Ex-SAS officer Simon Mann who was father of Prince Harry's 'real best man' and led failed African 'Wonga Coup' has died 'while exercising' aged 72
Simon Mann, the colourful mercenary and ex-SAS officer jailed for leading the so-called Wonga Coup involving Sir Mark Thatcher in central Africa 20 years ago has died, MailOnline can reveal.
Old Etonian Mann, who also served in the Scots Guards after Sandhurst, was one of a group of 70 mercenaries arrested in Zimbabwe for attempting to stage a coup in oil-rich Equatorial Guinea in 2004.
Businessman Sir Mark, son of former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, was later arrested in South Africa and, like Mann, admitted a part in the coup attempt.
It is believed that multi-millionaire and father-of-seven Mann was exercising in the gym when he died this week, aged 72.
Mann's polo-playing son Jack, by his first marriage, was previously named as Prince Harry 's 'real best man'.
Mann was born into a life of privilege and had a distinguished military career before his entanglement in the coup.
His father George captained the England cricket team in the 1940s and was an heir to the Watney Mann brewing empire.
After Sandhurst, he served in the Scots Guards and SAS in Cyprus, Germany, Norway and Northern Ireland, volunteering as a reservist in the first Gulf war in 1991.
In 1996, Mann formed the mercenary or 'Private Military Company' Sandline with former Scots Guards Colonel Tim Spicer, operating in Angola, Sierra Leone.
In 2004, Mann hit the headlines when he and 69 other ex-soldiers were arrested during a stop-off at Harare Airport to be loaded with £100k of weapons and equipment intended to engineer the coup in Equatorial Guinea and overthrow the government of President Teodoro Obiang.
Mann and the other conspirators claimed they were merely flying to the Democratic Republic of Congo to provide security for diamond mines, but after a trial in Harare, he was given seven years for attempting to buy arms for an alleged coup, while 66 other men were acquitted.
Thatcher, nicknamed 'Scratcher', meanwhile, was arrested at home in Cape Town and eventually pleaded guilty to 'negligently supplying financial assistance' to the plot.
The coup was financed by Lebanese fixer Eli Calil, nicknamed 'Smelly' by his ex-public school co-conspirators, who later died falling downstairs at his home in Holland Park, West London.
President Obiang promised that he would eat Mann's testicles and drag his naked body through the streets, should he ever get the chance.
In 2006, Coup! a TV movie was made about the affair, written by actor and comedy writer John Fortune, of Bremner, Bird and Fortune fame, starring Jared Harris as Mann and Robert Bathurst as Thatcher.
Then in 2007, a court in Zimbabwe ruled that Mann should be extradited to Equatorial Guinea after a shady agreement between the two governments branded the 'Oil for Mann' deal.
The then Zimbabwe president Robert Mugabe secured a large amount of oil from Guinea, widely believed to be in return for sending Mann north to meet his fate.
Multi-millionaire Mann was thrown into the notorious hell-hole of Black Beach Prison, where he was clapped in leg irons and would serve less than two years of a 34-year sentence, though he suffered with malaria more than once, caged in a tiny cell in solitary confinement.
Back home, Mann's loyal wife Amanda, fighting with others for her husband's release, displayed unquenchable spirit, acquiring a T-shirt emblazoned with the slogan: 'A man is for Christmas. Not for life.'
In 2009 he was granted a 'complete pardon on humanitarian grounds' by President Obiang, the man he had tried to depose, and settled in the New Forest with his wife Amanda, but last year the pair were reported to have split.
Last year, the Mail's Richard Eden reported that Mann had left Amanda, mother of four of his seven children, who campaigned tirelessly for his release and was apparently being comforted by a woman more than 20 years his junior.
'Simon and Amanda have split up,' a friend said, adding that Mann has moved out of the house on the south coast where they've lived since shortly after his release in 2009.
Mann's next scheme was growing cannabis in North Macedonia, it was reported.
