Was Sir Douglas Haig a Good or Bad Leader?

Was Sir Douglas Haig a Good or Bad Leader? The issue of Douglas Haigs role as a general on the Western Front, during the Battle of the Somme in 1916, has been thoroughly questioned by many historians to date. Through different views and opinions, Haigs skills have been both heavily celebrated and criticised. Therefore he has been viewed as both Butcher of the Somme and the Architect of Victory, much evidence supporting both arguments. However the majority of people seem to favour the idea of Haig being a merciless leader, which is completely understandable. For instance, the Battle of the Somme hugely affected almost every person in Britain, many losing family members. For them, it would have been easy to blame the British losses solely on General Haig, and many did just that. However many people saw him as a highly gifted soldier and leader, and there was a good side to Haig, for example, he did manage to eventually wear down the German army, and played a part in the result of World War 1. Therefore this controversial issue will perhaps be continually debated. The Battle of the Somme was a largely Scottish battle, with three Scottish divisions participating. This also applied to Douglas Haig, who was born in Edinburgh and was commander in chief. He was blamed for the enormous slaughter of the Battle of the Somme, during which there were around 60,000 British casualties on just the first day, a third of which were killed. This alone is evidence enough for a lot of people of Haigs failures as a general. However, many of the flaws in Haigs leading of the Battle of the Somme stemmed from the fact that he was commanding a group of sixty divisions, when the usual number was just six. This shows the extreme circumstances under which Douglas Haig was commanding at the Battle of the Somme. The Battle of the Somme was a significant event in history; this is mainly due to the absurd amount of deaths, even though they were no larger than were to be expected, however some people find fault in the fact that Haig kept the army fighting even when he became aware of the continuous height of casualty figures. Just like any general, Haig strove for success, however he had a major fault: he was extremely optimistic, and constantly believed that the German army was close to surrendering, therefore believing that a win was also close. This positive personality is shown by a quote which Douglas Haig himself said at the beginning of the war, The situation is never so good or so bad as first reports indicate. However, even though he felt that his army was fully capable of defeating the Germans, he wasnt correct, in fact, Haigs army didnt have the huge amount of soldiers, which the German army were able to take advantage of this clearly shows that his targets were impossibly to achieve , he was just too ambitious. Haig was also heavily criticised for the ridiculous length of the battle, this was simply because it could have been ended much sooner than it was, and this would have even prevented Britain in constantly finding fault in Haigs leadership skills. The main reason that Haig even allowed the battle to continue because he wished to straighten his trenches, as this would have had a great effect on his armys attacks. However Haig was also criticised for allowing the British army to fight in the appalling weather at the time of the Somme, although technically he cannot take the entire blame for this decision as the idea actually came from the French army officer. Haig was certainly one to override his army commanders, although this is understandable, as if he found their advice questionable then he had to trust himself to make the correct decision alone. However at the beginning of the battle of the Somme, Haig was overruled himself, by the governments of Britain and France, they asked Haig to attack the German army at that point in time, but Haig didnt agree this was because he felt that his armies werent ready; however his argument wasnt effective, therefore he was ignored. Haig understood that he would have to plan an attack quickly, because if he took too much time to do so then the alliance which stopped the French from attacking the British could be put in jeopardy, and that was a risk that Haig couldnt afford to take. At the start of the battle, the British army looked to have no chance in defeating the German army, in fact, Official History wrote that the Somme was the first time that the †¦British line been held with so few men and so few guns†¦. The British army were also overwhelmed by the power of the Germans and after just one day of fighting there were an enormous number of casualties, most of them due to bite and hold attacks. In the beginning, Haig was severely short of forces and, trying to find a solution, ended up having to leave Goughs twelve divisions alone to defend 42 miles of the front, this resulted in some having very few soldiers. Haig could have managed the Somme better, however by the end of the battle, the British were achieving success against the Germans and eventually the Germans did surrender, in fact the German General Ludendorff mentions in his autobiography, My war memories, As a result of the Somme we were completely exhausted on the Western Front. When considering Haigs skill as an army commander it has to be remembered that the situation at the Battle of the Somme was extremely unique, Haig was handling ten times the amount of forces, most of whom were learning the tactics of war as they went along. After the battle ended Haig was compared to other generals who sent hundreds of soldiers to their deaths, he was viewed as uncaring and constantly making horrible decisions. Although Haigs opinion of the turnout of the war was never made clear, it was suggested that he agreed with the result, as in 1919, Haig defended the fact that the Germans were offered a settlement at the end of the war. The