Andrew Condron, 41 Independent Commando, Royal Marines.
He lived in Stuart Terrace, Bathgate. My father’s family also lived in Stewart Terrace and my father had fond memories of Andrew’s mother.
Andrew Condron was taken prisoner during the Korean War, in November 1950 during fighting at Chosin Reservoir. Till 1953 he was imprisoned in Camp 10 at Chonma, and Camp 5, at Pyuktong, North Korea. At the end of the War he refused to be repatriated and he went to live in China. Though only a child at the time, I remember the vitriol that was poured on him by the newspapers, politicians, and by some Marines. The British government threatened to arrest him if he returned to Britain. The Navy treated him as a deserter.
His good name has been restored by Fred Hayhurst in a book called Green Berets in Korea, from whichthe following quotations come:-
Page 358:
“The closest we came to any form of personal hygiene was to wash the palms of our hands with snow. For three or four months it was impossible to remove any items of clothing, except perhaps when we hurriedly took off a shirt or sweater to delouse it, for naturally we had to contend with lice, crabs and bed bugs.”
The above, by Marine Andrew Condron, were what he described as “minor irritants” when recalling the first months of the virtual hell on earth that the prisoners of war endured during nearly three years of captivity in North Korea.
Page 373:
Some of the prisoners had begun to convince the Chinese that they could organise themselves much better if each nationality were on their own. The Chinese eventually agreed and a British company was formed with its own specific living area and cookhouse. Each group had to elect a committee to administer themselves and be a buffer between the Chinese and the prisoners. Marine Condron was voted as Chairman of the British Committee. He worked long and hard trying to improve the prisoners’ conditions. His fellow prisoners, who knew of his endeavour, much appreciated what he achieved for them. It was later stated that the British were highly respected and admired by the Chinese for their organising abilities and discipline. This admiration was in no way evident at the time.
Page 390:
Early in 1953 Marine Condron wrote to his M.P.. A copy found its way to a Socialist magazine. They published the letter seen below, as did the newspaper of the Young Communists.
To Mr. George Mathers, M.P.,
House of Commons,
February 24, 1953.
Dear Sir,
As a native of Bathgate, West Lothian, and a member of the constituency which you represent in Parliament, I wish to take this opportunity of expressing my views with regard to the present hostilities in Korea, and to call upon you to add your support to the ever-widening sections of the British public who are in favour of bringing this war to a peaceful conclusion.
When this Korean war broke out on June 25, 1950, my opinion, like that of the great majority of the people in Britain, was in complete accord with the official explanation and I considered the outbreak as a simple case of North Korean aggression. ‘Red Imperialism’ was on the move! And it was in this state of mind that I left England for Korea, as a member of 41 Independent Commando, Royal Marines, and took part in this war as an active combatant until my capture by the Chinese People’s Volunteers on November 30, 1950.
Since that time I have been in a position whereby I have been able to devote much time for an objective consideration of all the pertinent facts related to the Korean question and this has resulted in the forming of my present conclusion, which I shall partly relate below.
Surely, if the outbreak of the war had been a straight case of North Korean aggression, and if the United States Government policy had been fair and above board, there was no need for all this shilly-shallying and public deception.
Was the British public aware of the fact that the elections held in South Korea on May 30, 1950, had not been in Syngman Rhee’s favour? 90% of the electors voted and only twenty-seven of the old Assembly that Rhee had dominated, were re-elected. At least 128 of the 210 seats were won by independents, and Rhee supporters were sure of only 45 seats. If war had not broken out, it was well within the limits of possibility that Rhee could shortly have been forced out of office.
Another enigma – “It did not become public knowledge until June 5, 1951, during a routine hearing by the Senate Appropriations Committee on the State Department budget, that the State Department had already drafted a resolution to be used at the United Nations in the event of an attack in Korea.”
Witness was John D. Hickerson, Assistant Secretary of State for U.N. Affairs (Hidden History of the Korean War, I.F. Stone, p.53). Why all the secrecy?
Think of all the propaganda value for the capitalist press if it could have told its readers of the “aggressive intentions” of the Communists in Korea! I can just visualise the red ink headlines in the Daily Express! But why the continuous silence?