Eden reported: 'They are getting divorced,' the chum tells me, saying that the marriage has been 'very difficult' ever since Mann's return from Africa.
'They decided to stay together until their youngest child left home.'
More recently, Mann's polo-playing son Jack was in the news.
He had an intended business trip to Libya interrupted when he and colleagues attempted to fly in from Malta.
The authorities decided that their paperwork needed to be 'rectified' – a process which took five days.
Last year, the Daily Telegraph interviewed Mann who claimed that Thatcher's role in the coup attempt was far more than just a 'negligent financier'.
The plot was seeded in August 2003, when Calil summoned Mann to his grand mansion in Chelsea, after being approached by Severo Moto, the exiled opposition leader in Equatorial Guinea, who wanted to overthrow the tyrannical Obiang.
Mann claimed Calil told him that King Juan Carlos of Spain, of which Equatorial Guinea is a former colony, and the then-prime minister of Spain José Maria Aznar, knew about the coup and approved of it.
As a reward, Mann would have access to oil rights once Moto was in power. Mann was also attracted by the danger and adventure that the plan involved, and believed that removing a despotic dictator would justify the ethics of the job. He told Calil he would do it.
Putting together a team of mercenaries – armed with guns, rocket launchers and mortars – to carry out the coup would cost $2.5 million, he calculated, but Calil's funds were frozen due to a criminal investigation in France.
Calil introduced Mann to a businessman who would become a silent partner in the scheme, but Mann wanted his own man and approached Thatcher.
Sir Mark was an old friend; a close neighbour in Cape Town, where both men had homes; and, the Telegraph reported, something of an SAS groupie. During a walk on Table Mountain, Mann briefed Sir Mark on the plot and asked if he would invest.
'Mark was incredibly enthusiastic', Mann told the Telegraph. 'But he was not just keen to share the spoils of our adventure in Equatorial Guinea – he wanted to play an active role in [planning] the operation.'
Mann needed a helicopter for the fast movement of supplies and troops and Sir Mark, a trained helicopter pilot, had the connections and the cash to source the required aircraft.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
44 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Dehorning rhinos reduces poaching by 80%, study finds
Cutting the horns off rhinos causes a large reduction in poaching, according to a new study, which raises questions about the effectiveness of expensive anti-poaching techniques used to protect the African mammals. Poaching for horn is a significant threat to the world's five rhino species. The substance, which is similar to human fingernails, is commonly used for traditional medicine in China, Vietnam and other Asian countries. Dealers in the hidden market will pay tens of thousands of dollars for the horns, which are falsely believed to be effective at treating fevers, pain and a low sex drive in traditional medicine. But new research in the journal Science has highlighted ways to better protect the animals from illegal hunters. An assessment of rhino protection methods in the Greater Kruger region of South Africa – home to a quarter of the continent's rhinos – found that removing horns reduced poaching by nearly 80% between 2017 and 2023. In a collaboration between scientists, conservationists and government officials, the research found no statistical evidence that traditional anti-poaching interventions – such as rangers, detection cameras, dog tracking and helicopters – caused significant reductions in rhino poaching, despite their multimillion-dollar cost, even though they were successful at detecting hundreds of poachers. 'Dehorning rhinos to reduce incentives for poaching was found to achieve a 78% reduction in poaching using just 1.2% of the overall rhino protection budget,' said Dr Tim Kuiper of Nelson Mandela University, a lead author of the study. 'We might need to rethink our goals. Do we just want to arrest poachers? It doesn't appear to be making a massive difference to reducing rhino poaching.' To dehorn a rhino, workers sedate the animal, apply a blindfold and earplugs, and cut off the horn with a power saw. The horn will gradually regrow – an average rhino needs to be dehorned every 1.5 to two years. The process poses a very low risk to the animal and does not hurt it. 