Letters: Lessons of history

There has been a lot of talk about the loss of regiments to the British Army, especially up here with the proposal to lose the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders.

Many people got on the bandwagon and said that these locally-recruited regiments were a vital link to the areas they represent.

If these people had seen the regiments’ rugby teams they would know that many “locally-recruited” soldiers are actually from Fiji.

These Fijians, over the past ten or so years, have allowed the army to maintain recruiting levels and have provided many regiments and corps with vital manpower, so suggesting that the regiments are only locally recruited is incorrect because there have not been enough local soldiers to provide the manning for them.

Secondly, Scotland has six infantry regiments (five Royal Scots and the Scots Guards) out of a total of 32 regional regiments (the Parachute Regiment is national). This represents approximately 19 per cent of the total amount of infantry regiments in the British Army. Yet Scotland has approximately 8 per cent of the UK population; therefore it is disproportionately represented. People need to understand that there is not the money to fund the British Army in the way we used to. And many of those complaining the hardest are those who left the army and love talking about “tradition”, which, when you have left is often what you want to hold on to the most.

However, in my time I saw many units disband or amalgamate, and although it is sad, it is also inevitable. The army now has to adapt, and if we hold on to traditions just for the sake of it we will be left behind.

A small and professional force is what is now required, and if this means that some historic regiment’s name does not exist, then so be it. However, history will always be history whether there is a person to wave the flag or not.

Ian Veitch

Belvedere Park

Edinburgh