The whole legal structure of the United nations participation in the Korean Wars rests, in my opinion, on very shaky foundations indeed, when one is acquainted with the fact that President Truman imposed military sanctions when he “ordered United States air and sea forces to give the Korean government troops cover and support” at noon on the same day that the Security Council was to meet at 3.15p.m. to discuss the question.
The Security Council was thus forced to vote these sanctions or else oppose the action taken by the United States, a step that was exceedingly difficult to take by countries dependent economically on the United States.
This was later reflected by the statement, “The Senate warned the sixteen beneficiary nations that those refusing to help the United States fight the United Nations battle in Korea might lose all Marshall Aid,” (New York Times August 1, 1950). The fait accompli is, I believe, a measure adopted by certain diplomatic circles!
I must apologise for this rather lengthy explanation and the frequent notes, but I feel that they are necessary in order to show, in part, my feelings on this question which requires cool, calm and objective analysis by anyone who has the interests of the British people at heart.
The above-mentioned facts are only a few of those which are available, upon inquiry, to every responsible person in Britain, but it is my belief that these facts have been deliberately withheld from large sections of the public – otherwise the people of Britain would long ago have brought pressure to bear which, no doubt, could have ended this war.
My own personal idea, subject to better judgement, of the duties of a Member of Parliament, is that he should unreservedly serve the interests of those which he represents, regardless of his own subjective desires. But if this is any criterion of the actions of Members of Parliament, then there are many, to judge by Hansard who are guilty of “non-representation” insofar as the Korean War is concerned. When I stop to think of the needless deaths of so many young men here in Korea, such politicians make me sick!
Also I wish to register my disgust and apprehension of the reported statements contained in certain British and American newspapers to the effect that officers and men in these prison camps are beaten and machine-gunned unmercifully. In actual fact, the only danger to our lives comes from our own aircraft which, in the past, have on more than one occasion strafed and bombed these clearly marked camps. The aim of such mendacious reports in these papers cannot but be directed towards confusing the mind of this war. I consider all possible refutation of these slanders as of paramount importance.
I trust that I, and the other members of your constituency, can count upon you to make our voice heard in Parliament and that you will do everything in your power to bring this useless war to a speedy conclusion.
Yours sincerely,
Andrew M. Condron.
Page 394:
In a covering note, Marine Condron stated that the letter reflected the feelings of some POWs in Korea. The facts quoted in the letter could not have been produced by any prisoner without the assistance of some high authority in the Chinese Government. The letter did not appear in the papers until July 1953 and by that time the situation in Korea was changing.
Page 398:
The negotiations at the Cease-fire talks finally agreed to end the fighting on the 27th July 1953. They also approved the system for prisoners’ repatriation. Later it was revealed that, of the 75,000 taken prisoner by the North Koreans and the Chinese, more than 62,000 had perished. When the self proclaimed Peace Loving People announced the cease-fire, there was no rejoicing in the prison camps. Of the 31 men of 41 Independent Commando taken prisoner: 2 were killed trying to escape; 9 died in captivity; 1 fate unknown; 18 returned home; 1 refused repatriation.
Marine Andrew Condron was the sole Briton to remain. The majority of British newspapers denounced him as a traitor and a collaborator. They also proclaimed that he was afraid of reprisals from his fellow prisoners should he return home. Some accounts stated he was known in the Royal Marines as a “Barrackroom Socialist” and for being Bolshie.
All this came from the pens of journalists who had not seen or spoken to the man. Nor had they talked with any of the prisoners who had been close to him. As for being a Traitor? He was not in the same league as those of the Daily Worker, the British Communist Party and the Women’s International Democratic Federation – National Assembly of Women. They had visited the POW camps in North Korea in an attempt to convert the prisoners to Communism. They had even tried to coerce the families of prisoners, and those killed in Korea to support their cause. Articles were written by them giving glowing reports on life in the POW camps, but glossing over the fact that thousands of prisoners were killed or allowed to die in captivity.
The allegation that he was a collaborator was firmly refuted by his fellow prisoners. Marine Underwood said, “Andrew Condron never betrayed anyone, nor was he guilty of collaboration – his only sin was that he was able to improve the lot of many POWs because he constantly pressurised the Chinese. For that I am thankful.”
