Search This Blog

Thursday, March 16, 2023

Desertion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desertion
The Defector, by Octav Băncilă, 1906
 
Deserteur (Дезертир), by Ilya Repin, 1917
 
Armenian soldiers in 1919, with deserters as prisoners

Desertion is the abandonment of a military duty or post without permission (a pass, liberty or leave) and is done with the intention of not returning. This contrasts with unauthorized absence (UA) or absence without leave (AWOL /ˈwɒl/), which are temporary forms of absence.

Desertion versus absence without leave

In the United States Army, United States Air Force, British Armed Forces, Australian Defence Force, New Zealand Defence Force, Singapore Armed Forces and Canadian Armed Forces, military personnel will become AWOL if absent from their post without a valid pass, liberty or leave. The United States Marine Corps, United States Navy, and United States Coast Guard generally refer to this as unauthorized absence. Personnel are dropped from their unit rolls after thirty days and then listed as deserters; however, as a matter of U.S. military law, desertion is not measured by time away from the unit, but rather:

  • by leaving or remaining absent from their unit, organization, or place of duty, where there has been a determined intent to not return;
  • if that intent is determined to be to avoid hazardous duty or shirk contractual obligation;
  • if they enlist or accept an appointment in the same or another branch of service without disclosing the fact that they have not been properly separated from current service.

People who are away for more than thirty days but return voluntarily or indicate a credible intent to return may still be considered AWOL. Those who are away for fewer than thirty days but can credibly be shown to have no intent to return (for example, by joining the armed forces of another country) may nevertheless be tried for desertion. On rare occasions, they may be tried for treason if enough evidence is found.

There are similar concepts to desertion. Missing movement occurs when a member of the armed forces fails to arrive at the appointed time to deploy (or "move out") with their assigned unit, ship, or aircraft. In the United States Armed Forces, this is a violation of the Article 87 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The offense is similar to absence without leave but may draw more severe punishment.

Failure to repair consists of missing a formation or failing to appear at an assigned place and time when so ordered. It is a lesser offense within article 86 of the UCMJ. See: DUSTWUN

An additional duty status code — absent-unknown, or AUN — was established in 2020 to prompt unit actions and police investigations during the first 48 hours that a Soldier is missing.

By country

Australia

A 1918 cartoon by Cecil Hartt making light of the high incidence of soldiers going absent without leave in the Australian Imperial Force

During the First World War, the Australian Government refused to allow members of the First Australian Imperial Force (AIF) to be executed for desertion, despite pressure from the British Government and military to do so. The AIF had the highest rate of soldiers going absent without leave of any of the national contingents in the British Expeditionary Force, and the proportion of soldiers who deserted was also higher than that of other forces on the Western Front in France.

Austria

In 2011, Vienna decided to honour Austrian Wehrmacht deserters. On 24 October 2014, a Memorial for the Victims of Nazi Military Justice was inaugurated on Vienna's Ballhausplatz by Austria's President Heinz Fischer. The monument was created by German artist Olaf Nicolai and is located opposite the President's office and the Austrian Chancellery. The inscription on top of the three step sculpture features a poem by Scottish poet Ian Hamilton Finlay (1924–2006) with just two words: all alone.

Colombia

In Colombia, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Spanish: FARC) insurgency were highly affected by desertion during the armed conflict with the Military Forces of Colombia. The Colombian Ministry of Defense reported 19,504 deserters from the FARC between August 2002 and their collective demobilization in 2017, despite potentially severe punishment, including execution, for attempted desertion in the FARC. Organizational decline contributed to FARC's high desertion rate which peaked in the year 2008. A later stalemate between the FARC and government forces gave rise to the Colombian peace process.

France

"Convoy of Deserters - Paris" in the book "Cassell's History of the War between France and Germany. 1870-1871"

From 1914 to 1918 between 600 and 650 French soldiers were executed for desertion. In 2013, a report for the French Ministry of Veteran Affairs recommended that they be pardoned.

Conversely, France considered as highly praiseworthy the act of citizens of Alsace-Lorraine who during WWI deserted from the German army. After the war it was decided to award all such deserters the Escapees' Medal (French: Médaille des Évadés).

Germany

During the First World War, only 18 Germans who deserted were executed. However, the Germans executed 15,000 men who deserted from the Wehrmacht during the Second World War. In June 1988 the Initiative for the Creation of a Memorial to Deserters who deserted the Wehrmacht came to life in Ulm.

