Colonel /ˈkɜrnəl/, abbreviated Col, is a military rank of a senior commissioned officer. It or a corresponding rank exists in most armies and in many air forces; the naval equivalent rank is generally captain. In air forces with a separate rank structure, the equivalent rank is generally group captain. It is also used in some police forces and other paramilitary rank structures. A colonel is typically in charge of a regiment in an army.

'Colonel' is usually the highest or second-highest field rank, and is below the general ranks.

History and origins[link]

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2012)

With the shift from primarily mercenary to primarily national armies in the course of the seventeenth century, a colonel (normally a member of the aristocracy) became a holder (German Inhaber) or proprietor of a military contract with a sovereign. The colonel purchased the regimental contract — the right to hold the regiment — from the previous holder of that right or directly from the sovereign when a new regiment was formed or an incumbent was killed.^{[citation needed]}

The rank of colonel was popularized by the Spanish tercios in the 16th and 17th centuries. Gonzalo Fernández de Córdoba, nicknamed 'the Great Captain', divided his armies in 'cornelias' or colonelcies, each led by a 'coronel' or colonel. ^[1] The use of 'colonel' became more widespread as the tercios led by commanders of many nationalities fought all over Europe.

As the office of colonel became an established practice, the colonel became the senior captain in a group of companies which were all sworn to observe his personal authority — to be ruled or regimented by him. This regiment, or governance, was to some extent embodied in a contract and set of written rules, also referred to as the colonel's regiment or standing regulation(s). By extension, the group of companies subject to a colonel's regiment (in the foregoing sense) came to be referred to as his regiment (in the modern sense) as well.

In French usage of this period the senior colonel in the army or, in a field force, the senior military contractor, was the colonel general and, in the absence of the sovereign or his designate, the colonel general might serve as the commander of a force. The position, however, was primarily contractual and it became progressively more of a functionless sinecure. (The head of a single regiment or demi brigade would be called a 'mestre de camp' or, after the Revolution, a 'chef de brigade'.)

By the late 19th century, colonel was a professional military rank though still held typically by an officer in command of a regiment or equivalent unit. Along with other ranks it has become progressively more a matter of ranked duties, qualifications and experience and of corresponding titles and pay scale than of functional office in a particular organization.

As European military influence expanded throughout the world, the rank of colonel became adopted by nearly every nation under a variety of names.

With the rise of communism, some of the large communist militaries saw fit to expand the colonel rank into several grades, resulting in the unique senior colonel rank which was found and is still used in such nations as China and North Korea.

Colonel-in-chief[link]

In many modern armies the 'regiment' has more importance as a ceremonial unit or a focus of members' loyalty than as an actual battle formation. Troops tend to be deployed in 'battalions' (commanded by a lieutenant colonel) as a more convenient size of military unit and, as such, colonels have tended to have a higher profile in specialist and command roles than as actual commanders of regiments. However, in Commonwealth armies the position of the colonel as the figurehead of a regiment is maintained in the honorary role of colonel-in-chief, usually held by a member of the royal family,^[2] the nobility, or a retired senior military officer. The colonel-in-chief wears a colonel's uniform and encourages the members of the regiment, but takes no active part in the actual command structure or in any operational duties.^[3]

Colonel and equivalent ranks by country[link]

Colonel in individual military forces[link]

The following articles deal with the rank of colonel as it is used in various national militaries.

• Kolonel (Belgium, Estonia & Netherlands)
• Colonel (Canada)
• Colonel (India)
• Colonel (Pakistan)
• Colonel (United Kingdom)
• Colonel (United States)

Central and Eastern European equivalent ranks[link]

Since the 16th century, the rank of regimental commander was adopted by several Central and Eastern European armies, most notably the forces of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Cossacks and then Muscovy. In countries with slavic languages, the exact name of the rank maintains a variety of spellings, all descendant from the Old Slavonic^{[disambiguation needed ]} word plk or polk meaning unit of standing army (see The Tale of Igor's Campaign), and include the following:

• Plukovník (Czech Republic and Slovakia)
• Pułkownik (Poland)
• Pulkininkas (Lithuania)
• Polkovnik (Russia, Slovenia, Bulgaria)
• Polkovnyk (Ukraine)
• Pukovnik (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia)

The Hungarian equivalent ezredes literally means 'leader of a thousand' (i.e. of a regiment)

Western European equivalent ranks[link]

