Inquiring Minds: Deborah Cohen on troops' return from war

Deborah A. Cohen, assistant professor of history, recently answered questions from Kristen Cole about the reception of veterans returning home after war, and what the veterans of the war with Iraq may face. Cohen is author of the book "The War Come Home: Disabled Veterans in Britain and Germany, 1914-1939," in which she analyzed the different ways in which two nations cared for their disabled after World War I.

What reception did disabled servicemen returning home after the First World War receive from the public in the two countries you studied?

In the war’s immediate aftermath, the general public in both countries welcomed the soldiers home with sympathy and generosity. However, because of the interplay between government and philanthropy in the two countries, British and German veterans came to view the public very differently.

That’s the story my book tells. Despite high expectations raised during the war, the British state offered only modest compensation to disabled veterans. Charities filled the breach, brokering a lasting social peace between the disabled and their fellow citizens. The gratitude of the public, expressed through thousands of philanthropies, shielded the British state from veterans’ anger.

In Germany, by contrast, the post-war government provided its disabled veterans with the best social services in Europe. However, the new Weimar Republic also sought to establish a monopoly over benevolence; envisioning programs for wounded soldiers as the showpiece of postwar social policy, civil servants closed down charities to benefit the disabled. The state’s suppression of charity isolated the disabled from their fellow citizens. Convinced of the public’s ingratitude, veterans demanded that the Republic recognize their sacrifices with greater benefits than the government could eventually provide. Disabled veterans in Germany turned against the Republic that favored them.

What hurdles did the veterans experience? What factors led them to protest?

Twenty million men were severely wounded in the First World War; 8 million veterans returned home permanently disabled. For the disabled, the Great War – as one put it – “could never be over.” In every belligerent country, disabled veterans needed the same material provisions: decent care for their ailments, work that would accommodate their disabilities, and – if they could not work – a pension sufficient to enable them to live with a measure of dignity. But they wanted, too, a sense that their wartime service had been worthwhile: that their fellow citizens appreciated their sacrifices.

In the end, no country was spared mass protests by disgruntled veterans in the immediate postwar years. By the mid-1920s, however, for the reasons that my book explores, the course of the veterans’ movements had diverged decisively in Britain and Germany. British veterans had become bulwarks of the established order, loyal to king and country. The German disabled, by contrast, had joined the Weimar Republic’s most ruthless enemies.

What worked toward eliminating those hurdles?

In Britain, the charitable public championed the veteran’s cause. However, philanthropy did little more than rescue men from poverty. It did not promote their return to society. Measures that preserved social peace came at the cost of individuals’ lives. While British veterans existed at the periphery of their society, unhappy reminders of a time best forgotten, the Weimar state’s programs reintegrated the German disabled into the economy. Disabled veterans stood at the center of political life. Courted as a valuable constituency, they achieved a prominence unknown in Britain. As individuals, disabled veterans in Germany profited from their political mobilization. And yet, their self-realization contributed to the failure of Germany’s new democracy.

How do you think U.S. veterans of the war in Iraq will be received when they return?

The war in Iraq is being fought not by a conscripted mass army but by a professional force drawn from largely working- and lower middle-class Americans. Every family in Europe was affected by the First World War; only certain segments of the population are affected today. One of the lessons of Vietnam, learned well by those in the peace movement, is that the soldiers themselves should be spared criticism. We can expect, therefore, that the veterans of the war in Iraq, insofar as they receive any attention whatsoever, will be received with relative sympathy.

However, the skewed social distribution of the military has serious implications for veterans’ reception once the war is over. They will not have the public mobilized on their behalf, all the more serious a problem because these veterans, more than any others, face an administration whose antagonism toward social welfare programs is well established. The administration that urges us all to support our troops as they fight overseas – rhetoric that serves to mute protests against the war – is unlikely to care for them when they return home.