Ireland

Éire/Ireland was neutral during the Second World War; the Irish Army expanded to 40,000 men, but they had little to do once it became clear in 1942 that invasion (either by Nazi Germany or by the British Empire) was unlikely. Soldiers were put to work cutting trees and cutting peat; morale was low and pay was bad. Of the 60,000 men who passed through the army in 1940–45, about 7,000 men deserted, about half of them deciding to fight on the Allied side, most joining the British Army.

Once the war was over, EPO 362 order meant deserters were allowed to return to Ireland; they were not imprisoned, but lost rights to an army pension and could not work for the state or claim unemployment benefits for 7 years. They were also seen as traitors by some Irish people in their homes.

Decades after, the morality of their actions was debated; on the one hand, they had illegally abandoned their country's armed forces at a time when it was threatened with invasion — indeed, it was argued that their acts were treasonous at a time when Britain may have been planning to seize control of Ireland's ports (see Plan W); on the other hand, they chose to leave a safe if tedious posting in order to risk their lives fighting against fascism, and many were motivated by genuine idealism.

In 2012, the Minister for Justice and Equality Alan Shatter issued a pardon and amnesty to all World War II-era deserters from the Irish Defence Forces.

New Zealand

During the First World War 28 New Zealand soldiers were sentenced to death for desertion; of these, five were executed. These soldiers were posthumously pardoned in 2000 through the Pardon for Soldiers of the Great War Act. Those who deserted before reaching the front were imprisoned in what were claimed to be harsh conditions.

Soviet Union

World War II

Order No. 270, dated 16 August 1941, was issued by Joseph Stalin. The order required superiors to shoot deserters on the spot. Their family members were subjected to arrest. Order No. 227, dated 28 July 1942, directed that each Army must create "blocking detachments" (barrier troops) which would shoot "cowards" and fleeing panicked troops at the rear. Over the course of the war, the Soviets executed 158,000 troops for desertion.

Soviet–Afghan War

Many Soviet soldier deserters of the Soviet–Afghan War explain their reasons for desertion as political and in response to internal disorganization and disillusionment regarding their position in the war. Analyses of desertion rates argue that motivations were far less ideological than individual accounts claim. Desertion rates increased prior to announcements of upcoming operations, and were highest during the summer and winter. Seasonal desertions were probably a response to the harsh weather conditions of the winter and immense field work required in the summer. A significant jump in desertion in 1989 when the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan may suggest a higher concern regarding returning home, rather than an overall opposition towards the war itself.

Inter-ethnic explanation for desertion

In the beginning of the Soviet invasion, the majority of Soviet forces were soldiers of Central Asian republics. The Soviets believed that shared ideologies between Muslim Central Asians and Afghan soldiers would build trust and morale within the army. However, Central Asians' longstanding historical frustrations with Moscow degraded soldiers' willingness to fight for the Red Army. As Afghan desertion grew and Soviet opposition was strengthened within Afghanistan, the Soviet plan overtly backfired.

The personal histories of Central Asian ethnic groups – especially between Pashtuns, Uzbeks, and Tajiks, caused tension within the Soviet military. Non-Russian ethnic groups easily related the situation in Afghanistan to Communist takeover of their own states' forced induction into the USSR. Ethnic Russians suspected Central Asians of opposition, and fighting within the army was prevalent.

Upon entering Afghanistan, many Central Asians were exposed to the Koran for the first time uninfluenced by Soviet propagandist versions, and felt a stronger connection towards the opposition than their own comrades. The highest rates of desertion were found among border troops, ranging from 60 to 80% during the first year of the Soviet invasion. In these areas, strong ethnic clashes and cultural factors influenced desertion.

As Afghan soldiers continued to desert the Soviet army, a united Islamic Alliance for the Liberation of Afghanistan began to form. Moderates and fundamentalists banded together to oppose Soviet intervention. The Islamic ideology solidified a strong base of opposition by January 1980, overriding ethnic, tribal, geographic and economic differences among Afghans willing to fight the Soviet invasion, which attracted Central Asian deserters. By March 1980, the Soviet army made an executive decision to replace Central Asian troops with the European sectors of the USSR to avoid further religious and ethnic complications, drastically reducing Soviet forces.