• Oberst (Austria, Germany, Switzerland, Denmark and Norway)
• Överste (Sweden)
• Ofursti (Iceland)
• Eversti/Överste (Finland)

Other national equivalent ranks[link]

•  Afghanistan Dagarwal (دګروال)
•  Albania Kolonel
•  Armenia — Gndapet (գնդապետ)
•  Georgia Polkovniki (პოლკოვნიკი)

•  People's Republic of China Shang Xiao
•  Greece Syntagmatarchis (Συνταγματάρχης)
•  Hungary Ezredes
•  Iran Sarhang (سرهنگ)
•  Israel Aluf Mishne (אלוף משנה)

•  North Korea Sangchwa
•  Republic of Korea Taeryong

•  Republic of China (Taiwan) Shang Hsiao

•  Thailand Nai Phan (TH: นายพัน) Chief of 1,000
  • Phan Ek (TH: พันเอก) First of 1,000: Colonel
  • Phan Tho (TH: พันโท) Second of 1,000: Lieutenant colonel

•  Turkey Albay
•  Viet Nam Đại tá
•  Egypt عقيد Aqid (Egypt and most Arab League member countries)

Gallery[link]

Army colonels[link]

• Australian-Army-COL.gif

  Australia

• 

  Belgium

• Coronel-Brazil.gif

  Brazil (Coronel)

• Army slip-on Col.png

  Canada

• 

  Chile (Coronel)

• 

  Colombia

• 

  Finland (Eversti)

• 

  Germany (Oberst Bundeswehr

• 

  Greece (Syntagmatarchis)

• 

  Indian Army

• IE-Army-OF5.png

  Republic of Ireland

• 

  Italy (Colonnello)

• 

  Netherlands (Kolonel)

• Colonel Pak Army.jpg

  Pakistan

• Rank insignia of pułkownik of the Army of Poland.svg

  Poland (Pułkownik)

• 

  Portugal (Coronel)

• ROCA-COL.jpg

  ROC (Taiwan)(Shang Xiao)

• 

  Romania

• 

  Soviet Union (Polkovnik / Полковник)

• SL-Army-OF5 Colonel.PNG

  Sri Lanka

• 

  Sweden (Överste)

• 

  Thailand

• 

  United States

Air force colonels[link]

• 

  Belgium

• 

  Canada

• 

  Chile (Coronel)

• 

  Denmark (Oberst)

• 

  France

• 

  Germany (Oberst)

• 

  Italy (Colonnello)

• 

  Netherlands (Kolonel)

• 

  Poland (Pułkownik)

• 

  Spain (Coronel)

• 

  United States

Colonel as highest ranking officer[link]

Some military forces have a colonel as their highest ranking officer, with no 'general' ranks, and no superior authority (except, perhaps, the head of state as a titular commander-in-chief) other than the respective national government. Examples include the following (arranged alphabetically by country name):

• Antigua and Barbuda (170 personnel)
• Benin (4,500 personnel)
• Costa Rica (about 8,000 personnel)
• Gambia (1,900 personnel)
• Iceland (100 personnel, employed only for peacekeeping duties)
• Libya ( Commands all the Armed Forces -Muammar Gaddafi (Until 2011)
• Monaco (two branches, with a total of about 250 personnel)
• Niger (8,000 personnel)
• Suriname (1,800 personnel)
• Vatican City State (135 personnel - the Swiss Guard)

Rank insignia for a colonel in several nations which have no higher military rank.
Iceland	Monaco		Vatican City
	Colonel CCP	Colonel CSP
50px	50px	50px	50px

Other uses of colonel ranks[link]

The term colonel is also used as a title for auctioneers in the United States; there are a variety of theories or folk etymologies to explain the use of the term.^[4] One of these is the claim that during the American Civil War goods seized by armies were sold at auction by the colonel of the division.^[5]

See also[link]

• List of comparative military ranks

References[link]

Bibliography[link]

• Keegan, John; & Wheatcroft, Andrew (1996). Who's Who in Military History: From 1453 to the Present Day. London: Routledge.

Notes[link]

Ralph Peters (born 1952) is a retired United States Army Lieutenant Colonel and author. As a novelist he has sometimes written under the pen name Owen Parry.

Personal[link]

Peters was born in Pottsville, Pennsylvania and grew up in Schuylkill Haven. His father was a coal miner and unsuccessful businessman. His wife, Katherine McIntire Peters, is a reporter for Government Executive magazine (a property of National Journal Group, Inc.).