In an Army Journal, Bob Erricker of the 8th Hussars wrote, “Those of us who knew Andy in Camp 5 had, and still have, the very highest regard for him and there is no doubt that he did more for the British POWs than the next twenty of us put together. He was very often with the Chinese when the rest of us were going about our daily skylarking and he did his share of dirty Jobs. He was beaten up on interrogation sessions, which did not occur with the majority. There are those who were not there who are all too ready to condemn Andy as a collaborator, even as a traitor, all of us collaborated to a certain extent by helping the Chinese run the camp. Remember that it was the only way we could survive.”
Another Army POW wrote, “Andrew Condron used whatever influence he had with our captors to improve our miserable lives as POWs. There wasn’t much he could do, but I do remember being grateful for the effort he made on behalf of his fellow POWs. I cannot remember any dissent coming from any of us, and can only remember the respect we all had for him.”
Every British prisoner, on being released, was interviewed in Japan by military officers. Many were again interviewed when they returned home. Those who had been with Andrew Condron during their time in captivity, reported on the work he had done to improve conditions for all the prisoners in his camp. It was suggested by some that he should be honoured for his endeavours. The newspapers had already condemned him for refusing repatriation, therefore no reports appeared on his earnest attempts to improve their miserable existence, nor the high regard with which he was held by his fellow prisoners.
Page 407:
Andrew Condron was born in Bathgate, West Lothian, on 4th October 1928. On leaving school he went to study at the Wireless Operators College, Edinburgh, with the intention of joining the Merchant Navy as a Radio Officer. After three years at the College he changed his mind and enlisted in the Royal Marines two months before his 18th birthday.
On completion of 14 months recruit training, he was selected for a signals course. His studies at the Edinburgh College and his flair in Morse code gave him a great advantage on the course. As a qualified Signaller, he was drafted to HMS Liverpool, a Cruiser with the Mediterranean Fleet. On completion of the commission he returned to Signals School to obtain higher qualifications.
Those who served with Andrew Condron during his first four years in the Royal Marines could not agree with the reported description that he was a “barrackroom socialist” and was Bolshie. In the Corps, such a person is known as a “lower deck lawyer”. If he had been known to be Bolshie he would not have been given the opportunity to obtain higher qualifications as a signaller, nor would he have been recommended for promotion.
He was appointed Lance Corporal in June 1950 to attend a course at the NCO’s School which would qualify him for promotion to Corporal. He was at the NCO’s School when the call was made for volunteers to join 41 Independent Company. During his time in the Commando he acquitted himself as well as most in the Unit. On one of the night raids he was instrumental in saving the life of Lt. Pounds, who went on to be a Major General. He had become entangled in a live power cable that had been cut down by mistake. Regardless of his own safety, Marine Condron succeeded in extricating Lt. Pounds from the flashing cable and pulled him free.
Page 408:
After nearly three years in captivity, the decision of Andrew Condron not to be repatriated came as a shock to his fellow prisoners. They tried to dissuade him but he had made up his mind and was staying. His decision not to be repatriated was motivated by a desire to see how Communist China operated. On his decision to stay he wrote, “It was not one taken light-heartedly or without some anguish. I had become interested in ideas and I was seeking answers. There was not one moment when I thought my beliefs to be in contradiction with the real interests of my country and my people.”
Andrew, along with the 21 Americans who had decided not to return home, were taken to Peking. They were given accommodation and western style clothing. Andrew Condron was selected to remain in Peking and attend the University to study the Chinese language and international relations.
It was early in 1954 when he started at the University. Around that time the Royal Marines decided that he should be discharged “Services No Longer Required” SNLR. This is not a punishment but it is not an honourable release. Every Marine is given an annual assessment for character and efficiency. Throughout his time in the Corps, Marine Condron had received the highest possible assessment for character, which is “Very Good”. For efficiency he had been rated “Satisfactory.” The decision to discharge Marine Condron SNLR was taken on 22nd January 1954. It was, however, eight years before it was verified. Up until the date of discharge his pay and allowances were accumulating. Not having been paid for over three years there was, in his account, a few hundred pounds. He requested that any monies due to him should be paid to his mother.
