Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Vrbanja Bridge

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted by Zawed (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 08:20, 10 January 2019 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Battle of Vrbanja Bridge[edit]

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (talk)

Battle of Vrbanja Bridge (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

This is one of my rare forays into an article on the Bosnian War. This skirmish happened while I was in Bosnia on a recce for my later deployment, and had a significant impact on the training my troops underwent. It is particularly notable for being the most recent bayonet charge by the French Army, and for the fact that the officer who led the assault is currently the French Chief of the Defence Staff. It went through GAN a couple of years ago. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:06, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Indy beetle[edit]

  • Facing a second hostage crisis What was the first?
  • Should the ARBiH be considered co-belligerents in the infobox for firing on the VRS?
  • I'm open to that, but overall, I think the ARBiH involvement was incidental as far as this incident was concerned. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:29, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The infobox says the captured VRS soldiers were released, but this is not stated or supported in the prose. Phillip Corwin, UN officer in Sarajevo, discusses some of the legal implications of their capture in his memoir and their eventual release (pp. 63–65, 90, 93).
  • I'm seeing if I can find a better or corroborating source for the release, as memoirs are generally to be avoided due to the mix of primary and secondary material they usually contain. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:29, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have added the date of release of the VRS soldiers from Corwin, but given the nature of the source, I don't think the rumours and his opinions about the legal implications are ok to use. I have looked for academic coverage of the legal implications, but have come up short. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:28, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very well, all my comments are addressed and I support promotion. Well done. -Indy beetle (talk) 03:04, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • This source says that French President Jacques Chirac, who had been frustrated by UN pacifisticity, ordered the counterattack. Then, on 1 June, he said, "France will no longer permit its soldiers to be humiliated, wounded, or killed with impunity by those who choose to oppose their peacekeeping mission." The source further claims that this signified a stark break from "the mushy consensus among Western nations which, for four years, had cloaked their unwillingness to act in humanitarian garb." Any veracity to these claims?
  • He was far from the only one who was frustrated with the UN approach! I reckon this might be able to be used, I'll see if I can hunt down a news report to confirm. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:29, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I haven't been able to find this, and in fact it is contradicted by the INA video in which the French commanding general states that he ordered the attack without reference to Paris or even waiting for UN authorisation. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:06, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cancel that, I found a newly published source (Rathbun) that clearly states that Chirac ordered it. Have added some material about Chirac's intervention and its aftermath. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:22, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

-Indy beetle (talk) 23:57, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a look, Indy beetle, I'll report back once I've tidied up these bits, but I'm interested in whether others think the ARBiH should be considered a co-belligerent in the infobox. Could you chime in on this @AustralianRupert and Nick-D:? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:29, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
G'day, it's not a big deal for me, to be honest, but I would probably leave them out. I think their involvement was opportunistic and suspect that they would have opposed the UN troops in different circumstances (PM you can probably correct me if I am wrong), so it would possibly give the wrong impression to list them in the infobox alongside the UN. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:06, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with AR - the UN/NATO forces and Bosnians had an OK relationship, but this was largely due to them not attacking each other rather than cooperating at this stage. Nick-D (talk) 09:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We generally considered the Bosniaks the easiest to get along with, although their foreign mujahideen element did RPG an UNMO vehicle in our sector at one point. Ironically, the UNMOs in the vehicle were Arabs. I think I'll leave them out. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:17, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by AustralianRupert[edit]