Military career[link]

Peters enlisted in the Army as a private in 1976, after attending Pennsylvania State University.^[2] His first assignment was in Germany.

After returning from Germany, Peters attended Officer Candidate School and received a commission in 1980.^[3][4] Subsequently, he served with 1st Battalion, 46th Infantry Regiment, then part of the 1st Armored Division.^[5]

Peters spent ten years in Germany working in military intelligence. He later became a Foreign Area Officer, specializing in the Soviet Union. He attended the Command and General Staff College. His last assignment was to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence. He retired in 1998 with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. Peters never saw actual combat during his tenure.

Writing career[link]

Peters's first novel was Bravo Romeo, a spy thriller set in West Germany, and was published in 1981. Since then his novels progressed from futuristic scenarios involving the Red Army to contemporary terrorism and failed state issues. His characters are often presented as military mavericks who have the knowledge and courage to tackle problems others cannot or will not. His novel, The War After Armageddon, was released in 2009.

In 2008 he published the non-fiction Looking for Trouble: Adventures in a Broken World.

Peters is a regular contributor to the military history magazine, Armchair General Magazine, and he also serves on its Advisory Board.

Peters has published numerous essays on strategy in military journals such as Parameters, Military Review, and Armed Forces Journal, reports for the United States Marine Corps Center for Emerging Threats and Opportunities, wrote a regular opinion column for the New York Post, and has written essays and columns for USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Newsweek, The Weekly Standard, The Washington Monthly and Army magazine. Peters is a member of the Board of Contributors for USA Today's Forum Page, part of the newspaper's Opinion section. He has reported from Iraq, Israel, West Africa and other trouble spots.

Views[link]

Role of United States military[link]

Peters' 1997 article "Constant Conflict"^[6] stated:

There will be no peace. At any given moment for the rest of our lifetimes, there will be multiple conflicts in mutating forms around the globe. Violent conflict will dominate the headlines, but cultural and economic struggles will be steadier and ultimately more decisive. The de facto role of the US armed forces will be to keep the world safe for our economy and open to our cultural assault. To those ends, we will do a fair amount of killing.

In a 2009 article for The Journal of International Security Affairs titled "Wishful Thinking and Indecisive Wars"^[7] Peters' advocates the ruthless use of United States military power, declaring "If you cannot win clean, win dirty." Peters also raises the idea of directing the United States military to attack journalists. Peters writes, "Although it seems unthinkable now, future wars may require censorship, news blackouts and, ultimately, military attacks on the partisan media."^{[citation needed]}

Iraq war[link]

Peters was a strong supporter of the 2003 invasion and ongoing war in Iraq. Defending the war from critics who claimed that Iraq was descending into civil war, he authored a March 5, 2006 piece in the New York Post entitled "Dude, Where's My Civil War?", in which he wrote: "I'm looking for the civil war that The New York Times declared. And I just can't find it (...) The Iraqi Army has confounded its Western critics, performing extremely well last week. And the people trust their new army to an encouraging degree."^[8] Claims that Iraq was descending into civil war, he wrote, were the politically motivated claims of "irresponsible journalists" who have "staked their reputations on Iraq's failure".

By August 2006, Peters had turned more pessimistic on Iraq, stating in an interview with FrontPageMagazine.com, "civil war is closer than it was (...) The leaders squabble, the death squads rule the neighborhoods." He said that while it would be "too early to walk away from Iraq", the fate of the country was threatened by the US's failure after the invasion to provide adequate troop levels to maintain order, as well as "the Arab genius for screwing things up."^[9]

On November 2, 2006, he wrote in USA Today:

Iraq is failing. No honest observer can conclude otherwise. Even six months ago, there was hope. Now the chances for a democratic, unified Iraq are dwindling fast (...) Iraq could have turned out differently. It didn't. And we must be honest about it. We owe that much to our troops. They don't face the mere forfeiture of a few congressional seats but the loss of their lives. Our military is now being employed for political purposes. It's unworthy of our nation.^[10]

In this piece he also speculated that "only a military coup — which might come in the next few years — could hold the artificial country together" and that "it appears that the cynics were right: Arab societies can't support democracy as we know it."