relationship between Douglas Haig and David Lloyd George was a cause of major conflict and had an overpowering effect on Haigs reputation. Lloyd George was clear in the fact that he had no trust or liking for Haig, especially during the Somme, when he didnt understand why Haig was allowed the high casualty rates to continue, especially since this didnt give any advantage to the British. He saw Haig simply as a man with no intelligence, and no understanding, although he also never replaced him, or even stood up to him. However, it was no secret that a war was waged between Haig and Lloyd George. An example of the tension between these characters was on the 1st September, when Haig received a telegram from Henry Wilson, marked personal, this carried a warning, that Haig was to stop preventable casualties during the battle of the Somme. The clear reason for the telegram was for the protection of Lloyd George; however Haig took it that he could strike the Hindenburg line if he felt t he need to do so. The tension between them grew when Lloyd George published his war memoirs, in which he unleashed an attack on Haig, both, simply as a man and as part of the army. This was one of the very little books that really cause chaos for an important figures reputation, especially since when it became available, Haig had already passed and therefore he couldnt even protect his own reputation. However Lloyd George isnt the only politician that Haig had a significant relationship with, Haig and Winston Churchill also had a somewhat interesting relationship, in fact Haig helped out Churchill in the writing of his book, The World Crisis, by sending him parts of his personal diaries which he kept during the war. The reason that this is interesting is the fact that Churchill often criticised Haig, especially as a General during the war. However, Churchill did admit that when reviewing the war he began to think a good deal better if Haig than I did at the time. Unlike Lloyd George, Churchill felt that it would be impossible to find as good a general as Haig was to replace him. Haig didnt mind some criticism from Churchill in his book, but it was that criticism which strongly effected Haigs reputation. The conflict between these politicians and Haig meant that Haig had to fight the war against not only the Germans, but also those politicians. It wasnt just Churchills writing that affected Haigs reputation though; there were many different memoirs and accounts released after the war, by many different people, for example, David Lloyd George, Churchill and Gough. However when these records were released Haig mentioned to Foch that he couldnt release a book on the war, as it was too soon to tell the truth. If he had written them however, they would have not only been successful, but would have probably heightened his reputation. However Haigs Final Dispatch, published in 1919 actually had only a small effect on the opinions of the war. Yet, decades later, a revisionist historian, John Terraine revised these arguments and tried to re-build Haigs reputation. In fact, Terraines Douglas Haig: An Educated Soldier strongly defended Haigs reputation, his main point being that it was Haig who eventually wore down the German army. However historian, John Laffin, has the opposite opinion, he feels as though Haig should be accused beca use of his wilful blunders and wicked butchery. This shows clear argument between the two recent historians, both trying to challenge Haigs reputation. Terraine passed away in 2003, however before his death, he did manage to change the way that some people saw Douglas Haig, and he restored Haig to the position of serious commander. Haig was criticised and celebrated by different historians, few ever looking at both sides of things. Haigs reputation was heightened the most due to his input in helping and celebrating ex-servicemen. Haig devoted a large part of his life, after the war, to charity events and war-memorials. This shows that people were even slightly wrong about the fact that he didnt care about the young men fighting in the war. For example, in 1922, Haig travelled to Swansea and 4000 people turned out to see him lay a stone for the city memorial, and in 1925, the Haigs toured Canada; some 10,000 people came to see Haig lay a stone on a cenotaph in Toronto. Also, in Glasgow, in 1924, Haig revealed a monument. These days people may be shocked to find out that in 1925 Haig opened the Newfoundland Memorial Park; this was where the 1st Newfoundland attack took place in 1916. The fact that Haig was sought after to carry out the ceremony by the government, shows that even though there is constant argument over Douglas Haigs reputation, at this time he must have been highly thought of. This is why Haig was overwhelmed with huge amounts of requests to reveal all sorts of different memorials. Haigs speeches at these events were never completely neutral, the issues of sacrifice and the needs of ex-soldiers were constantly highlighted. This made his reputation improve to a lot of people, because they felt as if he was more caring. In the early 1920s Haig began to type up his wartime diary, he wished for this to be published after his death. In 1928 a line of war diaries and memoirs began being published, some attacking Haigs reputation seriously, however Haig wasnt alive to see this, as on the 29th January 1928, Douglas Haig died of a heart attack. This death came as a shock to Britain, many people in disbelief. Haigs wife believed that the strain of wartime command had worn out his heart, and the media began to print headlines, field marshal a war victim, Haig was treated just like any soldier who had fought in the war, and he too was seen as a war casualty. The real surprise after Haigs death was the extent to which the public mourned him; his death was treated much more graciously than any other British general. Therefore his coffin was escorted by the two future