DAVID DAVIS: Which side is Labour on - the troops who defended this nation in Northern Ireland, or those who tried to destroy it?
British troops went to Northern Ireland to save lives. Today, prosecutors pursue them for doing just that.
To understand how we reached this appalling state of affairs, we must return to the beginning.
In 1969 the British Army deployed to Northern Ireland not as an occupying force but as a peacekeeping one. Their mission was to shield the Catholic community from loyalist mobs amid spiralling sectarian violence.
The IRA and their supporters are now trying to cynically rewrite that basic truth.
The early years of the Troubles did not feature unrest, but murder. It was Paramilitary killings, as opposed to arrests, which defined the conflict: take the Warrenpoint ambush in 1979, where 18 British soldiers were killed and over 20 more were wounded by IRA bombs.
But the IRA's campaign was not just against soldiers: its terrorists slaughtered innocent civilians, too. In Omagh in 1998, a bomb planted by the so-called Real IRA killed 29 and injured 200. These were not military operations. They were cowardly attacks on the defenceless.
And yet, astonishingly, those who perpetrated such atrocities now recast themselves as victims. The IRA peddles a grotesque inversion of the truth, downplaying the scale of its crimes, while promoting a narrative of 'state abuses' designed to paint terrorists as martyrs and soldiers as villains.
The Troubles killed more than 3,500 people, and injured more than 50,000. Republican and Loyalist paramilitaries caused roughly 90 per cent of the deaths.
In stark contrast, British soldiers operated under the strict constraints of Operation Banner, bound by the 'yellow card' rules of engagement, which required restraint, warnings and proportionality.
Time and time again, we see examples of the British military displaying courageous restraint in their confrontations with the IRA. One such case is that of Captain Herbert Westmacott, an SAS officer who was killed in an IRA ambush.
Having witnessed their commanding officer brutally gunned down, his patrol entered the house from which the terrorist had fired the shots that killed him – not to exact revenge, but to detain the gunman.
These troops chose justice over vengeance. Meanwhile, 1,400 soldiers and police officers died, while the Army killed only 300 IRA terrorists: a stark indicator of the lethal, asymmetric war they faced. Our troops served with discipline and honour in near-impossible conditions.
And the facts bear this out: more Catholics were killed by the IRA than by any other group during the Troubles. So much for their claims to be liberators.
Which brings me to the Clonoe incident, now the subject of a politically loaded inquest.
Readers may already be aware of some of the facts. In February 1992, Special Branch learnt that an IRA team, armed with a Soviet DShK ('Dushka') heavy machine gun, would attack the Coalisland police station.
The intelligence indicated that the attack would be mounted from the Clonoe chapel car park, so the SAS commander's plan was to close in on the IRA operatives and arrest them there as they mounted the heavy machine gun on to their stolen lorry.
At 7.40pm on that dark February night, 12 members of the SAS were in position on the boundary of the car park, behind the hedgerow.
However, the intelligence briefing was wrong. Instead, at around 10.40pm, the DShK was used to attack the Coalisland police station. Sixty rounds were fired at close range from the DShK. The attackers' intent was clear: to kill police officers.
The gunfire could clearly be heard, and the tracer bullets were observed by the SAS patrol.
After a minute or two, the soldiers heard another burst of gunfire. They did not know that this was in fact IRA terrorists firing their guns in the air as a tribute to Tony Doris, another IRA man who had been killed in a firefight the previous year. For all they and their commander knew, hiding behind their hedge, the murder gang were engaging other soldiers or other policemen.
Within a minute, the lorry appeared out of the darkness, driven at breakneck speed, lurching around corners and with its engine screaming in too low a gear.
As it drove into the car park, headlights illuminated the SAS position behind the hedgerow. At that point, the soldiers did not know whether they had been spotted. Fearing they were about to be attacked, the soldiers stood up, advanced on the occupants of the lorry and the three other vehicles in the car park, and opened fire.
Four IRA members were shot dead, one was wounded, arrested at the scene and, notably, given first aid by the soldiers, while others fled in the three cars.
Like all counter-terrorism actions at the time, the operation was reviewed by the Director of Public Prosecutions and all soldiers involved were found to have behaved entirely properly.
Now we fast forward to February 2025, when Mr Justice Michael Humphreys ruled that the use of lethal force by the SAS in this incident was unlawful. The ruling is demonstrably wrong and ignores the facts.
I find it hard to imagine a more clear-cut situation that would allow firing without challenge.
Clonoe is just one incident in which elderly veterans are being persecuted, there will be many more.