Following the 2006 US Congressional election, Peters wrote:

It's going to be hard. The political aim of the Democrats will be to continue talking a good game while avoiding responsibility through '08. They'll send up bills they know Bush will veto. And they'll struggle to hide the infighting in their own ranks - Dem unity on this war is about as solid as the unity of Iraq. Now that they've won on the issue, the Dems would like Iraq to just go away. But it won't. And they've got to avoid looking weak on defense, so the military will get more money for personnel, at least. But we won't get a comprehensive plan to deal with Iraq or, for that matter, our global struggle with Islamist terrorists. No matter how many troops we send, we're bound to fail if the troops aren't allowed to fight - under the leadership of combat commanders, not politically attuned bureaucrats in uniform. At present, neither party's leaders want to face the truth about warfare - that it can't be done on the cheap and that war can't be waged without shedding blood.^[11]

Peters was opposed to what became the Iraq War troop surge of 2007 when it was first proposed. In October 2006 he wrote, "the notion of sending more U.S. troops is strategic and practical nonsense. Had the same voices demanded another 100,000-plus troops in 2003 or even 2004, it would have made a profound, positive difference. Now it's too late."^[12] By July 2007, he had changed his mind, writing that U.S. troops were making "serious progress against al-Qaeda-in-Iraq and other extremists", and that while "Iraq's a mess", "we've finally got a general in Baghdad - Dave Petraeus - who's doing things right."^[13]

In August 2007 Peters wrote that a quadruple truck bomb attack in Iraq that killed reportedly 500 individuals was "a sign of al Qaeda's frustration, desperation and fear."^[14]

In January 2008, on the first anniversary of the troop surge, Peters wrote that "the political progress has been remarkable." He added:

Determined to elect a Democrat president, the "mainstream" media simply won't accept our success. "Impartial" journalists find a dark cloud in every silver lining in Iraq. And the would-be candidates themselves continue to insist that we should abandon Iraq immediately - as if time had stood still for the past year - while hoping desperately for a catastrophe in Baghdad before November. These are the pols who insisted that the surge didn't have a chance. And nobody calls 'em on it.^[15]

By 2009, Peters had become much more optimistic about the future of Iraq. In July 2009, a day before the Iraqi Kurdistan legislative election he wrote, "for all of Iraq's remaining problems -- and they're vast -- it looks more and more as if 'Bush's Folly' may work out." He added, "We've all come a long way since the dark days of 2006." He reserved special praise for Jawad al-Bolani, head of the Interior Ministry, whom he called, "in the context of Iraq... a miracle worker." He also praised the Kurdistan election, calling it "a horse-race toward accountability and transparency."^[16]

Redrawing borders and regime change[link]

In a June 2006 article titled "Blood borders: How a better Middle East would look", Peters conducted a thought experiment by changing the borders in the Middle East: "In each case, this hypothetical redrawing of boundaries reflects ethnic affinities and religious communalism—in some cases, both."^[17]

He has drawn strong criticism for his maps in the countries involved, who viewed these as a direct attack on the integrity of their borders and usually attributed the maps to US Military and US Intelligence services and government, and their future plans for the region, rather than the retired Lieutenant Colonel.^{[citation needed]}

In a February 2008 column, Peters called for giving the majority-Serb enclave in northern Kosovo to Serbia, calling it a "cancerous issue" that "just promises further conflict down the road - like forcing an ex-husband and -wife to share an apartment after a savage divorce."^[18]

Regarding Iraq, he wrote, "might it not have been wiser - as several of us suggested in 2003 - to shake off Europe's vicious legacies and give Kurds their state, Iraqi Shias their state, and the country's Sunni Arabs a rump Iraq to do with as they wished?" Regarding all these countries, he wrote, "We needn't launch an endless war to fix the mess Europeans in pinstriped trousers left us - but we'd damned well better accept that, when we expend blood and treasure to prop up phony states, we're standing on the tracks in front of the speeding train of history."^[18]

In a column for Armchair General Magazine, he wrote in support for regime change in Syria, Iran and Pakistan:

Syria's determination to develop nuclear weapons apes Iran's and North Korea's nuke programs, as well as Pakistan's successful bid to join the club of nuclear powers. ... Given a choice between taking out Osama Bin Laden and his entire leadership network and eliminating renegade nuclear engineers, the latter option might do far more for our long-term security.^[19]

Afghanistan[link]

In February 2009 Peters called for U.S. troops to be pulled out of Afghanistan, writing, "we've mired ourselves by attempting to modernize a society that doesn't want to be — and cannot be — transformed." He continued, "We needed to smash our enemies and leave. Had it proved necessary, we could have returned later for another punitive mission. Instead, we fell into the great American fallacy of believing ourselves responsible for helping those who've harmed us."^[20]

