Review of The British Commonwealth and Victory in the Second World War by Iain E. Johnston-White

St. Croix, Brad

English

Scholars Commons

Canadian Military History
Volume 28 | Issue 1 Article 17
4-29-2019
Review of "The British Commonwealth and
Victory in the Second World War" by Iain E.
Johnston-White
Brad St. Croix
This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Canadian Military
History by an authorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.
Recommended Citation
St. Croix, Brad () "Review of "The British Commonwealth and Victory in the Second World War" by Iain E. Johnston-White,"
Canadian Military History: Vol. 28 : Iss. 1 , Article 17.
Available at: https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol28/iss1/17
  51C A N A D I A N  M I L I TA RY  H I S T O RY 
Iain E. Johnston-White. The British Commonwealth and Victory in 
the Second World War. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. Pp. 319.
It is often said that victory has a thousand fathers. The Allied 
victory of the Second World War is no exception to this adage. Some 
nations are given more credit than others for the ultimate defeat of 
the Axis powers, although myths inform some of these conclusions. 
The United States is credited due to its financial and industrial 
contributions, the Soviet Union because it largely destroyed the 
German Army while suffering an enormous loss of human life and 
finally the United Kingdom (UK) contributed major intelligence work 
along with its lone stand against Nazi Germany for an entire year. 
The lone stand myth of the United Kingdom has been challenged, 
however, mostly by historians from the former Dominions. Iain E. 
Johnston-White’s The British Commonwealth and Victory in the 
Second World War explores the important part played by the British 
‘white’ Dominions in the overall British victory. Canada’s, New 
Zealand’s, Australia’s and South Africa’s contributions are examined 
through four separate case studies: financial support for the UK, an 
aircrew training programme known as the British Commonwealth 
Air Training Plan (BCATP), oceanic shipping and the land war in 
North Africa.1 The analysis focuses on the period from the fall of 
France in June 1940 to the summer of 1943 when the United States 
began to be fully mobilised and the Soviet Union began to push back 
the German advances. This period was selected as it was when the 
Dominions were the UK’s most significant allies. The importance of 
the Dominions to victory frames this entire work.
Johnston-White contends that the British could not have won 
the war without the various forms of aid provided by the Dominions. 
Altruistic intentions were not the only reasons why the Dominions 
were eager to help Britain in its time of need. Johnston-White claims 
that, as demonstrated in each case study covered in his work, the 
Dominions’ generosity was motivated by national interests and 
not simply a desire to support the British war effort. Due to the 
Dominions’ support for the UK, the bonds of the Commonwealth 
began to weaken as the Dominions demonstrated that they could 
support themselves and not rely on Britain. Motivations for providing 
assistance and the aid itself are the key themes explored in this work. 
1  Ireland is excluded as it remained neutral throughout the war.
1
St. Croix: Review of "The British Commonwealth & Victory" by Johnston-White
Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier,
52 Book Reviews
Johnston-White’s argument gives a crucial role to the Dominions: 
“I seek to analyse the Dominions primarily in terms of the war 
effort they produced—emphasising its essential nature to the UK 
and therefore adding an important element to the understanding of 
British triumph in the Second World War” (p. 15). 
Examples of aid, along with evidence to demonstrate self-interested 
intentions, are provided in each case study. Canada’s Billion Dollar 
Gift to the British government was given so that arms made in Canada 
could be bought in Britain which in turn would help stimulate the 
Canadian economy. Before Lend-Lease was enacted by the American 
government, Canada supplied a large quantity of arms to the British 
armed forces. The South African government allowed use of its ports 
in exchange for the UK providing the resources to upgrade them. The 
Royal Navy needed these ports as the Mediterranean-Suez route was 
closed with Italian entry into the war and travelling around the Cape 
of Good Hope was the safest way to reach India and the Far East. 
Johnston-White states that Australia provided troops for the war in 
North Africa because they needed British protection in the Pacific, so 
any support given to British world power benefitted Australia. New 
Zealand supported the BCATP because of a pre-war plan to train 
New Zealander pilots in cooperation with the Royal Air Force (RAF). 
The New Zealand government wanted the resources that they already 
had invested in air training to be used. Johnston-White provides a 
good example of the contributions of the Commonwealth nations to 
the UK when examining the importance that all countries played in 
aircrew training. Comparison of the number of training schools in all 
the Dominions combined helps support the work’s overall argument 
because the Dominions operated more schools than the UK at certain 
points in the war. 
Exploring the Dominions together requires an explanation of 
their similarities and differences. One such area is the ethnic makeup 
of the Dominions. The presence of British settler-colonists in all of 
the Dominions is used as one of the reasons for their support of 
Britain during the war. Despite making this point, Johnston-White 
