On film, what makes the SAS truly spe­cial Sunday Herald Sun, - TopicsExpress



          

On film, what makes the SAS truly spe­cial Sunday Herald Sun, Australia Sep 21, 2014 25 JUST when the fam­i­lies of the se­cre­tive sol­diers in the Spe­cial Air Ser­vice Reg­i­ment thought they could re­lax, here they go again. Over the last week the quiet men from Aus­tralia’s spe­cial forces have re­turned to Fron­tier­land, where Wild West meets mur­der­ous Mid­dle East. As if 10 years of Afghanistan wasn’t enough. The good thing about hav­ing served in Afghanistan is that they know what to ex­pect in Iraq, Syria or any­where else they’re or­dered to put them­selves in harm’s way. They’re back where ev­ery pedes­trian (es­pe­cially kids) or car could be a sui­cide bomb primed to kill them. Where ev­ery­one in uni­form car­ries guns ev­ery­where they go — ser­vice pis­tols strapped to hip or thigh, as­sault ri­fles slung as non­cha­lantly as pub­lic ser­vants and politi­cians carry brief­cases in Can­berra. Once again, they will have a gun at hand when they eat and when they go to the shower huts and next to their bunks at night. Every other coun­try fan­cies it has the best spe­cial forces troops, which is no sur­prise. But as our elite force re­turns to the killing grounds, it seems clear they re­ally are among the best in the world — and that’s not just Aussie bravado. Even the Amer­i­cans say so and no one ar­gues. The ac­co­lades flowed af­ter Oper­a­tion Ana­conda in Afghanistan in 2002, when the Aus­tralian SAS Reg­i­ment had done what it does best, in this case fight­ing along­side United States forces in a val­ley full of pre­dictably fa­nat­i­cal but sur­pris­ingly well-armed al-Qaeda gueril­las. What should have been a text­book op­er­a­tion teetered on the edge of dis­as­ter. The eerie moon­scape of the Shahi Kot Val­ley al­most be­came Death Val­ley. The Pen­tagon read the bat­tle wrong but the Aus­tralian spe­cial forces on the ground got their bit right. There were only 100 of them but the men the Yanks had joked about as Steve Ir­win “croc­o­dile hunters” punched above their weight. After­wards, a for­mer US Sec­re­tary of State, Richard Ar­mitage — him­self an ex-spe­cial forces sol­dier — was blunt. He told a jour­nal­ist: “The Aus­tralian SAS are s--t-hot and our peo­ple love to work with them.” His coun­try­man, Lieu­tenan­tGen­eral Frank Ha­gen­beck, de­liv­ered a sim­i­lar mes­sage: “The Aus­tralian SAS dis­played those kinds of things that make them elite, in my view, of small-unit in­fantry­men through­out the world … that’s au­ton­omy, in­de­pen­dence, tenac­ity.” They call them­selves “the Reg­i­ment”, which tells you some­thing. There are plenty of reg­i­ments but this is the reg­i­ment. But it hasn’t al­ways been this way. In fact, only 15 years af­ter be­ing born in se­crecy in 1957, the Aus­tralian SAS came close to fad­ing into ir­rel­e­vance. In Viet­nam the Vi­et­cong called them Ma Rung — the “phan­toms of the jun­gle” — and later said they were the only troops they feared. But the De­fence chiefs in Can­berra didn’t all share the en­emy’s hard-won re­spect for the dark and deadly arts of in­tel­li­gent guerilla war­fare. The SAS sur­vived af­ter Viet­nam but seemed doomed to be an odd­ball off­shoot of the reg­u­lar army, tol­er­ated but not ap­pre­ci­ated. Apart from any­thing else, it was sep­a­rated from the mil­i­tary hi­er­ar­chy by the Nullar­bor: its head­quar­ters were Camp­bell Bar­racks in sub­ur­ban Perth, whereas al­most ev­ery­thing else in uni­form was then in the east­ern states. But when the SAS went to East Ti­mor af­ter the In­done­sian with­drawal in 1999 it was what mil­i­tary