kings of England, showing that he was obviously an important member of the nation, even though some people viewed him as a callous butcher. This was reinforced because St Pauls, Wrens great cathedral was suggested as where Haig would be buried and if he had been then hed have been buried with Wellington and Nelson, two heroes from WW1, however Haig had wanted to be buried at home, in Edinburgh, therefore he body was sent north. A crowd of people waited for him to arrive, to pay their respects. Eventually he was buried in the grounds of Dryburgh Abbey. However the event of his death just brought more conflict to the argument of Haigs reputation. Again, Haigs reputation plummeted. Therefore Haigs reputation is constantly debated, going from one extreme to the other, barely ever balancing, or being fair to the actions of Haig. However much argument is presented in favour of Haig, the evidence is overpowered by the casualty figures of the battle of the Somme, by Churchills criticisms of Haig and by the tension in Haigs relationship with David Lloyd George, these are the facts people cant just forget and therefore the points which effect Haigs reputation. Haigs reputation was most significantly analysed through memoirs and accounts, for example of Churchill, Lloyd George, Gough and Terraine, although his reputation took a severe hit after his death also. Its clear that Haig will forever be viewed as heartless general, which is a fair judgement, considering the fact that he was the general in charge during the Battle of the Somme, and allowed the horrific casualty figures to present, and the fact that he let the battle go on for much longer than it should have, fo r personal or no gain, and thats why Douglas Haig will forever be condemned as Butcher of the Somme. Hedging Techniques: Analysis of pros and cons Hedging Techniques: Analysis of pros and cons This report will discuss the basics of hedging, advantages and disadvantages of hedging. There is description of methods and techniques used for hedging. This also discusses the primary need of hedging. Then follows the detailed calculations of the receivables of 500M pesos due in six months time and the best way of hedging to get the most of it. This report then goes on to discuss the forward contracts and futures along with forward options that are available for individual and basic differences between forward contracts and options Introduction: An unexpected change in exchange rates is the economic exposure which is commonly seen as a political disaster or natural disaster. The effect of economic exposures on exchange risks is kept out from this paper on one hand. On the other hand the cross-border firms do not get affected by the volatility of the exchange rates, in terms of the translation transaction exposures. Foreign exchange risk does not exist; even if it exists, it need not be hedged; even if it is to be hedged, corporation need not hedge it. When compared with certain results this hypothesis seems to be inconsistent. Different ways have been found out by some empirical researches to hinder different exposures. For instance, in some real cases financial instruments or netting was applied. Hedging and Importance Normally foreign exchange rates are dictated based on the supply and demand of two currencies and are persuaded depending on both the interest and inflation rates of the corresponding countries. For entering into a contract both the parties those are going to buy sell must have to be familiarised by the forward exchanging rate. Above all relationship between forward exchange rates, spot exchange rates, inflation and interest have to be introduced. Due to some factors such as government intervening and costs of transaction, relationship should not always be hold in the short run. But however the relationship could be hold on the long run by the four parties: purchasing power, expectations theory, the interest rate parity the international Fisher effect. Types of exchange rate exposures: In an international firm exchange rate losses those are unfavourable are protected by hedging currency exchange risk. Thus hedging currency exchange risk can be considered as one of the factors for eliminating risks. There are basically three forms of exchange rate exposures. Transaction exposure Translation exposure Economic exposure Transaction exposure: It is caused when the organisation is driven into certain financial agreements or obligations. The future gains or losses of an organisation are completely dependent on the changes caused to the exchange rates in the future cash flows of the agreements or obligations. The values that were before after the accounts received paid along with those engagements to buy or leasing financial cash flows do not match. The risk of transaction exposure is completely different from the risk of transaction exposure since the former one contains potential changes regarding cash flows. Translation exposure: Translation exposure is also known as balance sheet exposure or accounting exposure. It is a kind of exposure which occurs when if the financial statements of all the affiliates have been consolidated by the parent company. The denominated currencies of the affiliates are quite different when compared to their parents. Economic exposure: Economic exposure is also known as real exposure or operating exposure. It is mainly concerned about the risk of losses in exchange in association with the changes in future cash flows. It is completely different from the former two exposures which operate by long-term diplomatic decisions. There are mainly three barriers for non-financial organisations hedging currency risks compared to the financial organisations. Firstly, models to forecast forward are not well devised. Secondly, team of management is incessantly hesitant to hedge risks of FX the team seems to risk-averse with respect to FX risks. Lastly, the risk management is less in