Terrorists killed 722 British soldiers during the Troubles. Not one of those murders has led to a retrospective inquest, let alone a prosecution. But today, we witness a legal crusade against the men who risked everything in the service of peace. This is not justice. While the killers walk free, authorities hound the men who stopped them, like criminals.
The Legacy Act, which created a new body known as the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR) to take over all Troubles-era cases, was designed to put an end to this travesty.
But the Government's dithering response has handed the initiative back to those who spent decades glorifying violence.
Labour must decide whose side it is on: the defenders of this nation, or those who tried to destroy it?
Our veterans, many now in their seventies, deserve peace in retirement, not a knock on the door and questions about a firefight in a chapel car park three decades ago, in which they were operating well within the law.
Brave soldiers who served their country with honour, heroism and skill during the Troubles now have the Sword of Damocles hanging over them.
I have repeatedly asked the Government to end this shameful campaign of retrospective justice. I have received no meaningful answer.
That is why I support the petition calling for an end to these prosecutions – and the Mail's important new campaign, Stop the SAS Betrayal, to seek new legal safeguards for our troops. The petition has now passed 100,000 signatures, triggering a debate in Parliament. But that is just the start.
This is not just massively important to our veterans. If this rewriting of history succeeds, this weapon of lawfare can be used against soldiers in any future conflict, destroying the efficacy of our troops when we need them most.
The Rt Hon Sir David Davis is MP for Goole and Pocklington.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
35 minutes ago
- Times
Times letters: Fixing the amateur way Britain is governed
Write to letters@ Sir, Munira Mirza's assessment of where we are going wrong appears spot on, and her scathing criticism of our politicians also rings true ('Here's how we can fix the way Britain is run', Jun 26). One hopes that the efforts of her Fix Britain group will bear fruit. However, given that, as she says, there is no shortage of sound input from think tanks, the issue would seem to have less to do with lack of sound advice than an unwillingness to act on it by those who govern us. As to her closing statement about people's reluctance to vote for a political party unless it can tell them exactly how it will fix Britain, the electorate appears to be showing no reluctance whatsoever. If opinion polls are to be believed, Reform is surging ahead — with only the merest nod to the 'how' and no nod at all as to the means by which Britain might be BrowneDatchet, Berks Sir, Munira Mirza is unsparing in her critique of career politicians, whom she characterises as ignorant of their subject and the machinery of government, and as rabbits caught in headlights or consummate bluffers, seeking celebrity but lacking competence. Her proposition, however, is another think tank, a sector with which, as she points out, we are richly blessed. But the difficulty with think tanks is that the thinkers in them have no responsibility for the ideas they propose. They too seek celebrity, their job titles often being 'fellow' or some other quasi-academic handle. Perhaps she could instead found a school for politicians to teach them the machinery of government, and she and the other nine members of Fix Britain's advisory board could take their expertise properly into politics by standing for election as BrockFowlmere, Cambs Sir, Many of us would endorse Munira Mirza's observation that 'something is fundamentally broken about Britain and the way we are run', and applaud the ambition of Fix Britain to 'prepare a prospectus for government' by putting 'the right plan' in place. But the right plan will make little difference if our political system itself remains unreformed, for it is within that system that the fundamental weaknesses of government in the UK exist. These include the lack of professional competence; the inability to create, take and implement strategic decisions in a timely manner; the excessively confrontational nature of party politics; the lack of a genuinely democratic mandate; and the pandering of political parties to the whims of today's voters rather than the needs of future generations. Without profound and coherent reform of our political system I fear that any plans made by Fix Britain will fall on stony General APN CurrieWinchester Sir, Munira Mirza says the measure of success for her Fix Britain group will be 'a future in which no party stands for election without publishing a detailed and credible programme for government'. Yet within a short time of coming to power, any government will face issues entirely unforeseen during the programme-planning stage — Covid-19, the war in Ukraine, the energy crisis, Israel-Gaza etc — that will render its detailed and credible programme obsolete. As Mike Tyson said: 'Everyone has a plan until I punch them in the mouth.'Lucian CampLondon NW1 Sir, Emily Fabricius says that 'grateful patients' are surely the biggest reward for doctors (letter, Jun 26). As a consultant diagnostic histopathologist in NHS labs for 39 years, diagnosing 5,000 patients' diseases/pathology each year, I received a total of two letters from grateful patients. Both were consultant colleagues. My motivation was nevertheless for patient welfare, even though their gratitude may not have been explicit. Diagnosticians are the hidden and unrecognised back-room doctors but are nevertheless John McCarthyRet'd consultant pathologist, Newcastle upon Tyne Sir, I couldn't agree more with Phillip