is right to point out the difficulties in some Dominions of maintaining 
popular support for the war. Not all the Dominions had homogenous 
British populations. For example, the Canadian French-speaking 
minority and the South African Afrikaners, who made up most of the 
white population, caused concern for their respective governments. 
Both countries needed to emphasise to their people the self-interested 
2
Canadian Military History, Vol. 28 [], Iss. 1, Art. 17
https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol28/iss1/17
  53C A N A D I A N  M I L I TA RY  H I S T O RY 
elements of the aid given to the UK to keep public support for the 
war effort. New Zealand and Australia were less concerned about 
this issue as their populations were predominantly British and their 
populations mostly supported the aid given to the UK. This section 
shows that South Africa and Canada were more self-interested in 
their aid to the UK than Australia and New Zealand. 
There are a few mistakes in the text that create confusion due 
to missing information. For example, Johnston-White states that 
the United States and Southern Rhodesia provided trained men for 
RAF duties and the supporting numbers are said to be in table 8.2 
but there is no information about either country’s role in this table 
(pp. 115-16). As Johnston-White relies heavily on statistics to make 
his arguments, this mistake raises some credibility concerns over 
accuracy in his findings.  
Some of Johnston-White’s arguments are stronger than others, 
with Canadian and South African contributions providing the most 
support for the overall thesis. Another positive element of this work 
is its focus on the Dominions and not on the UK. Dominion politics 
and opinions form the bulk of the evidence used. Johnston-White’s 
approach to the British Empire in the Second World War is seldom 
employed in the historiography and it is done well here. British works 
often lump Dominion contributions into the British war effort while 
historians from the former Dominions tend to focus only on their 
country’s war effort and ignore the efforts of the other Commonwealth 
nations in the war. A true Commonwealth-wide approach is rarely 
used and thus The British Commonwealth and Victory in the 
Second World War is a significant contribution to the historiography. 
Johnston-White uses a good blend of primary and secondary sources 
from each Dominion. Archives in all the Dominions were consulted, 
lending greater authority to the work. Government departmental 
documents were heavily used to show relations between government 
officials in the different countries and to provide statistical support 
for the arguments about Dominion aid.  
Johnston-White claims his work is the first comprehensive study 
of the British Commonwealth in the Second World War but this is 
not the case, although it is one of few works on the topic. It is also 
not the first work to frame the weakening connections between the 
UK and the Dominions as part of the fall of the British Empire. 
Andrew Stewart explores both elements in Empire Lost: Britain, 
3
St. Croix: Review of "The British Commonwealth & Victory" by Johnston-White
Published by Scholars Commons @ Laurier,
54 Book Reviews
the Dominions and the Second World War, published in 2008.2 
Stewart’s timeline is much more extensive as it covers the entire war. 
Other vital differences exist between these two works. One of the 
most significant is their approach to the role of the Second World 
War and the Dominions’ intentions behind their actions. Stewart 
argues that the Dominions supported the UK to maintain their 
autonomy and equality with the UK within the Commonwealth.3 
Johnston-White puts forth the far more convincing argument that 
the Dominions acted in their own self-interest and not merely to 
maintain their independence. The debate on the nature of the British 
Commonwealth in the Second World War can be clearly seen when 
these works are compared. Johnston-White challenges most of the 
decolonisation literature and the role the war played in causing the 
collapse of the British Empire by arguing that a “de-dominionisation” 
process began before the war and the Dominions’ actions during 
the conflict further accelerated the separation (p. v). However, this 
process is often ignored by historians of decolonisation. Johnston-
White argues that those writing on the collapse of the British Empire 
need to understand the Second World War to better comprehend 
the process of decolonisation and the role of the Dominions in that 
process.
Reading The British Commonwealth and Victory in the Second 
World War would be more beneficial to those who are studying the 
decline of the British Empire than to those who want to learn about 
the Second World War. The strengths of the work lay in its insights 
into the relationships between the UK and the Dominions. Johnston-
White is quite right to highlight that the Dominions do not receive 
as much attention as they should in understanding decolonisation and 
this work will help to rectify the omission. 
brad st.croix, university of ottawa
2  Andrew Stewart, Empire Lost: Britain, the Dominions and the Second World War 
(London: Continuum, 2008).
3  Stewart, 162.
4
Canadian Military History, Vol. 28 [], Iss. 1, Art. 17
https://scholars.wlu.ca/cmh/vol28/iss1/17


Review of  The British Commonwealth and Victory in the Second World War  by Iain E. Johnston-White

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1963&amp;context=cmh

Review of The British Commonwealth and Victory in the Second World War by Iain E. Johnston-White

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Scholars Commons