Support: Apparently, I reviewed this at GAN a few years ago. I don't recall this, I'm sorry, but I have reviewed the changes since then and have a couple of minor comments/suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 10:47, 6 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • I wonder if there might be some sort of map, that could be added to the article?
  • In terms of licensing no, although I would add details of where the data presented comes from - OSM is the base map only. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:22, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, thanks. I've followed up with the map author, but they haven't edited since June, so I'm not particularly hopeful on this one. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:48, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • VRS seized 377 UNPROFOR hostages --> do we know which countries these were from? Potentially this could be added in a note?
  • I haven't been able to find a complete answer for this, unfortunately. They were from a lot of different countries. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:05, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • General Smith and other --> there is no need for the rank here, as it has already been introduced
  • The first evidence that something was wrong at Vrbanja Bridge... --> "The first evidence that the French (or NATO) received that something..."
  • The French marines overran a sangar held... --> perhaps try to introduce the bayonet charge in a more active way here. For instance, French marines, with bayonets fixed, overran a sangar held...
  • a corporal, managed to escape: do we know how?
  • No worries, as it is relatively recent history, it may not have been released yet, or written about in accessible sources. AustralianRupert (talk) 03:15, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • One of the wounded French soldiers died of wounds later that day --> "One of the wounded French soldiers died of wounds later that day, bringing the total of French killed during the battle to three"?
  • some of the citations use cite templates, and some don't. For instance, the news articles don't -- this creates a very slight inconsistency in outward presentation
  • No worries, PM, it is definitely getting there and I know you are very busy elsewhere. Thanks for your efforts. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:22, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • is there a place of publishing that could be added for Schmidt's work in the Notes section?
  • the infobox mentions a strength of 14 soldiers for the VRS, but I couldn't locate this number in the body of the article, unless I missed it somewhere
  • I can't find a source for the number of Serbs, adding up the killed, wounded and captured mentioned in sources would be OR, as some may have fled. Replaced with "unknown". Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:38, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • in the Aftermath, is there anything that could be added (if it exists in reliable sources) about how the incident impacted future deployments of peacekeepers in the region?
  • I believe that a large number (121) UN peacekeepers who had been taken hostage, were released on 4 June. These were from France, Canada and the UK. This might be relevant for the Aftermath, perhaps? Source: "Fighting escalates, UN role in question", UN Chronicle, 32.2 (September 1995): p. 29 + (accessed via Gale's War and Terrorism Collection online information database through my work library). Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Nick-D[edit]

This is a great little article. I only have some minor comments:

  • Can you include material on the impact of the battle on how your troops and other UN/NATO forces were trained/deployed?
  • I'm waiting on a source for this which will hopefully have a mention, but given things were so chaotic at the time with changing mandates and Croatian/Bosniak offensives right across Bosnia, I'm not sure it filtered outside military documents which I don't have access to anymore and might not be considered reliable anyway. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:01, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fair enough. I imagine that the documents may also not have been declassified. Nick-D (talk) 05:50, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • It presumably isn't an accident that the aggressive and successful young platoon commander ended up running the French military. Could some material be added on the battle's impact on his career? Nick-D (talk) 09:31, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've added some stuff from France 24 which makes it clear the Vrbanja Bridge bayonet charge made him famous, it also includes a video of him talking about it when he was a colonel. There were other factors, including his command in Mali, but it can't have hurt him. What do you think? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:01, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Those changes look good, and I'm now pleased to Support this nomination. Nick-D (talk) 05:50, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry everyone, I've been a bit distracted with other things. Will get onto these comments in the next couple of days. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:43, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am still working on this, just not at my normal workrate. Waiting for a source to see if it helps with a couple of questions. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:31, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:58, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Catrìona[edit]