non-financial firms compared to financial firms. The main purpose of hedging FX risks for most of the non-financial firms is for variance reduction in future cash flows. Some of the advantages of corporate hedging are as below. It can predict the cash flows of the firm that are generated internally can arrange the financing plan of a firm either internally or externally. Also hedging helps for the smoothening of the net income of a firm, which proves to be valuable in the present financial market which focuses attention to quarterly earnings rather than the cash flows in the long-run. Based on the proponents of hedging, some of the many arguments are opposed to hedging. Spending on hedges of currency opt for an exceed in the loss in currency risk exposures. If the management fails in reducing the risks using hedging, rivalry arises between management shareholders, where as the value of the shareholder crumbles. There are several hedging instruments in order to protect our money from getting exposed to the above mentioned exposures/risks. These hedging techniques include spot, forward contracts, options, futures, currency swaps and so on usually referred to as derivatives. The most frequently used instruments are: Forward Contracts: The two parties enter a contract in which they agree on a favourable current exchange rate on a specified future date. Thus this guarantees a customized future payment and maturity date and eliminates future volatility. It is tailor made instrument that it includes and specifies all its parameters like money, date, exchange rate and denomination of payment. Also the cost of forward contracts is low comparing with other instruments and the settlement date is up to one year. Futures: These are similar to forward contracts but are more standardised in terms of volume that is about to be exchanged. This is generally intended to speculating profits. Spots: This allows us to buy or sell a currency at todays exchange price and the day of settlement will be no more than two business days. Currency Options: Options are like contracts but are more costly than contracts. It guarantees a worst-case exchange rate for the future purchase of one currency for another. There is a right to sell or buy but there is no obligation to do so as such giving the options holder substantial benefits. Currency Swaps: These are in general long term high value transactions. By swapping their future cash flow obligations the counterparties are able to replace cash flows denominated in one currency with cash flows in a more desired currency. As requested billing in U.S. dollars, forward contracts and money market hedge are some effective techniques of hedging and safe guarding the firm from any possible fluctuations and risks arising from the same. In U.S. dollar billing we charge the goods at the rate in their home country but enter a contract based on the spot rate on the day of sale, and which means they need to pay the equivalent amount in dollars when the payment is due. Irrespective of the fluctuations of the currency rates the company is bound to make the payment of that exact amount of dollars at the end of contract or due date. Forward contracts are mentioned above lock in the exchange rate on future currency transactions and thus reducing their exchange risk. The payment is due in future but the current exchange rate is used for entering into such a contract. Money market hedge is a technique where in the company relies on borrowing and investing funds via money markets and using the spot rate to lock in the amount from the receivable. We borrow in the home currency the same amount that we are expected to receive ad invest in the other currency. Billing in U.S. Dollars As per our previous exports made to Mexico, we will receive 500 million Mexican Pesos. The spot rate of Peso/USD is 15.3555-15.3561, one of 15.3555 is the bid price at which the trader will buy from us and 15.3561 is the price at which he will sell. So we need to buy 500 million Mexican pesos meaning we need to consider the spot exchange ask rate 15.3561. Thus the 500 million Mexican pesos will come to USD which is $32.5604 M. Therefore we will be receiving a definite sum of $32.5604 M after the end of contract which is 6 months. So what ever is the exchange rate at the end of 6 months or whatever be the range of fluctuations we will get $32.5604 M. But the company has to pay an equivalent of $32.5604M which is $32.5604M*15.3555 = 499.9812M pesos. This is mainly due to the depreciation of peso with respect to US dollars. Forward Contract Since the goods have been exported the importer is now short if 500 million Mexican pesos. By entering into a forward contract we sign an agreement with the importer, which states that the delivery of the equivalent of the amount due should be made after 6 months time at the forecasted forward rate which is 15.0123-15.0134 (peso/USD). So as in the previous case we will be entitled to a sum of USD which turns out to be $33.3036 M. Hence we now entered into a future contract which gives us $33.3036 M at the end of 6 months. While we receive $33.3036 M, as an equivalent to 500 M Mexican pesos, the importer needs to pay the trader an amount of $33.3036*15.0123 = 499.9636 M pesos. However if the future rate increases then the importer is obliged to pay the 500M pesos at the prevailing spot rate. But in case the spot rate goes down then the importer has to meet the previously agreed rate for the payment. Money Market Hedge Here we are expected to receive 500 M pesos, so we borrow the same amount from a Mexican bank at the borrowing rate of 2.6% p.a. and we convert them to US dollars and invest the exact same amount in US dollars at 3.1% p.a. We borrow 500M Mexican pesos at 2.6%, which is = 493.5834M and we convert them into dollars at the prevailing spot rate of 15.3561, which transforms to = $32.1425M and we invest them in US market at 3.1%, which gives us $32.1425*1.016 = $32.6568M. But once we receive the payment of 500M pesos the loan will have to be repaid and we have $36.6568M*15.0123 = 550.3029M pesos, whereas the loan amount is 500M*1.013 = 506.5M pesos. Which means we have a profit of 550.3029M-506.5M pesos = 43.8029M pesos, which in turn is = $2.9176M Best Hedge By observing the figures, it is clear that future contracts method is more beneficial than the rest of them. This hedging earns us $32.5604M by billing in U.S. dollars, $33.3036M in forward contracts and $32.6568M by money market hedging. Derivatives The derivative securities market has become quite large in recent years. In 2007, according to the International Swaps and Derivatives Association the notional value of all financial swaps stood at $587 trillion worldwide. The GDP of the entire world was only about $60 trillion by the year 2008. The swaps and derivatives transfer risk from those who do not want to bear to those who are willing to bear for a fee. It is almost like insurance on property or automobile. For example, a put option is to safeguard if the price of a stock is expected to fall. And, like the insurance industry, both parties are mutually benefitted by this type of transaction; it is called hedging. Bulk of the transactions in derivative securities is mainly based on speculation than for the purposing of hedging against foreign currency risks. These help in providing liquidity in the currency market apart transferring risk. The sizes of banks and stock brokerage firms in derivative securities may give rise to huge loss which may well bring the entire financial system to a standstill. At the same time, some participants in these derivatives markets are reporting huge profits. Swaps The derivatives market involves more than just put and calls options. There are also contracts involving swapping fixed interest rate payment streams for adjustable or floating interest rate payment streams. Simply put its mutual agreement of two parties which satisfy both the parties. Forward Contracts and Futures Swaps, caps, and floors are recent innovations in the derivatives markets. The derivatives market traditionally included forward contracts in addition to options (puts, calls, warrants). A forward contract involved a commitment to trade a specified item at a specified price at a future date. The forward contract takes whatever form the two parties agree to. There is also a market for standardized forward contracts, which is called the futures market. The standardization makes possible a wider market with greater liquidity and efficiency. Often the futures markets eliminate the ties between specific parties, the party and the counter-party, and the risk that the other might not fulfil the contract. In the futures market everyone deals with the clearinghouse who guarantees fulfilment. Forward exchange operations carry the same credit risk as spot transactions, but for longer periods of time; however there are significant risks involved. A forward contract requires delivery, at a fixed future date, of a specified amount of one currency against other foreign currency payment; the exchange rate is fixed at the time of writing the contract. It is to be noted that gain or loss on the forward contracts is irrespective of the current spot rate. The gain or loss exactly offsets the change in currency costs. The major active participants in forward markets are arbitrageurs, traders, hedgers who seek to reduce their exchange risks by locking in the exchange rate on future trade or financial operations. There are differences in even the quoted prices, commercial customers are usually quoted the actual price while the dealers quote the forward rate only as a discount/ premium on the spot rate. These contracts are usually available for 1,2,3,6 or 12 months delivery. However forwards for odd maturities can also be formulated. With the increase in the maturity and volatility of the currency the bid-ask spread rises. Forward Exchange Options Contract In the options market there has developed some terminology that is somewhat intimidating to the uninitiated. A call option is the right to buy a share of a stock, the underlying security, at a specified price, called the exercise price or the strike price. A put option is the right to sell a share of a stock at a specified price, the exercise price or the strike price. There is a limited time for the exercise of the call option. An American option can be exercised at any time up to and including the expiration date. A European option can only be exercised on the expiration date. The value of a call option at any time depends upon: The current market price of the underlying security The exercise price The interest rate Time remaining until expiration The volatility of the price of the underlying security. When any of these change the value of the option will change. The options terminology that is most obscure is the use of Greek letters to refer to the response of the option value to changes in the variables which affect it. Ά Delta = the change in the price of the option per unit change in the price of the underlying; i.e., the increase in option value if the current market price of the stock goes up by one dollar. Delta is important in creating a perfectly hedged portfolio. The rate of change of the delta of an option is called its gamma. à Ã‚  Rho = the rate of change in the price of an option in response to a unit change in the interest rate. ÃŽÂ ¸ Theta = the rate of change in the price of an option with respect to time; i.e., the change as the time until expiration decreases by one unit. Vega (this is not a Greek letter) = the rate of change in the price of an option for a unit change in volatility. Despite having the right to buy a call option or to sell a put option, the rights holder is not obliged to buy or sell but can do so at his will. This will give him total flexibility as to when to buy/sell his options