Alderman about the importance of continuity of care (letter, Jun 25). Training to be a doctor, of whichever chosen speciality, is an apprenticeship — one in which the value of watching, absorbing, asking questions and being supervised by senior members of the 'team' should not be underestimated. The sense of belonging this brings, together with ownership of the patient and their journey, has been lost in the change to a shift pattern with reduced working hours and therefore the exposure to pearls of wisdom that you cannot glean from a book. The issue of continuous 'handovers' occurs not only in a hospital setting but also in GP practice, where almost exclusive part-time working contributes to loss of information and the inevitable Siobhan CarrollConsultant anaesthetist, Guildford Sir, Phillip Alderman correctly links continuity of medical care with patient safety. Two systematic reviews have found that continuity is associated with lower patient mortality. Given the usual emphasis on patient safety, the policy blindspot on continuity is Sir Denis Pereira GrayFormer chairman, Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; Exeter Sir, As a relative, friend and former nurse I have had the great privilege of sitting with people of many ages who are dying. Just being able to alleviate some of their distress and discomfort; holding their hand, moistening their lips and wiping their forehead. Praying, if it helps them, reading and softly playing their favourite music, remembering that hearing is the last sensation before consciousness is lost. And frequently reminding them how loved they are by everyone. That is my interpretation of assisted dying. Of course, this scenario is not always possible but I believe that, above all, love must be the dominant factor when you are comforting someone who is WickhamDorking, Surrey Sir, Dr MWM Upton speaks of the palliative doses of morphine that are given when a patient is in great distress towards the end of their life (letter, Jun 24). My mother and father, and recently my husband, were allowed to die in this way. The kindness and mercy of such a palliation were profoundly helpful to them, and to me, as I sat with them at the end of their CoshBournemouth Sir, Wes Streeting says there is no 'budget' for setting up an assisted dying service in a constricted NHS (news, Jun 26). He should surely balance against this cost the savings gained in not having to treat those patients who opt for assisted dying during the final six months of a terminal GrayIffley, Oxon Sir, I agree with all of Alice Thomson's excellent article (Jun 25; letters, Jun 26) save for its headline 'Too many women see childbirth as traumatic'. This should have read: 'Childbirth is too traumatic for too many women.' The young women of my daughter's cohort were all traumatised by their birthing experiences, none being straightforward or without significant, unplanned interventions. Several have cited it as their reason for adopting a 'one-child' policy — devastating for an already declining birthrate and an indictment of our maternity services. Wes Streeting should roll his sleeves up and sort this SlaterStowmarket, Suffolk Sir, Edward Lucas is right to highlight the cowardice of Nato ('Nato's Potemkin summit sends lethal signals', Jun 26). At a time when Ukraine needs to feel the support of Nato, the Nato summit was an appeasement of a maverick and unpredictable US president. It should have been a summit in which European nations reassured Ukraine of their commitment. At a time when civilian targets are being increasingly attacked in Ukraine, air support is essential. The attack on Dnipro train station on Tuesday was only a success because local units had run out of air defence missiles. Talk of increased Nato defence spending in the future is of no comfort here. I hope we don't live to regret Nato's EdwardsZhytomyr, Ukraine Sir, I beg to differ with Georgi Holley about Glastonbury festival (letter, Jun 24). I live within a short walk of Worthy Farm and find the disruption minimal. Yes, we have a proliferation of pop-up camping sites but only for two weeks before the festival. Our lanes 'designed for horses and traps' are regularly visited by overlarge lorries, so no change there. Most of the festival is on-site and provides a gloriously memorable week for those who attend. The atmosphere is one to treasure and it is a safe environment for young people to celebrate the end of their exams. My husband and I have volunteered there and regularly benefit from the free Sunday ticket given to locals. My children and grandchildren (ranging in age from 3 to 50) will join us this year and there will be something for all of us. I feel privileged to live in this glorious area and am glad to share it with others. Within a fortnight, all vestiges will have disappeared and we can return to our 'normally sleepy hollows'.Linda DaviesNorth Wootton, Somerset Sir, I take issue with Alan Ward's suggestion that 'there are many more for whom a life on benefits is always going to be preferable to getting out of bed every morning to go to a job that is likely to be thankless, tedious and not even financially beneficial' (letter, Jun 26). In my experience of being forced on to benefits because work was not available — or because men aged over 50 were not wanted — I found few who enjoyed the experience. Benefits are too low to 'live on', and those seeking work (whether fit or otherwise) wish for routine, company and the sense of worth that work gives, even when it is badly paid. It is just not possible to live on benefits. Many of us now struggle to survive on a pension, so how can anyone survive on benefits, which pay much less? If Mr Ward knows those who can do it there are many who would like to learn from HerriottBraintree, Essex Sir, Further to the letters on weight-loss drugs (Jun 26), I was in a school class with 32 other boys and I never knew anyone who was overweight. Of course, we had the perfect stimulus to avoid being overweight: it was called rationing. It worked, and as far as I know no one died from it. Maybe the government should start issuing ration books SharpScarborough, N Yorks Sir, My Oxford interviewers asked me to define a gentleman (letters, Jun 23 to 26). Frantically I cited Chaucer's Knight ('a verray, parfit gentil knyght') and stepping out of a lift to expel wind. It proved insufficiently intellectual for a scholarship but did sneak me in as a BrooksSutton Coldfield, W Midlands Sir, My late father, a dyed-in-the-wool Yorkshireman, once stated that a gentleman would always hold the door open for his wife when she brought the coal JordanTimperley, Cheshire Write to letters@