Soviet disillusionment upon entering the war

Soviet soldiers entered the war under the impression that their roles were primarily related to the organization of Afghan forces and society. Soviet media portrayed the Soviet intervention as a necessary means of protecting the Communist uprising from outside opposition. Propaganda declared that Soviets were providing aid to villagers and improving Afghanistan by planting trees, improving public buildings and “generally acting as good neighbors”. Upon entering Afghanistan, Soviet soldiers became immediately aware of the falsity of the reported situation.

In major cities, Afghan youth that originally supported the leftist movement soon turned to Soviet oppositional forces for patriotic and religious reasons. The opposition built resistance in cities, calling Soviet soldiers infidels that were forcing an imperialist Communist invasive government on Afghanistan's people. As Afghan troops continued to abandon the Soviet army to support the mujahideen, they became anti-Russian and antigovernment. Opposition forces emphasized the Soviets' atheism, demanding support for the Muslim faith from civilians. The hostility shown towards soldiers, who entered the war believing their assistance was requested, grew defensive. The opposition circulated pamphlets within Soviet camps stationed in cities, calling for Afghan freedom from the aggressive Communist influence and a right to establish their own government.

The native Afghan army fell from 90,000 to 30,000 by mid-1980, forcing Soviets into more extreme combative positions. The mujahideen's widespread presence among Afghan civilians in rural regions made it difficult for Soviet soldiers to distinguish between the civilians they believed they were fighting for and the official opposition. Soldiers who had entered the war with idealistic viewpoints of their roles were quickly disillusioned.

Problems in Soviet army structure and living standards

The structure of the Soviet army, in comparison to the mujahideen, set the Soviets at a serious fighting disadvantage. While the mujahideen structure was based on kinship and social cohesion, the Soviet army was bureaucratic. Because of this, mujahideen could significantly weaken the Soviet army by the elimination of a field commander or officer. Resistance forces were locally based, more ready to address and mobilize the Afghan population for support. The Soviet army was centrally organized; its regime structure emphasized rank and position, paying less attention to the well-being and effectiveness of its army.

The initial Soviet plan relied on Afghan troops' support in the mountainous regions of Afghanistan. The majority of the Afghan army support crumbled easily as forces lacked strong ideological support for Communism from the beginning.

The Afghan army, comprising 100,000 men before 1978, was reduced to 15,000 within the first year of the Soviet invasion. Of the Afghan troops that remained, many were considered untrustworthy to Soviet troops. Afghans that deserted often took artillery with them, supplying the mujahideen. Soviet troops, to fill Afghan soldiers' place, were pushed into mountainous tribal regions of the East. Soviet tanks and modern warfare was ineffective in the rural, mountainous regions of Afghanistan. Mujahideen tactics of ambush prevented Soviets from developing successful counterattacks.

In 1980, the Soviet army began to rely on smaller and more cohesive units, a response to mirror mujahideen tactics. A decrease in unit size, while solving organizational issues, promoted field leaders to head more violent and aggressive missions, promoting Soviet desertion. Often, small forces would engage in rapes, looting, and general violence beyond what higher ranks ordered, increasing negative sanctions in undesirable locations.

Within the Soviet army, serious drug and alcohol problems significantly reduced the effectiveness of soldiers. Resources became further depleted as soldiers pushed into the mountains; drugs were rampantly abused and available, often supplied by Afghans. Supplies of heating fuel, wood, and food ran low at bases. Soviet soldiers often resorted to trading weapons and ammunition in exchange for drugs or food. As morale decreased and infections of hepatitis and typhus spread, soldiers became further disheartened.

Soviet deserters to the mujahideen

Interviews with Soviet soldier deserters confirm that much of Soviet desertion was in response to widespread Afghan opposition rather than personal aggravation towards the Soviet army. Armed with modern artillery against ill-equipped villagers, Soviet soldiers developed a sense of guilt for the widespread killing of innocent civilians and their unfair artillery advantage. Soviet deserters found support and acceptance within Afghan villages. After entering the mujahideen, many deserters came to recognize the falsity of Soviet propaganda from the beginning. Unable to legitimize the unnecessary killing and mistreatment of the Afghan people, many deserters could not face returning home and justifying their own actions and the unnecessary deaths of comrades. Upon deserting to the mujahideen, soldiers immersed themselves into Afghan culture. Hoping to rectify their position as the enemy, deserters learned the Afghan language and converted to Islam.