More to come, but my first thought is that there might there be Serbian language sources that could be used to expand the article. Catrìona (talk) 02:14, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Given the conflict and the partisan nature of most if not all of the state-controlled Serbian and Bosnian Serb news outlets at the time, contemporary Serb news reports are likely to be so hopelessly biased as to be unusable without giving them undue weight. I did search Radio Television Serbia, Politika and B92, but there is nothing online that I could find other than articles about the civilians killed on the bridge earlier. The only Serbian language book I could locate that mentioned the battle was a brief passage in Ratni zločini NATO-a (War crimes of NATO), the title of which underlines my concerns. Undue weight is why I have avoided, as much as possible, using Serb, Bosnian or French sources except for basic facts, and have instead relied on news sources and books from countries like the US and UK who were not directly involved in the battle and are less likely to have an axe to grind. Having said that, you may have better searching skills or access than I, so if you are able to find any academic Serbian language sources on this incident that are not hopelessly biased, I would be very interested. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:09, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I trust your sourcing skills :) This source[1] potentially gives some information although it's hard to tell because I can only see a snippet view. Nothing else on Google Books. No additional sources were found on Google News or a general Google search (in English).
I did a spot check of two of the web sources (Wilkinson 28 May 1995 and Daley 7 June 1995).
  • Daly (not Daley) is the correct spelling according to the Independent.
  • Fixed. Not quite sure how I missed that...
  • I have tweaked the references a bit to make it clearer what is being supported by Wilkinson source.
  • French marines, with bayonets fixed, overran a sangar held by the VRS, at the cost of the life of one Frenchman, Private Jacki Humblot. I am not clear on how Wilkinson supports this content since neither bayonets, Humblot or sangar is mentioned. The content is mostly supported by Daly but Daly does not mention bayonets.
  • Wilkinson was used to reinforce the general aspects of Daly. Have amended this to reflect what the sources say. Let me know what you think? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:24, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Five French were wounded in the clash I cannot find the information in the source that supports this claim.
  • Not sure how that snuck in, I suspect this was from the earlier news article. The later one says 10 French wounded. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:24, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Close paraphrasing found: "Ten were taken to an unknown destination while two remained on the bridge as human shields." in Daly 28 May 1995 versus "Ten were taken to an unknown destination while two remained on the site as human shields." in the article. Catrìona (talk) 05:46, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Balkan battlegrounds: a military history of the Yugoslav conflict, 1990-1995. Central Intelligence Agency, Office of Russian and European Analysis. 2002. pp. 407–409.

All of the web sources are mainstream media or institutional, and can be assumed to be reliable. The books appear to be published by mass-market or university presses. The only one that is potentially concerning is Ripley, since Osprey Publishing has ended up at RSN for various reasons and apparently published books by Franz Kurowski. According to Osprey, Ripley has an academic background, and I have no reason to believe the source is not an RS.

Support on sources. Catrìona (talk) 10:00, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the source review! I consider the Osprey criticisms go too far. Kurowski is one thing, Osprey as a publisher is another. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:28, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Harry[edit]

  • It occurred after the VRS seized French-manned Maybe go with "began" rather than "occurred"?
  • was appointed as the French Chief of the Defence Staff I'm not a professional copy editor, but I'm fairly sure "appointed as" is ungrammatical
  • Try to avoid starting two sentences in the same paragraph with "in response"
  • General Michael Rose established the UN Rapid Reaction Force is there an article on that force we can link to, or some more we can say about it? It's relatively unusual for UN forces to get pro-active like that.
  • Yep, very rare, but 2 LI, 2e REI, and a regiment of British 155 mm guns made for quite a punch. Added some material on its creation and the role it played in forcing the Bosnian Serbs to the negotiating table. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:56, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice to see a couple of Brits featuring, especially Smith (I wrote the article on The Utility of Force a few years ago); is it worth including the nationalities of the UN commanders?
  • VRS forces were observed to be less likely to engage French UN peacekeepers Do we know if this applied just to French forces, or to all of UNPROFOR?
  • In the immediate aftermath, according to the sources used, just the French, but I got the feeling they were a bit wary in general. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:56, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • What was the ultimate result of the political fallout in France and why was it so controversial that the CDS threatened to resign? Was there any fallout with the UN?
  • Added that the French PM and Defence Minister also disagreed, but were overruled by Chirac. If there was internal UN fallout, I haven't been able to find a news article covering it. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:39, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe explain the relevance of the operations linked in the see also?

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:30, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'm done, Harry. Please check I've addressed all your points to your satisfaction? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:39, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Harry, forgot to ping you. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:42, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. One followup though. I don't think the article makes it clear enough that the "more aggressive rules of engagement" are not a normal thing for UN peacekeepers. I'm just looking for a sentence or two about how unorthodox it is for UN troops in white tucks and blue helmets to take offensive action (the only other example that springs to mind is UNAMSIL in the Sierra Leone Civil War, and that was a long time coming). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:28, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
G'day Harry, added in some more material about the fact that the UN RRF were green rather than white, and a bit more about the shift to peace enforcement. I also shifted the RRF stuff to Aftermath, which is where it really belongs, and included the release of the hostages on 18 June. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:46, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That works for me. Support. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:38, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Battle_of_Vrbanja_Bridge&oldid=877691618"