Churchill was more a liability than an asset to the free world

Churchill was more a liability than an asset to the free world

03 Sep 2009

Why now?

Britain’s great wartime leader has been the subject of many biographies. The young historian Richard Toye has now released another. Churchill’s Empire: The World That Made Him and the World He Made is an insightful examination of a lesser-mentioned side of Britain’s national hero; “the Churchill who frequently inveighed against human rights, nationalism, and constitutional progress – the imperialist who could celebrate racism and believed India was unsuited to democracy.”

Writing in the New York Times Book Review, Johann Hari said that “In the end, the words of the great and glorious Churchill who resisted dictatorship, overwhelmed the works of the cruel and cramped Churchill who tried to impose it on the world’s people of color. Toye teases out these ambiguities beautifully.”

Churchill’s reputation is at the centre of the “politics of memory” of Britain and the Western world. It comes down to this: is the great story of the 20th century about the defeat of totalitarianism or the defeat of imperialism? If you believe the first, then the end of WW2 and the end of the Cold War are the great victories, and the rewards for the victors is stable liberal democracy. If you believe the second, then the liberation struggles of the post-War and the continuing fight against various oppressions are more important.

When President Obama returned to Gordon Brown the bust of Churchill that Blair had loaned to Bush, he seemed to be saying that it was time for America to turn its back on a tradition that condoned racism and brutality and empire. Churchill has become the terrain over which different views of the West’s position in history are fought.

Summary

Winston Churchill is often held up as a champion of freedom and a symbol of Britain’s determination to defend the world from the threat of Nazism, but do we see Churchill through rose-tinted glasses? Are we forgetting his authorisation of the RAF’s ‘terror-bombing’ of German cities in World War 2, and his starvation blockade of Germany during the Great War? And what about the military catastrophes he masterminded at Gallipoli (1915) and Norway (1940)? An esteemed panel debate Churchill’s true legacy.

Arguing in favour of the motion are Pat Buchanan, Nigel Knight, and Norman Stone.

Pat Buchanan opens the case for the motion by acknowledging Churchill's role during Britain's 'Finest Hour' in 1940, but goes on to state that for the rest of his career, "no other career of a western statesman was more calamitous for his country and civilisation than that of Winston Spencer Churchill".

Nigel Knight criticises Churchill for his decision to put Britain on the gold standard - a decision which worsened the effects of the Great Depression when it eventually arrived, and his failure to recognise Japan as a major threat to Britain's naval superiority.

Norman Stone decries the 'myth' of Churchill as a dangerous thing, and condemns Churchill's disastrous imperialist attitude, such as trying to salvage the Empire in the east whilst only just hanging on in a European war.

Arguing against the motion are Andrew Roberts, Anthony Beevor, and Professor Richard Overy.

Andrew Roberts begins by praising Churchill for ensuring that the British fleet was ready for action at the start of the Great War. He also warned Britain in the 1930s - at great political cost to himself - of the threat that Adolf Hitler posed, and in his famous 'Iron curtain' speech in 1946, warned the world of the threat that the Soviet Union posed.

Anthony Beevor focuses his argument on World War II, beginning by stating that Churchill was correct to delay D-Day, allowing the American Army to gain experience fighting in the Mediterranean. He also notes that Churchill championed the freedom of the central and eastern European states towards the end of, and after, WWII.

Richard Overy says that Churchill cannot be blamed for all of the things of which he is accused because all of the decisions he made were as part of a committee. But most of all, Overy says, Churchill was a man driven by a love of liberty and a deep-seated hatred of tyranny.

First Vote: 118 For, 1167 Against, 422 Don’t Know

Final Vote: 181 For, 1194 Against, 34 Don’t Know

Speakers for the motion

Pat Buchanan

Senior advisor to three Presidents and two-time candidate for the Republican presidential nomination
Nigel Knight

Political scientist and economist
Professor Norman Stone

British Historian