'The headline result is that dehorning stood out for its effectiveness. We are cautious to say that the other interventions are not working. They worked when measured by whether they were detecting poachers. But detecting and arresting a load of poachers doesn't necessarily bend the curve on rhino poaching,' Kuiper said. In South Africa, rhino poaching remains high, with 103 killed in the first three months of 2025. Last year, 420 were lost. In recent decades, rhino populations have collapsed in Asia and Africa due to poaching and habitat loss, continuing falls driven by European colonial hunters. But the researchers behind the project, representing the University of Cape Town, Nelson Mandela University, University of Stellenbosch and the University of Oxford and other conservation institutions, cautioned that dehorning rhinos was not a magic bullet. A significant stump of horn mass remains on the rhino after dehorning, and some poachers were still prepared to kill rhinos for this section. Sharon Haussmann, a pioneer in rhino conservation in South Africa and co-author on the paper, played a leading role in coordinating conservation efforts in the study area. She died unexpectedly at the weekend and Kuiper wanted to highlight the collaboration between different sectors that are often mistrustful of each other in her memory. 'Is a rhino still a rhino without its horn? That's a bigger question,' said Kuiper. One study of black rhinos indicated that while poaching rates decreased, dehorned animals became more timid and covered much smaller ranges. Researchers believe that horn is used to establish territories and dehorned rhinos were unable to do this after the procedure. 'We wouldn't like to keep dehorning them for the next 100 years,' Kuiper said. 'Ideally we would like to address the drivers of poaching. But it is better than the impacts of poaching' Find more age of extinction coverage here, and follow the biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield in the Guardian app for more nature coverage
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Russia is about to suffer its millionth casualty. For Putin, that's a price worth paying
Almost two centuries ago, the Prussian military theorist Carl von Clausewitz cautioned against the temptation to 'shut one's eyes to what war really is from sheer distress at its brutality.' One milestone betrays the sheer scale of the butchery in Ukraine: by the end of June, Russian forces will, in all probability, have suffered their millionth casualty in this war. When Vladimir Putin sent some 200,000 Russian soldiers into Ukraine in February 2022, he expected to seize Kyiv by the third day of a lightning offensive. Today, his troops remain hundreds of miles from the capital, while the number of Russian dead and wounded has grown to nearly five times the size of that initial invasion force. 'Overall, a high of 250,000 Russian soldiers have died in Ukraine, with over 950,000 total Russian casualties,' notes a study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), an American think tank based in Washington, DC. Those numbers conjure an image of Putin casting the entirety of his first invading army into a furnace, then gathering another and doing the same – over and over again. On an average day in April, about 1,200 Russians were killed or wounded on Ukraine's battlefields, where killer drones and heavy artillery have together created the most lethal expanse of territory on Earth. If this casualty rate is sustained, the CSIS study concludes, 'Russia will likely hit the 1 million casualty mark in the summer of 2025.' By way of comparison, the combined death toll in every Soviet or Russian conflict since 1945 – from the invasion of Hungary in 1956 to the Second Chechen war in 1999, including the Afghanistan campaign of 1979-89 – came to less than 50,000. Putin has sacrificed about five times that number in the space of three years and four months in Ukraine. Having been thrown back from Kyiv, Putin is now waging what the CSIS calls a 'grinding contest of attrition', in which Russia loses 'vast quantities' of men and materiel for 'mere metres of ground'. Since January 2024, Putin has captured about 1 per cent of Ukraine at the cost of between 800 and 1,600 Russian casualties per day. By comparison, 179 British military personnel were killed during six years of combat operations in Iraq. Yet Putin's frame of reference is almost certainly not the conflicts since 1945. He is steeped in the history of what Russians call the Great Patriotic War – the Soviet Union's epic struggle against Hitler's invasion between 1941 and 1945. That titanic confrontation claimed the lives of at least 24 million Soviet or Russian citizens, amounting to 12 per cent of the entire population of the Soviet Empire. The Battle of Stalingrad alone, lasting less than six months, killed almost 675,000 Russians. The siege of Leningrad – the city of Putin's birth – was even more deadly. His parents lived through those harrowing years from 1941 to 1944; his father fought in the city's defence, while his elder brother was among the children who died of hunger and privation. In total, over 1 million Russians gave their lives to save Leningrad from the Nazis. If that is your perspective, then 250,000 dead and a million casualties in Ukraine become far more acceptable. Putin will doubtless see these