During their initial stay in Peking, Andrew Condron and the Americans were treated as honoured guests. On one occasion they were invited to view a National Day Parade in Tiananmen Square from a VIP stand. While on the stand, Andrew recognised a voice from his days in the POW camp. It was the woman radio announcer whose voice he had heard giving the Communist version of events in Korea. She was Esther Winnington, the wife of Alan Winnington the British journalist of the Daily Worker. He was also the representative to the Chinese Government of the British Communist Party. Mr & Mrs Winnington invited Andrew to their home. He became a family friend, spending a great deal of time in their house.
At the Peking University, the Chinese language studies were proving difficult. Nevertheless, he persevered. Eventually, he was good enough to converse with his fellow students and others he met while going about the city. At the University he became friendly with a young Chinese woman. This resulted in his first clash with the Authorities. He was now being treated with suspicion and the woman was banished to another province of China. Andrew obtained a post teaching English at the Foreign
Languages Institute. His pupils were easily recognised when they spoke. Their English was with a strong Scottish accent.
In co-operation with two former US Army Sergeants, Andrew Condron was instrumental in compiling a book entitled Thinking Soldiers, published in China by New World Press. Written by American and British POWs while in Korea, the book is a collection of articles and poems. There were three main topics running through the book: 1. The disadvantages of coming from a poor family. 2. The kindness of the Chinese People and their great desire for peace in the world. and 3. Life in the prison camps,which some of the writers claimed, consisted of fishing, sport, and the pursuit of knowledge and pleasure. Not one of the thinking soldiers gave any explanation why thousands of their fellow prisoners died or disappeared during captivity.
During his time in Peking, Andrew Condron cultivated an affection for the Chinese people, but at the same time, he became more and more disenchanted by the attitude of those in authority. He realised that they would never accept him and they were distrustful of him, as they were of all foreigners. He was told to leave Peking and move to Wuhan. His work as a teacher and translator ended. He stayed with the Winningtons for a time and, after a time, he was offered small work assignments. He realised that any work he was offered must have been sanctioned by the authorities. One day on his rounds of work places, he was told about a pleasant two-roomed apartment that may be made available. Much to his surprise he was offered the accommodation and was allowed to move in and remain in Peking.
Page 414:
In the late 1950s Andrew Condron was introduced to Jaqueline Baudet, a French-Chinese lady. Her father Phillippe, was a high ranking French diplomat, who later became the French Ambassador to Moscow. In 1959 they married and a year later Jaqueline gave birth to a baby boy. He was called Ian. The family cat was given the name of Mac Mao. When Ian was able to talk his father encouraged him to call the cat “Big Brother” – perhaps because it was always watching them.
Early in the 1960s Andrew became disillusioned with life in China. It was the start of the Cultural Revolution and the authorities were becoming more and more xenophobic. The following sequence of events are uncertain, but are likely to be as follows:
In 1962 Andrew applied to re-enter the United Kingdom.
Questions on the Condron situation were asked in Parliament by Tom Driberg M.P. who had accompanied members of 41 Independent Commando on two night raids.
26th February 1963, Andrew Condron’s Certificate of Discharge from the Royal Marines was signed by the Officer in Charge of Pay and Records Office, Royal Marines.
The British Embassy in Peking issued him with a passport. The Condron family left Peking for London. They travelled via Russia and East Germany. On landing in East Germany, troubles were encountered with the authorities. They suspected Condron of being a British Agent. Eventually they allowed the family to leave, arriving in London in October 1962.
The national newspapers reported the return branding Condron as a deserter. Over the years other publications, including an authorised history of the Royal Marines published in 1980, also wrongly denounced him as a deserter. Having been given lawful authority to be absent by the British Government, Andrew Condron was not charged with desertion, neither was he charged with any other offence.
Andrew Condron underwent a five-day interview in Whitehall. Andrew wrote of the interview, “The whole period of the POW camp was put under close scrutiny by men who were obviously experts and who were extremely well informed. I presume that my recollections were compared with the information and knowledge garnered from other POWs who had returned earlier.”
At the end of the five day session he was informed that none of the other POWs had been critical of his behaviour in the camps, that many had spoken highly of his efforts to bring about improvements. Most, however, had been opposed to the political stance he took at the end of the fighting in Korea.