The Guardian
44 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Members of British Jewish body suspended after criticising Israel to launch appeal
Thirty-six elected representatives to the UK's largest Jewish organisation are to appeal against disciplinary action taken against them after they criticised the Israeli government's operations in Gaza, and have said they remain 'deeply concerned' about the war. The Board of Deputies of British Jews announced on Tuesday that five of the group would be suspended for two years and 31 would be reprimanded for breaching its code of conduct after a two-month investigation. In a statement released on Thursday, the group said they would appeal after taking legal advice. They 'remain deeply concerned about the remaining hostages, the appalling humanitarian crisis and ongoing war in Gaza and the further deteriorating situation in the West Bank', they said. The five deputies who gave media interviews about an open letter that was published by the FT in April had received 'the enhanced punishment of effective expulsion from the board' as they were suspended for the remainder of their terms of office, the statement said. It was 'the biggest mass disciplinary action in the board's history, with over one in 10 elected board members disciplined', it added. The open letter caused a furore among British Jews amid growing divisions over the war and distress at the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza. It said that 'Israel's soul [was] being ripped out' by military action that renewed in March, and that the signatories could no longer 'turn a blind eye or remain silent' on the issue. Statements issued by the Board of Deputies since the war began in response to atrocities committed by Hamas on 7 October 2023 have been broadly supportive of the Israeli government's actions. The board launched an investigation after receiving complaints from other members. It stressed that it welcomed a diversity of opinions, debate and free speech but that its code of conduct required deputies not to misrepresent the position of the board and not to bring the institution into disrepute. The reprimanded group's statement said they stood 'in solidarity with the 70% of Israelis that consistently say they want an immediate end to the war in Gaza, which is the perceived price for the return of all the hostages'. Since writing the open letter, a lack of food and aid had 'engineered conditions of scarcity, which has seen hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of Palestinians being killed week after week in the desperate scramble for survival that has been created'. There was 'no justification for the continuing misery and destruction being wrought on Gazan civilians'. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion Harriett Goldenberg, one of those suspended, said: 'So many Jews in the UK agreed with our sadly groundbreaking letter. We were inundated with thanks from those who said we represented them, and that we were their voice. It is tragic that voice is still needed.' Philip Goldenberg, another suspended deputy, said the board's executive was 'effectively expelling those who spoke inconvenient truth unto power. This is utterly contrary to the Jewish tradition that robust debate is an essential part of a civilised life, and feels more like Putin's Russia.'
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
'It'll push disabled people into poverty': Labour's controversial welfare bill
Labour has been in turmoil over the most controversial piece of legislation of Keir Starmer's premiership: a major overhaul of the benefits system. The government says the welfare bill is out of control – largely because of the huge rise in people claiming personal independence payments (Pip). More than 120 Labour MPs were poised to rebel, and yesterday Starmer was promising to make concessions. But for the 3.7 million people who rely on Pip to pay the extra costs associated with having a disability, it has been an incredibly worrying time, says the Guardian columnist Frances Ryan. Pip is essential for the extra costs incurred by disabled people, she says. 'It's about being able to afford to pay the care fees so that you can wash your hair. It's about having enough money to charge your electric wheelchair so you're not housebound.' She says the 'toxic' rhetoric around disability that the political debate inspires is also hugely damaging. Ryan has just written a book, Who Wants Normal? The Disabled Girls' Guide to Life, and has spoken to 70 well-known women living with a disability. In her interviews, one thing came across clearly: the message given to disabled people by society is that they do not have a right to be included, whether that is at school, in the workplace or at university. And, she says, the government's 'quick fix' attitude to reducing the benefits bill, rather than looking at the barriers people with disability face while trying to work, is part of the problem.