his­to­rian Bruce Hors­field calls a “turn­ing point” that would trans­form his reg­i­men­tal his­tory into “a retelling of the ugly duck­ling story”. Now re­tired, Hors­field is old enough to have taken on some­thing eas­ier than mak­ing the de­fin­i­tive doc­u­men­tary his­tory of the SAS. He started on the epic task in the mid-1990s and is still sol­dier­ing on. The ques­tion is: can he in­clude the lat­est twist and pro­duce the fi­nal four episodes of his 11-hour project? The task has con­sumed him — and far too much of his money — over al­most 20 years. As with many of the men whose ser­vice he has doc­u­mented, ap­pear­ances are de­cep­tive. Hors­field is quiet and slightly built. It’s mildly sur­pris­ing that he is a sea­soned lec­turer and a film maker. Even more sur­pris­ing is that he was once in the spe­cial forces him­self — he trained as a com­mando for four years be­cause it seemed “ad­ven­tur­ous” and glam­orous. “I fan­cied my­self in that green beret,” he says, smil­ing at his 18-yearold self, a skinny kid from New­cas­tle who went on to make some 350 para­chute jumps and do the dan­ger­ous div­ing and ca­noe­ing mis­sions that com­man­dos have to do. Hors­field’s army time helped him gain the trust of Viet­nam vet­er­ans so that he could make the ac­claimed doc­u­men­tary Long Tan: the true story, about the 1966 Viet­nam War bat­tle. It im­pressed some­one in the SAS. After the doc­u­men­tary was re­leased in 1993 he got a call from a for­mer SAS of­fi­cer sug­gest­ing he make a doc­u­men­tary about “the Reg­i­ment”. “Other­wise I would never have ap­proached the spe­cial forces, be­cause of the se­crecy,” Hors­field con­fesses. But some­one won ap­proval for the idea. He also gained an in­flu­en­tial pa­tron for the project in Maj. Gen. Michael Jef­fery, fu­ture Gover­nor-Gen­eral. WITHOUT Jef­fery’s back­ing, it would have fallen over. The “9-11” out­rage in 2001 was a mas­sive in­ter­rup­tion, be­cause the reg­i­ment was in a state of con­stant alert for years af­ter­wards. But Hors­field kept go­ing. Among his sup­port­ers is Bill Gray, one-time Her­ald re­porter and one of the rare Viet­nam-era con­scripts asked to train for the SAS along­side reg­u­lar army vol­un­teers. Gray ended up fight­ing in Viet­nam in one of the five-man units that did the dan­ger­ous pa­trol work. Now he’s fight­ing to help Hors­field fin­ish his mis­sion to record the his­tory of the reg­i­ment. After thou­sands of hours, Hors­field has com­pleted two sea­sons of seven episodes and is work­ing on four one-hour episodes to round out the third and fi­nal sea­son. Can­berra’s de­ci­sion to send the reg­i­ment back “in coun­try” this month means he has a post­script to add. He has had unique ac­cess to for­mer and serv­ing SAS mem­bers, in­clud­ing mod­ern-day he­roes Ben Roberts-Smith and Mark Don­ald­son (pic­tured left). The cal­i­bre of the men in front of the cam­era shows up in the thought­ful things they say. One of them, Lt Col Ric Bosi, said: “The in­tan­gi­ble value of this doc­u­men­tary is it cap­tures the essence of mil­i­tary ser­vice, what Sa­muel John­son called ‘the dig­nity of dan­ger’, with real men telling real sto­ries.” Which is great. But un­less the RSL or the De­fence Depart­ment or the Aus­tralian War Me­mo­rial or a phi­lan­thropist — or all of the above — give it a leg-up, this re­mark­able se­ries won’t be fin­ished the way it de­serves to be. Dig­gers carry their wounded. Bruce Hors­field’s brave project is al­most home safe but needs a hand to get over the line.
Posted on: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 06:21:19 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015