With the interview complete he was free to start life anew in the U.K. Soon the family was increased when Jaqueline gave birth to a girl who was called Chantelle. They set up home in London. Andrew’s first job was selling the Encyclopedia Britannica, then he became a proof reader for a publishing company. Jaqueline was employed by the B.B.C. as a programme producer with the World Service. Visits to his home town of Bathgate were made so that Jaqueline and their children could get to know Andrew’s family and friends. Sadly his mother had died while he was away. New friends were made and old friendships were re-established with former POWs and people he had known before going to Korea and China.
With all his experiences in China, Andrew had had more than enough of politics. When asked by Esther Winnington whether, since coming home, he had considered joinig the Labour Party or the Communist Party, he replied, “Good heavens no, I don’t want anything more to do with the likes of that.”
Andrew attended a number of POW reunions and he was made very welcome. In 1986 he attended a 41 Independent Commando reunion at the Commabdo Training Centre. When the members started to gather at the Sergeant’s Mess bar a few were resentful when they heard that Andrew Condron would be attending. The handful of annoyed members were prepared to confront him when he arrived but they were persuaded not to cause any trouble that would spoil the reunion weekend.
Colonel Drysdale commanded, “I will not have ill-discipline in my unit.” The Colonel was of the opinion that no one who had not suffered the years of captivity should made pronouncements on the subject. He made a point of greeting Andrew Condron and spent some time talking with him.
After the reunion, Dave Brady sent a bitter letter to Andrew questioning his motives for attending the reunion. He also accused him of lack of fibre while in Korea. Dave received a polite but lengthy reply. He said that Colonel Drysdale had asked that he attend. He gave a detailed account of what had happened in the POW camps and he concluded, “In all honesty, although I thought your letter to be long on hyperbole and emotion but extremely short on fact, I thank you for your straightforward approach. You wrote pithily and pulled no punches.”
Sgt. Norman Chaplin, who had known Andrew prior to Korea and had accompanied him to the reunion, also wrote to Dave Brady pointing out that Brady’s letter was incorrect and insulting. He expressed the high regard he and others, including former POWs, had for Andrew. Dave Brady apologised fully. He said, “I apologise unreservedly for my bigotry, without knowledge of all the facts.”
Andrew’s brother, Samuel,had suffered as a POW with the Japanese during World War 2. When, in 1962, it became known that his brother Andrew was bringing his family home, he wrote a poem entitled –
JUDGE NOT – SO THAT YOU MAY NOT BE JUDGED (OOR ANDY)
Is he boy or man, who hopes to return
to the land of his birth?
Is he traitor? Hero….?
No man can judge, no man can tell,
Without having undergone
The tests and trials
That he has tasted.
So easy for fools to say:
Renegade, Rascal, Knave…
So easy for fools to say:
Idealist dreamer, evil schemer.
Yes, so easy
In the comfort and warmth
of the old armchair,
To airily decide the reasons
That made him stay…
If you have hugged the ground,
As bullets hiss in anger,
If you have known
Confinement, Anguish, Agony,
Lost hopes,
Hatred, Hunger,
Dashed dreams and dark despair,
Sickness, silence, solitude,
The smell of lice – the caked black blood
on thumb nails both –
The stench of death…
Then judge!
But if these things – and more,
Much more,
Mean nought to you,
Be silent, be humble,
And let Judgement – if any –
Lie with a Higher Hand.
From Scotia’s fair land he went,
The cream his country knew,
Headed for a far-off shore
– and more –
The dangers of a vicious war.
Fired with the epic tales
Of heroes in days of yore,
As we had been ourselves,
But one short decade before.
To judge him, there are but few,
And where would they begin?
The line that lies betwixt
A traitor and a hero is
oftentimes so thin.
We who know him,
We neither judge nor care
It will be enough to
Welcome him home,
With his chosen bride and son.
For we at home,
It will be a day
of Joy…
One tragedy alone
Will be
That the one who gave him life
Will not be there,
her boy to see…
Andrew Condron received neither the Queen’s Korea Medal nor the United Nations Service Medal.
In 1994 a friend wrote, on his behalf, to the Commandant General Royal Marines, requesting the medals. The friend was told that the request had to come from Andrew. He never submitted a request perhaps because he was ill. He died on 12th March 1996.
In 1997 a TV company in Scotland produced a programme devoted to him in the series Secret Scotland. The presenter said that the Condron file in the Public Records Office would remain closed for 100 years.
Bathgate Old Times 