figures as just a fraction of the cost of preserving his home city from Hitler. And that is not even to consider earlier episodes of suffering. The Russian civil war that followed the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 claimed some 10 million lives, mainly from starvation, while Stalin's Great Purge, between 1936 and 1938, is estimated to have claimed between 700,000 and 1.2 million. If, like Putin, your historical memory is dominated by events before 1945, then you take a different view of a million Russian casualties in Ukraine. And the Kremlin's propaganda campaign is designed to ensure that the Russian people think like their leader. Not even the prospect of Putin soon having sacrificed a million of their sons in the country's bloodiest war in 80 years appears to be stirring popular discontent. In March, polling by the Levada Center, a Russian independent, nongovernmental research organisation, found that a 'majority of respondents support the actions of the Russian military and believe that the special military operation is progressing successfully.' For Western policy-makers, by contrast, Putin's cold indifference to suffering presents a strategic dilemma. Effective deterrence depends on an adversary believing that any act of aggression will incur an overwhelming and unacceptable cost. But what constitutes an unacceptable cost in Putin's eyes? Given that a million Russian casualties in the crucible of Ukraine seem to leave him unmoved, sustaining effective deterrence becomes far more difficult. Hence the continued importance of nuclear weapons – perhaps the only price even Putin would be unwilling to pay. Meanwhile, his dogged assault on Ukraine has forced his neighbour to defend itself with ever greater force, vindicating the bleak words of Clausewitz: 'If one side uses force without compunction, undeterred by the bloodshed it involves, while the other side refrains, the first will gain the upper hand. That side will force the other to follow suit; each will drive its opponent towards extremes.' Russia's extreme violence has killed between 60,000 and 100,000 Ukrainians, according to the CSIS, inflicting around 400,000 casualties in total – an astonishing toll reminiscent of the pre-war era. Given that Ukraine's population is less than a third of Russia's, the target of the invasion has endured a heavier toll per capita – a butcher's bill greater even than that of its aggressor. Ukrainian soldiers on the front line know better than anyone that the prospect of a million Russian casualties will not deter Putin. The only counterweight is still greater force.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Fighting the climate crisis is vital for national security
Former military leaders rightly point out that climate change is a matter of national security (UK must consider food and climate part of national security, say top ex-military figures, 29 May). What is required in response is a thoughtful, strategic approach that focuses in on actions that are practical and effective in these difficult times and will help build the UK government's 'strong foundations' of national security and secure borders. For example, arguably the biggest near-term threat to UK security is the 'mass population displacement' that Lt Gen Richard Nugee refers to. About 3.5 billion people live in an arc around Europe, across Africa, the Middle East and Asian countries such as Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. People in these regions are already confronting floods and heatwaves of up to 50C that are making large areas uninhabitable. Rural communities are being forced into conflict and migration, while food production and supplies to cities are being affected. Russia has already identified this as a strategic way to undermine European democracies. It stokes conflict and weaponises people – for example, pushing a wave of 4 million Syrian war refugees into Europe and Turkey. The payoff has been the rise of pro-Russian rightwing parties across Europe. With temperatures rising much faster than expected, this problem will accelerate during the present parliament. It requires immediate action as there's no way to contain it. What can we do? The UK has a strong track record of using international aid to promote farming in these vulnerable communities. The best approach is regenerative farming, which produces food, builds resilience to extreme weather and draws carbon out of the atmosphere as it rebuilds soil health. It is a strategy for mitigating, and adapting to, climate change. We must salvage and expand this programme within the remaining aid and climate finance budget. It is essential to our national security that we fight climate change at home, through decarbonisation, and that we promote regenerative agriculture at home and in frontline countries around Adam ParrHertford College, University of Oxford Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
