Rupert Wieloch

When is a war not a war? Both Russia and America have begun wars against large independent countries this decade but denied they are in a war to their domestic audiences. In Putin’s words, the invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022 was a “special military operation” to protect Russian national security. In Trump’s words, the “major combat operations in Iran” that he launched on 28 February 2026 were to ensure America “will never be threatened by a nuclear-armed Iran” and to facilitate regime-change.

Both these expensive operations have failed to achieve their stated aims and have stagnated with highly contested front lines in Eastern Ukraine and the Strait of Hormuz. However, there is a significant difference between the two wars. In the case of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Air, Maritime and Cyber forces are all engaged, but the vicious hand-to-hand fighting involving ground troops means that the neighbours are still At War and In War. In the Gulf War, the memorandum-of-understanding signed last week pretends that Iran and the USA are not At War, but we all know that the tit-for-tat strikes yesterday will continue and in reality, they remain stuck in a never-ending ideological war.

Why is this important? First, the legal consequences of starting a war of aggression. Second, the Global economic consequences of closing the flow of energy from the Gulf. Third, the diplomatic consequences of breaking the international rule-book. Can this situation be retrieved? Yes, but it will take a Mahatma Gandhi, or Nelson Mandela to overlook the grievances and heal the wounds. Who is waiting in the wings with the political and diplomatic credibility?

Taking a break from the current conflicts that seem to be stuck in perpetual stagnation, I paid a visit to Perugia and Assisi for two commemorations. In October, it is the 800th anniversary of the death of St Francis and the build up has included a magnificent exhibition of the work of Giotto, who brought life to art in the 14th century. I managed to catch the last day of this show in Perugia before visiting the Basilica of St Francis, where Giotto painted a number of frescos.

Below the Basilica, as you can see in the photograph, lies the Commonwealth War Cemetery of Assisi where 946 casualties rest. Fourteen of these were from my regiment, including the tank crew of Leach, Lunnon and Sharp, who could not be separated when they died together on 19th June 1944.

On that day, the 17th/21st Lancers were part of 26th Armoured Brigade, tasked with capturing Perugia. Advancing along the line of the railway, they came under heavy artillery fire. The bridge into town had been prepared for demolition but was unblown. As they were about to cross, an enemy shell hit the charges, which exploded, utterly destroying the bridge. The way was shut and the day turned into a bitter fight through thick and tangled country, where the enemy was hard to locate.

That night the German Army moved west out of the town towards Lake Trasimene. The 17th/21st Lancers continued to support 2nd Rifle Brigade, before they were withdrawn into Perugia for five days to refit the Sherman tanks and recover their casualties. The fighting in Italy is now thought of as a side-show compared with the Normandy Landings, but the reality is that it was a really tough campaign in much harder country than North-West Europe.

The American announcement that the US-Iran deal will be signed on Sunday is a bold assertion given the hurdles to that happening. To my mind, it is symbolic of the difference between the two countries and Washington’s lack of understanding about the devolved nature of the Iranian chain of command.

I have written about this before because it happened in Bosnia in 1995. The West would negotiate a deal with the Bosnian leaders in Sarajevo and then be surprised when the agreement was ignored by the so-called warlords in the provinces. This is not necessarily a characteristic of a failed state, but rather a clever mechanism to ensure its strength is spread to ensure its survival as an independent country. One of the finest examples was in France during World War II when the Resistance did not allow Germany a peaceful occupation.

I spent two years interpreting probabilities when I was Head of Reliability in the Ministry of Defence. In my view, the likelihood of a deal is high, but the chances of it happening today are less than 50%. Will this mean peace in the Middle East? One can only look at historical examples to answer that question and if you look at that data, one might say with some confidence that the percentage is low and conclude this deal is unlikely to last.