United Kingdom

Historically, one who was paid to enlist and then deserted could be arrested under a type of writ known as arrestando ipsum qui pecuniam recepit, or "For arresting one who received money".

Napoleonic Wars

During the Napoleonic Wars desertion was a massive drain on British army resources, despite the threat of court martial and the possibility of the capital punishment for the crime. Many deserters were harboured by citizens who were sympathetic to them.

First World War

"306 British and Commonwealth soldiers were executed for...desertion during World War I," records the Shot at Dawn Memorial. Of these, 25 were Canadian, 22 Irishmen and five New Zealanders.

"During the period between August 1914 and March 1920 more than 20,000 servicemen were convicted by courts-martial of offences which carried the death sentence. Only 3,000 of those men were ordered to be put to death and of those just over 10% were executed."

Second World War

Throughout the Second World War, almost 100,000 British and Commonwealth troops deserted from the armed forces. Capital punishment for desertion was abolished in 1930 so most were imprisoned.

Iraq War

On 28 May 2006, the UK military reported over 1,000 absent without leave since the beginning of the Iraq War, with 566 missing from 2005 and that part of 2006. The Ministry of Defence said that levels of absence were fairly constant and "only one person has been found guilty of deserting the Army since 1989".

United States

Legal definition

A United States wartime poster deprecating absence

According to the United States Uniform Code of Military Justice, desertion is defined as:

(a) Any member of the armed forces who–

(1) without authority goes or remains absent from his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to remain away therefrom permanently;
(2) quits his unit, organization, or place of duty with intent to avoid hazardous duty or to shirk important service; or
(3) without being regularly separated from one of the armed forces enlists or accepts an appointment in the same or another one of the armed forces without fully disclosing the fact that he has not been regularly separated, or enters any foreign armed service except when authorized by the United States; is guilty of desertion.

(b) Any commissioned officer of the armed forces who, after tender of his resignation and before notice of its acceptance, quits his post or proper duties without leave and with intent to remain away therefrom permanently is guilty of desertion.

(c) Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct, but if the desertion or attempt to desert occurs at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct.

War of 1812

The desertion rate for American soldiers in the War of 1812 was 12.7%, according to available service records. Desertion was especially common in 1814, when enlistment bonuses were increased from $16 to $124, inducing many men to desert one unit and enlist in another to get two bonuses.

Mexican–American War

During the Mexican–American War, the desertion rate in the U.S. Army was 8.3% (9,200 out of 111,000), compared to 12.7% during the War of 1812 and usual peacetime rates of about 14.8% per year. Many men deserted in order to join another U.S. unit and get a second enlistment bonus. Others deserted because of the miserable conditions in camp, or in 1849–1850 were using the army to get free transportation to California, where they deserted to join the California Gold Rush. Several hundred deserters went over to the Mexican side; nearly all were recent immigrants from Europe with weak ties to the United States. The most famous group was the Saint Patrick's Battalion, about half of whom were Catholics from Ireland, anti-Catholic prejudice reportedly being another reason for desertion. The Mexicans issued broadsides and leaflets enticing U.S. soldiers with promises of money, land grants, and officers' commissions. Mexican guerrillas shadowed the U.S. Army, and captured men who took unauthorized leave or fell out of the ranks. The guerrillas coerced these men to join the Mexican ranks—threatening to kill them if they failed to comply. The generous promises proved illusory for most deserters, who risked execution if captured by U.S. forces. About fifty of the San Patricios were tried and hanged following their capture at Churubusco in August 1847.

High desertion rates were a major problem for the Mexican army, depleting forces on the eve of battle. Most of the soldiers were peasants who had a loyalty to their village and family but not to the generals who conscripted them. Often hungry and ill, never well paid, under-equipped and only partially trained, the soldiers were held in contempt by their officers and had little reason to fight the Americans. Looking for their opportunity, many slipped away from camp to find their way back to their home village.

American Civil War

During the American Civil War, both the Union and Confederacy had a desertion problem. From its 2.5 million or so men, the Union Army saw about 200,000 desertions. Over 100,000 deserted the Confederate army, which was less than a million men and possibly as little as a third the size of the Union one.

