have appreciated a really detailed reckoning for people like Jock Stirrup.
Finally, the highly personal introduction and conclusion felt like it came from a different book. It wasn't bad per se, but it seemed strange when put alongside the more dispassionate bulk of the book. His ending bit about his school teacher, who he pronounces to be a "good man", is oddly deflating – hasn't the entire book taught us that this is not about whether men are good or not? Even if you disagree, it's a strange moment to introduce the idea.
Despite my nitpicks – and they really are nitpicks – this is an impressive book.
Given the utter failure of the war in Afghanistan, one might assume the British public would have realised the limitations and problems of the army, and Akam's book would not be necessary. However, the continued calls from both the left and right wing that we should "go back in" suggests that people still incorrectly think the British Army can do... anything meaningful at all in terms of nation-building. So this really is an essential read and, at the very least, demonstrates why the US could not give a single shit what the UK thinks with regards to any military endeavour whatsoever.
Unfortunately, there are a few stylistic issues with this book that I suspect will limit its reach. Akam's insistence on proving his military bona fides is understandable, but becomes utterly exhausting to general audiences after you've read the 500th acronym. His use of the present tense throughout is propulsive, but also wearying after a while – especially when combined with his elongated garden path sentences (and chapters, really). I didn't quite get his obsession with the orientation of buildings relative to each other, either.
More seriously, Akam pulls his punches in terms of the most senior military staff. Yes, he thinks they should have been fired or made to resign – but he never quite spells out why, unlike the highly detailed treatment he gives to more junior figures. Maybe I skipped over it, but I would have appreciated a really detailed reckoning for people like Jock Stirrup.
Finally, the highly personal introduction and conclusion felt like it came from a different book. It wasn't bad per se, but it seemed strange when put alongside the more dispassionate bulk of the book. His ending bit about his school teacher, who he pronounces to be a "good man", is oddly deflating – hasn't the entire book taught us that this is not about whether men are good or not? Even if you disagree, it's a strange moment to introduce the idea.
Despite my nitpicks – and they really are nitpicks – this is an impressive book.