During the Vietnam War, Canada became a safe haven for young men who considered themselves conscientious objectors. Though the draft was eliminated, US soldiers have continued to flee to Canada during the current war. But Canada’s policies may be changing.
A protest in support of conscientious objectors, held in Toronto; Photo: picturenarrative
The stories of men who have crossed the US-Canada border as a statement against war are many, and they go back several decades. According to a recent article in Newsweek, about 50,000 men fled to Canada during the Vietnam War era in order to avoid the draft, many adjusting to life in their adopted country and settling there permanently.
Although the draft no longer exists in the United States, many war-weary soldiers who have done enough duty in Afghanistan and Iraq to question America’s motives for being there have returned from their deployments as conscientious objectors, refusing to accept redeployment orders. Many of them have crossed the border to seek asylum in Canada.
Increasingly, however, the Canadian government is taking active measures to deport these individuals back to the United States to face desertion charges. According to Newsweek, while three in five Canadians support the granting of permanent residency to conscientious objectors, the conservative government has been stepping up deportation activity since this time last year.
To learn more about the men and women who have served in the current wars and who now question America’s actions abroad, visit Iraq Veterans Against the War.
About the Author
More By This Author
- Matador Meets the New York Times & The Sunday Telegraph (5 comments)
- Meet a Matador Editor: Carlo Alcos (15 comments)
- Anna Brones Launches a Social Media Start-Up (8 comments)
Related Posts
7 Comments... join the discussion!
-
-
I agree that the ‘conscientious objectors’ of the vietnam war had reason to flee. but those of today signed up for the military, and if they did not understand the terms of the contract they signed they should not have signed it. I understand that you can change your beliefs during your time in the military, but decisions have consequences, and I have a hard time believing that a person goes from signing up for the military to pacificism in the four years or so that they are in the military. And therefore I don’t think Canada should give them any special treatment, nor asylum.
↵ -
Eva and Luke-
Thanks for your comments.
Personally, I’m not sure what I think of either the phenomenon of border crossing and asylum seeking for this reason/in this war, nor of Canada’s policy shift. The issue’s complex, no? Many of the narratives I’ve read from soldiers who have either considered crossing the border or who have done so raise a common refrain: They genuinely thought that the war was justifiable and that by serving, they were upholding some patriotic obligation or ideal. Once there, and over time, they began to see the situation differently, in a much more nuanced way. They were also there long enough to see how the strategies of the war evolved (or, more appropriately, devolved), and thus felt that their impetus for having joined the military and participated in this war had been hijacked, in a sense. I think the issue is pretty complex and that to the extent that such a response is feasible, each case needs to be considered individually.↵ -
I agree Julie, the Bush administration duped a lot of people.
↵ -
I appreciate that they were able to re-examine things they had taken for granted and change their minds, I really do. But I don’t understand why they should evade any consequences for their misguided decisions. I guess I just don’t see why it’s up to Canada to consider their cases, individually or otherwise. I’ll admit I’m out of the loop on more recent cases (I only followed the issue during the early trickle) but most of the early arrivals never went overseas at all, so it wasn’t a matter of seeing firsthand the horrors of war.
I dunno, I know it’s a messy complicated mess, but I’m also frustrated with the constant “George Bush made me do it” refrain. I was there, watching from Canada, and I remember how this got started – the war had something like an 80% approval rating at the start, didn’t it? Most of these soldiers probably voted Republican in 2000 and 2004 (and, for that matter, many sitting Democrats voted for the war). I guess my hardline on these soldiers comes from a desire for the American nation at large to take responsibility for this war, not just blame Bush/Cheney (though I’d also very, very much like to see them get what’s coming to them, too).
↵ -
I agree, Eva– I don’t think Canada bears any responsibility for harboring anyone. And while I’ve done my fair share of eye rolling at the “George Bush made me do it” refrain too, I’ve also read/seen/listened to enough of these stories to find many of them convincing. Were many of these folks naive? Yes, it certainly seems so. But I also think that many were people who honestly considered themselves to be signing up to perform a patriotic duty, and I remember being in New York City on and after September 11 and listening to even the most liberal of friends and acquaintances agreeing that we should “bomb ‘em [whoever the "they" was] to hell.” Years later, our perspective has become more nuanced, I think. But bottom line- we’re in agreement: it’s a mess and Canada shouldn’t bear the burden of resolving a very sticky issue that the US has largely avoided handling.
↵ -
I’m an American, whose born in Canada grandfather may have been one of the youngest there to serve in the their Black Watch in World War I, in the trenches and gassed. He would later serve here through 3 more “wars” in the merchant marine. I also have to study America sometimes for the legal requirements of archaeology in historic sites proposed to be developed. In NYC, where I am, the first US Congress met and two “National Guard” units were once in what was the city’s theater district and various burial grounds now known as “The Bowery”. One unit, “Steuben Rifles” it’s officer in courts martial after the so-called “Draft Riots” would be called out to march to Washington, DC to protect it during the Civil War. The other had the famous 7th Regiment or Park Ave. Armory built for it with private funds.
In the Vietnam era, ten years in which the US Congress failed to declare war, which only it can do, I heard that less than 1000 National Guard personnel ever even saw Vietnam, millions did, and many joined it to escape the draft which ended during my 18th year, I had a number, those of that age since allowed to vote.
I feel many of the National Guard, many in their 30s and even 40s are the wrong people to pull out of society and make serve where the other branches of the service do not, in Iraq and Afghanistan. What of the 50,000 troops we keep today in Germany? And what of others? We have calamities in weather, fire and design here in the US the National Guard could be helping instead, which I thought was why it was created, the perceived “last line of defense”.
Whereas the “hopped up” Illinois Air Guard also killed five Canadian troops with bombs in Afghanistan and it took three days for former President Bush to apologize, I am not surprised that Canada would continue to make what we are doing an “issue”.
↵