The UN Is Watching For A Peace Deal

I know Dan well. He was the best Army applicant for the University of Cambridge MPhil in International Relations in 2009 when I helped him to gain a place at Jesus College. He gave this up to be a politician and has brought a much needed infantry officer’s perspective to the House of Commons. His previous army service commanding soldiers in the parachute regiment and working on operational deployments are clear signs that he has the capacity to cope with the demanding workload as Secretary of State for Defence. However…

Dan is wrong to accept this role because if he does, the military services will be forced to make do with insufficient funds to be credible in the volatile world that we live in today. With two prominent politicians making a stand, now is the time to overturn the Treasury’s disastrous policy of denuding Defence as it has done for the past 16 years.

All soldiers are imbued with the spirit of managing with fewer resources than ideal. In many ways, this has been the characterisation of all my years service. The only Prime Ministers who actually gave us more were Maggie Thatcher and Tony Blair in their first terms. So if Kier Starmer wishes to survive, he should follow their example and side with the Armed Forces over the Treasury. And Dan Jarvis should only accept the appointment if the Defence Industrial Strategy is fully funded.

Churchill Didn’t Let Down The Armed Forces

In my experience, intelligence staff officers often provide poor advice about tactical situations, battlefield decision-making and strategy. However, they are often outstanding when it comes to providing dossiers about enemy commanders and the hierarchy of an adversary.

A good example of this is the way they compiled evidence for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. During my second operational tour in the Balkans, I was involved in operations to capture those responsible for war crimes, otherwise known as PIFWCs (see sheet below). And the evidence from those operations is that once your name is on the list, you will be hounded forever.

The Media is very quiet about this aspect of the current wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, but I have no doubt that there are dedicated teams that are working relentlessly to interview survivors, compile evidence and track those responsible for war crimes. In the case of the former Yugoslavia, the mandate for the court lasted 24 years from 1993 to 2017. I can see the current work on Ukraine and the Middle East lasting twice as long – a job for life.

Twenty-four years ago, during a Chatham House seminar that I attended, the panel predicted that China would overtake the USA’s economy in the late 2020s. At that time China was assessed by the Government as posing “no conventional military threat to the UK”. Furthermore, Washington was sharing technology and military information with Beijing, as the Pentagon had placed all US Army doctrine on the internet, which was freely accessible by anyone.

This came to a head on 1 June 2011 during the British Chief of the General Staff’s main conference before the Coalition Government’s Strategic Defence Review. In the Keynote session, the Deputy Chief of The People’s Liberation Army (General Zhang Qinsheng) gave a well-received address about the Strategic Context and Nature of Conflict (lots of Sun-Tzu). The following day, when the Commanding General of US Cyber Command was asked probing questions by the Chinese delegates, it became clear that the relationship was changing.

Since then, China has extended its influence throughout the World through democracy and economics. There is a certain irony that while Putin and Trump have failed in their recent military operations against Ukraine and Iran, their attempts to return to the bipolar Cold War have merely opened the door to President Xi. The photographs of him with the US and Russian Presidents this month remind me of images of Medieval Kings visiting the Pope. Not only has Washington lost half its Allies in Europe, but its Intelligence fraternity has lost huge influence in London with respect to the Government’s relations with China (e.g. permission for the new Chinese Embassy to proceed). The big question is: will the City follow?

The news that the USA is deploying 5,000 troops to Poland is most welcome at this time of heightened security in the European countries bordering Russia.

After returning from an operational tour in Bosnia in 1995, I was drawn into the largest Partnership for Peace (PfP) exercise in Poland and Germany. Our deployment to Krakow pre-dated the British armoured battlegroup exercises that resulted from its success and led to the first three Warsaw Pact nations joining NATO in March 1999 (Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic). PfP was an initiative of the Clinton Administration to work together for the best future of Europe. Not only was it highly successful in helping Eastern European countries become democracies, but it also continues to this day with 18 “Partner Members”, including Ukraine.

Subsequently, Poland was a great support to the USA in Iraq. I had a very strong team led by a Polish colonel with a company of mechanised soldiers under command in Baghdad, so I am not surprised that the Washington is honouring their debt to Warsaw with the latest news of this deployment. It will certainly help in deterring Russia from invading the Baltic countries in the immediate future.