Exactly 200 years ago a notorious English adulterer died. From a weedy boy he had grown to a 5ft 4inch high adult who was seasick whenever he sailed. He had openly set up home with his mistress and even took the cuckolded husband on their trips to Wales. Despite losing an arm and the sight in one eye he led a naval force chasing enemy fleets across the Atlantic from Europe to the West Indies and back to southern Spain. Despite having fewer ships with about half the guns of the opposing fleet, his final battle went down as one of the major naval victories in British history and arguably its influence even extends to modern shipping laws.
I am of course speaking of Admiral Lord Nelson. The defeat of the combined French and Spanish fleets at Cape Trafalgar, just outside Cadiz put paid to any plans Napoleon had to invade Britain. At the end of the battle virtually all the usable battleships in the French and Spanish navies had been destroyed or captured. Two centuries later warships from the three nations jointly marked the anniversary by releasing wreaths on the waters that saw the deaths of so many brave sailors. It’s worth examining how the battle progressed and the victory was achieved because there are lessons that can be drawn for today in Iraq.
One of the greatest assets Nelson had was the skill of his seamen. One the British ships, each cannon could be reloaded in about 90 seconds. Huge training efforts had gone into this. In contrast the French and Spanish gunners took about three times longer and they were well aware of this difference. Despite this they took their ships and formed a line of battle. In those days the two fleets would line up opposite each other and fire broadsides at the opposition. It would have taken a very lucky shot to get inside the opposition’s ship through the open gun ports but as each ball slammed into the side of the wooden hulled ships, deadly sprays of splinters would be thrown from the inside of the ship’s wall.
Nelson had developed a means of extending the range of his guns by skimming the cannonballs over the sea so they bounced like a stone thrown at a low angle. That same technique was later used by Barnes Wallace in WWII to produce the famous “Dambuster” bouncing bombs. Combined with the greater firing rate, this would have inevitably meant that Nelson’s fleet would have been victorious in a conventional battle. Nelson’s plan was not conventional. Instead of firing broadsides he took his fleet in lines straight at the opposition. Of course that meant that they were unable to fire their guns and had to take the incoming fire from the French and Spanish. During their painfully slow progress towards the French fleet, Nelson refused to cover his easily identifiable uniform with a greatcoat. Instead he led his men (and women) into battle in open view to inspire them. He understood that setting this example inspired the greatness he saw nascent in everyone and inspired in many. It was to be his downfall as he became a target for French snipers lodged in the sails of their ships (both sides used this)
Taken to a makeshift hospital on the deck below the lowest gun deck, he got reports of the progress of the battle from the ship’s captain Hardy. Just as he had planned, the British ships opened fire as they passed the French and Spanish. This sent the broadsides from both sides of the ships into the opposition. The weakest points of these great battleships was the expanse of glass and light woodwork at the stern. Instead of hitting the sides, the British cannonballs blasted through the meagre protection and into the main decks of the French and Spanish ships. The “shock and awe” of this tactic cause most of them to become disabled or surrender.
If the Americans could take the lesson of overwhelming and aweful firepower from Trafalgar, there were also lessons for the Iraqis. Nelson identified the weakest aspect of his opponents’ forces. He allowed the apparently devastating fire to be rained on his ships until he could attack the weak point. The Iraqis simply allowed the invasion to progress with little opposition. They knew they could not out gun the Allies’ land forces and had lost control of the air. Instead they organised a guerrilla warfare hitting the opposition at its weakest point – the continuing deaths of smallish numbers of their enemy every day until public opinion would make withdrawal inevitable and a counter-coup could replace the old regime.
To a large extent you could even argue that Saddam is using the example of sacrifice epitomised by Nelson (and also figures from Islamic history). For him, the fight is now to establish himself as a great fighter who stood up to the Americans who were acting on behalf of the Israelis. The US is already using counter propaganda. Others have recently pointed out that the story of him being captured in an underground foxhole may be a fabrication and that he was caught after a small arms fight in a farm building.
Changing the “facts” to suit the interests of one side is of course not new to us in Iraq. The “heroic rescue of Sgt Jessica” is probably only the best known. Yet the practice goes back to Nelson’s death. His reported last words were not “Kiss me Hardy” although even those were sanitised to the fake “Kismet” to protect the innocent from the (again erroneously deducted) suggestion of homosexuality in the correct version. Instead, as befits any British hero, he expired repeating “Thank God I have done my duty” which reflects his famous signal at the start of the battle “England expects that every man will do his duty”. Except he did not say that. Contemporary documents have revealed that he uttered the far more human “Drink, drink. Fan, fan. Rub, rub”, a plea to help alleviate the pain he was experiencing. Incidentally, the signal was originally to read “Nelson confides (i.e. is confident) that….” Someone pointed out that it would be better to use “England” – despite a third of his force coming from Scotland. The officer in charge of the signals had “expects” in the code book but not “confides” so the former was substituted. Getting clear signals to your forces is just as important today when much of the “blue on blue” deaths have resulted from incomplete or inaccurate information.
The more astute among you may realise that Nelson was greatly loved by his men for his courage in setting an example by leading his men into close quarters battles. It is a tradition that imbues UK forces to this day. Both Prince Harry and now Prince William have insisted that they be allowed to go into battle as they start their officer training. They will not ask the soldiers they command to go into danger they are not prepared to face. (It must be said that William is unlikely to be allowed to do so in practice). It does however make a refreshing change that a future head of the armed forces is prepared to ask he be treated equally – unlike the Commander in Chief of another country who explicitly stated he was not prepared to serve his country abroad.
