Long march of the black British soldier

The Army says it has come a long way since minority recruits were weeded out, but has Prince Harry's 'Paki' remark uncovered a less palatable truth?

By Cahal Milmo, Kim Sengupta and Terri Judd

January 13

The Independent

Photo: Getty Images, The Independent

They were known as "D Factor personnel". For 20 years, the British Army restricted the number of ethnic minority recruits to its ranks by instructing its medical officers to use the secret designation to single out would-be soldiers with "Asiatic or negroid features".

It was a policy which might have belonged to the 19th century or the First World War, but in reality it only ended in 1977 when medical examiners were told to stop classifying recruits according to physical characteristics which included looking like "Chinamen, Maltese or even swarthy Frenchmen".

Racial prejudice blighted the achievements of Second Lieutenant Walter Tull, who volunteered for the British Army a week after the declaration of war in 1914 and was recommended for the Military Cross by his superiors for his "gallantry and coolness under fire". The son of a former slave in Barbados, 2nd Lt Tull never received his award because military law forbade "any negro or person of colour" being commissioned and the medal seemed a step too far.

Ministry of Defence (MoD) officials have been at pains to underline that the armed services have come a long way in stamping out racism and increasing recruitment of members of the ethnic minorities. But as the row over Prince Harry's use of racist language to describe a Pakistani comrade continued yesterday, new figures revealed the problems the armed forces are facing in retaining black and Asian soldiers.

Data obtained by The Independent shows that the Army is losing ethnic minority recruits nearly 50 per cent faster than the rest of the services. In 2007, the last year for which complete figures are available, the Army lost 6.3 per cent of its black and Asian soldiers, compared to an average of 4.5 per cent.

The latest monthly figures show that the outflow of ethnic minority personnel across all services has risen to 5.2 per cent of all recruits.

One Whitehall defence source said: "Ethnic minority soldiers leaving the forces at a faster rate than others is not the direction we want to be heading in. There has been a big push in recruiting from our black and Asian communities and currently we have the lowest number of people leaving for four years. But it does not look good if we cannot persuade our minority recruits to stay."

Military chiefs can point with some justification to success in recruiting from the minorities. The proportion of non-white personnel in the Army, the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force has risen from 3.5 per cent in 2005 to 6.3 per cent last year. The Army now has 9 per cent of its intake from minorities – comfortably above its target of 5 per cent. The Navy and the Air Force lag behind with 2.7 per cent and 2.3 per cent respectively.

But critics, including the House of Commons Defence Committee, point out that about 60 per cent of minority recruits come from Commonwealth countries rather than Britain's own ethnic communities. The MoD said figures showing the number of British minority personnel are not produced.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission said yesterday that it has "concerns" about the accuracy of the ethnic monitoring data produced by the armed forces and would be raising the issue of Prince Harry's remarks with senior military staff.

Despite success in recruiting non-white personnel to the lower ranks, few make it into the upper echelons of the services. Just 2.5 per cent of officers above the rank of lieutenant colonel or equivalent are from ethnic minorities, falling to 1.5 per cent in the Navy. However, the highest ranking ethnic minority officer in the forces is in the Navy. Admiral Amjad Hussain, who arrived in Britain from northern Pakistan at the age of three, was promoted to become the first non-white admiral in 2006.

Senior officers admitted that the damage caused by Prince Harry referring to Lieutenant Ahmed Raza Khan as "our little Paki friend" in a video diary shot while training at Sandhurst in 2006 would have a negative impact on ethnic minority recruiting. Colonel Paul Farrar, the Army's deputy head of recruiting, described the use of the term as "unacceptable". He said: "None of this helps the Army and whatever we do to try to encourage people from diverse backgrounds to join. I haven't seen the full context of what [Prince Harry] said, but any sort of throwaway line of this nature is to be regretted."

The controversy showed no sign of abating yesterday. Gordon Brown said that the prince's "genuine" apology should be accepted, but Keith Vaz, one of Britain's few Asian MPs, said: "What is important is, does it reveal a wider culture in the Army where words of this kind are acceptable?"

For its part, the MoD said: "Bullying and racism are not endemic in the armed forces and there are robust procedures for dealing with all forms of unacceptable behaviour."

Blogs Views from both sides

From military blogs

*Service people often use nicknames and pet names without meaning offence, it's all part of the comradeship. There are far more important issues going on than bothering about remarks made ages ago. rod-gearing

"Paki" is used all the time by racist scum, with venom. What the press are manipulating is the context, knowing full well that the military are merciless in taking the piss out of each other by exploiting individual differences. The majority of free-thinking people will recognise it for what it is. Dallas

*Brit is fine. Taff is OK. Jock is acceptable. Paddy is used quite often. We use these when addressing these people to their faces, more often than not they are our friends. So just what is racist?? SRENNAPS

From Asian blogs

*For years the term "Paki" was hurled at me in the street. This was meant as a racist and hurtful term. So, all of you saying that it is harmless name calling, think again. M Hussain

*An apology through a third person is unacceptable, so if he really is sorry we wait to see if he is man enough to own up to it. If not, then we know him better. Raheel

*If this was any other day they would be saying we are being PC about it etc. But, as the genocide in Gaza takes place they want to divert our attention, it's not going to work!!! Raja