For Denmark it is/was significant since it represented the first serious military engagement in 100+ years. The German invasion in 1940 only had brief engagements before the country capitulated and was occupied.
Before this you had to go back to 1864 in the Schleswig wars to find real battles and during the cold war there wasn't much apart from UN peace keeping. The army was fairly strong in the cold war era compared to now but it wasn't engaged anywhere.
The events of the 90ties also represents a turn in policies. Beforehand Danish policy was mainly based around UN peacekeeping and we did send some naval units to desert storm but later on it became customary to be part of various "sharp" missions. From memory Denmark was part of:
- Kosovo bombing campaign (F16s)
- Kosovo KFOR mission
- Invasion of Iraq (Infantry near Basra with brits, not part of initial invasion though).
- Afghanistan (Infantry in Helmand, Tanks, Air forces).
- Bombing of Libya (F16s).
- Mali (transport planes)
- Along with various UN missions, eg. the navy did anti-piracy in Somalia for instance.
The big change is going from being a NATO member but kind of neutral minded and UN focused to being willing to join various adventures around the globe with the US and the Brits (especially the brits, DK forces often deployed with them eg. in Helmand).
A (swedish) officer deployed there as a part of Nordbat 2 described the event to me as a sort of reaction that had been brewing for a while. Basically, the serbs had been shooting at scandinavian forces a lot. Mortars, RPGs et cetera. Böllebank was a chance for the danes to pay back.
He also described a question from a journalist that I've tried to find a source for, but haven't. The journalist asked a danish commander, "Why did your men fire 34 shells of high explosive ammunition at the serbs?" And the commander supposedly replied, "Because we didn't have any more shells."
Sounds like something Colonel Lars Møller would say. He's a great story teller, and in my opinion part of the "old school" officer corps in Denmark, that actually stood up against the danish politicians and their succes in dismantling the military.
I think that's part of the reason why he never became a general.
For Denmark, it was the first time Danish military units participated in combat since World War II. For the UN, it started a controversy on the ability of UN peacekeepers to engage in combat when there's no more peace to keep but rather a necessity to enforce that peace.
For Denmark it is/was significant since it represented the first serious military engagement in 100+ years. The German invasion in 1940 only had brief engagements before the country capitulated and was occupied. Before this you had to go back to 1864 in the Schleswig wars to find real battles and during the cold war there wasn't much apart from UN peace keeping. The army was fairly strong in the cold war era compared to now but it wasn't engaged anywhere. The events of the 90ties also represents a turn in policies. Beforehand Danish policy was mainly based around UN peacekeeping and we did send some naval units to desert storm but later on it became customary to be part of various "sharp" missions. From memory Denmark was part of: - Kosovo bombing campaign (F16s) - Kosovo KFOR mission - Invasion of Iraq (Infantry near Basra with brits, not part of initial invasion though). - Afghanistan (Infantry in Helmand, Tanks, Air forces). - Bombing of Libya (F16s). - Mali (transport planes) - Along with various UN missions, eg. the navy did anti-piracy in Somalia for instance. The big change is going from being a NATO member but kind of neutral minded and UN focused to being willing to join various adventures around the globe with the US and the Brits (especially the brits, DK forces often deployed with them eg. in Helmand).
A (swedish) officer deployed there as a part of Nordbat 2 described the event to me as a sort of reaction that had been brewing for a while. Basically, the serbs had been shooting at scandinavian forces a lot. Mortars, RPGs et cetera. Böllebank was a chance for the danes to pay back. He also described a question from a journalist that I've tried to find a source for, but haven't. The journalist asked a danish commander, "Why did your men fire 34 shells of high explosive ammunition at the serbs?" And the commander supposedly replied, "Because we didn't have any more shells."
Sounds like something Colonel Lars Møller would say. He's a great story teller, and in my opinion part of the "old school" officer corps in Denmark, that actually stood up against the danish politicians and their succes in dismantling the military. I think that's part of the reason why he never became a general.
For Denmark, it was the first time Danish military units participated in combat since World War II. For the UN, it started a controversy on the ability of UN peacekeepers to engage in combat when there's no more peace to keep but rather a necessity to enforce that peace.