Bowe Bergdahl[link]

Peters expressed sympathy for POW Bowe Bergdahl's family, but speculated (Fox News, July 19, 2009) that Specialist Bergdahl might be "an apparent deserter . . . if he walked away from his post and his buddies in wartime — I don't care how hard it sounds — as far as I'm concerned the Taliban can save us a lot of legal hassles and legal bills". He characterized Bergdahl's description (in the Taliban produced video) of U.S. military behavior in Afghanistan as collaboration with the enemy, even if coerced.^[21] Peters called those statements about military policy lies, and doubted existence a girlfriend (Steve Malzberg's radio show, July 22). Bergdahl had said he missed his girlfriend and local media identified her as Monica Lee.^[22][23] Peters also wished him to be reunited with his family, but argued the media glorifies one captured soldier who shamed his unit and lied, while ignoring heroes and casualties (The O'Reilly Factor, July 21).^[24]

Donald Rumsfeld[link]

Ralph Peters was quoted as saying, in regards to former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, "I am allergic to Rumsfeld. We did a great thing in Iraq, but we did it very badly. He is an extremely talented man but he has the tragic flaw of hubris. His arrogance is unbearable. My friends in uniform just hate him."^[25]

WikiLeaks[link]

In view of WikiLeaks' release of United States diplomatic cables in late 2010, Peters called for the assassination of Julian Assange on FOX News, accusing him of being a cyber-terrorist guilty of crimes against humanity. In this context he claimed that WikiLeaks puts aid workers, human rights workers, journalists and dissidents at risk of torture, assassination and rape.^[26]

Books[link]

Novels[link]

• As Ralph Peters
  • Bravo Romeo - 1981 ISBN 0-399-90097-7
  • Red Army - 1989 ISBN 0-671-67668-7
  • The War in 2020 - 1991 ISBN 0-671-67670-9
  • The Perfect Soldier - 1995 ISBN 0-671-86583-8
  • The Devil's Garden - 1998 ISBN 0-380-97362-6
  • Twilight of Heroes - 1999 ISBN 0-8117-2690-8
  • Traitor - 1999 ISBN 0-380-97641-2
  • Flames of Heaven: A Novel of the End of the Soviet Union - 2003 ISBN 0-8117-2684-3
  • The War After Armageddon - 2009 ISBN 978-0-7653-2355-2
  • The Officers' Club - 2011 ISBN 978-0-7653-2680-5
  • Cain at Gettysburg - 2012
• Abel Jones Series (as "Owen Parry", pseudonym of Ralph Peters)
  • Faded Coat of Blue - 2000 ISBN 0-380-97642-0
  • Shadows of Glory - 2000 ISBN 0-380-97643-9
  • Call Each River Jordan - 2001 ISBN 0-06-018638-0
  • Honor's Kingdom - 2002 ISBN 0-06-018634-8
  • Our Simple Gifts: Civil War Christmas Tales - 2002 ISBN 0-06-001378-8
  • Bold Sons of Erin - 2003 ISBN 0-06-051390-X
  • Strike the Harp!: American Christmas Stories - 2004 ISBN 0-06-057236-1
  • Rebels of Babylon - 2005 ISBN 0-06-051392-6

Nonfiction[link]

• Fighting for the Future: Will America Triumph? - 1999 ISBN 0-8117-0651-6
• Beyond Terror: Strategy in a Changing World - 2002 ISBN 0-8117-0024-0
• Beyond Baghdad: Postmodern War and Peace - 2003 ISBN 0-8117-0084-4
• New Glory: Expanding America's Global Supremacy - 2005 ISBN 1-59523-011-4
• Never Quit the Fight - 2006 ISBN 0-8117-3328-9, ISBN 978-0-8117-0274-4
• Wars of Blood and Faith: The Conflicts That Will Shape the 21st Century - 2007 ISBN 0-8117-0274-X
• Looking For Trouble: Adventures in a Broken World - 2008 ISBN 0-8117-3410-2
• Endless War - 2010

References[link]

 This article incorporates public domain material from websites or documents of the United States Army Center of Military History.

External links[link]

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Ralph Peters

• Plans for Redrawing the Middle East: The Project for a “New Middle East” (Centre for Research on Globalization)
• Interview on New Glory at the Pritzker Military Library
• Interview on Wars of Blood and Faith
• Constant Conflict
• In Depth interview with Peters, August 3, 2008