New York suffered 44,913 desertions by the war's end, and Pennsylvania recorded 24,050, with Ohio reporting desertions at 18,354. About 1 out of 3 deserters returned to their regiments, either voluntarily or after being arrested and being sent back. Many of the desertions were by "professional" bounty men, men who would enlist to collect the often large cash bonuses and then desert at the earliest opportunity to repeat another enlistment elsewhere. If caught they would face execution; otherwise it could prove a very lucrative criminal enterprise.

The total number of Confederate deserters was officially 103,400. Desertion was a major factor for the Confederacy in the last two years of the war. According to Mark A. Weitz, Confederate soldiers fought to defend their families, not a nation. He argues that a hegemonic "planter class" brought Georgia into the war with "little support from non-slaveholders" (p. 12), and the ambivalence of non-slaveholders toward secession, he maintains, was the key to understanding desertion. The privations of the home front and camp life, combined with the terror of battle, undermined the weak attachment of southern soldiers to the Confederacy. For Georgian troops, Sherman's march through their home counties triggered the most desertions.

The execution of a U.S. deserter in the Federal Camp, Alexandria

Adoption of a localist identity caused soldiers to desert as well. When soldiers implemented a local identity, they neglected to think of themselves as Southerners fighting a Southern cause. When they replaced their Southern identity with their previous local identity, they lost their motive to fight and, therefore, deserted the army.

A growing threat to the solidarity of the Confederacy was dissatisfaction in the Appalachian mountain districts caused by lingering unionism and a distrust of the slave power. Many of their soldiers deserted, returned home, and formed a military force that fought off regular army units trying to punish them. North Carolina lost 23% of its soldiers (24,122) to desertion. The state provided more soldiers per capita than any other Confederate state, and had more deserters as well.

First World War

Desertion still occurred among American armed forces after the U.S. joined the First World War on 6 April 1917. Between 6 April 1917, and 31 December 1918, the American Expeditionary Forces (AEF) charged 5,584 servicemen and convicted 2,657 for desertion. 24 AEF troops were eventually sentenced to death, but all managed to avoid execution after President Woodrow Wilson commuted their death sentences to prison terms. Deserters were often publicly humiliated. One U.S. Navy deserter, Henry Holscher, later joined a UK regiment and won the Military Medal.

Second World War

Over 20,000 American soldiers were tried and sentenced for desertion. Forty-nine were sentenced to death, though forty-eight of these death sentences were subsequently commuted. Only one U.S. soldier, Private Eddie Slovik, was executed for desertion in World War II.

Vietnam War

According to the Department of Defense, 503,926 United States servicemen deserted during the Vietnam War between 1 July 1966 to 31 December 1973. Some of these migrated to Canada. Among those who deserted to Canada were Andy Barrie, host of Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Radio's Metro Morning, and Jack Todd, sports columnist for the Montreal Gazette. Other countries also gave asylum to deserted U.S. soldiers. For example, Sweden allows asylum for foreign soldiers deserting from war, if the war does not align with the current goals of Swedish foreign policy.

Iraq War

According to the Pentagon, more than 5,500 military personnel deserted in 2003–2004, following the Iraq invasion and occupation. The number had reached about 8,000 by the first quarter of 2006. Almost all of these soldiers deserted within the United States. There has been only one reported case of a desertion in Iraq. The Army, Navy, and Air Force reported 7,978 desertions in 2001, compared with 3,456 in 2005. The Marine Corps showed 1,603 Marines in desertion status in 2001. That had declined to 148 by 2005.

Penalties

Before the Civil War, deserters from the Army were flogged; after 1861, tattoos or branding were also used. The maximum U.S. penalty for desertion in wartime remains death, although this punishment was last applied to Eddie Slovik in 1945. No U.S. serviceman has received more than 24 months imprisonment for desertion or missing movement after September 11, 2001.

A U.S. service member who is AWOL/UA may be punished with non-judicial punishment (NJP) or by court martial under Article 86 of the UCMJ for repeat or more severe offenses. Many AWOL/UA service members are also given a discharge in lieu of court-martial.

The 2012 edition of the United States Manual for Courts-Martial states that:

Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct, but if the desertion or attempt to desert occurs at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct.

Legal status of desertion in cases of war crime

Under international law, ultimate "duty" or "responsibility" is not necessarily always to a "government" nor to "a superior", as seen in the fourth of the Nuremberg Principles, which states:

The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.

Although a soldier under direct orders, in battle, is normally not subject to prosecution for war crimes, there is legal language supporting a soldier's refusal to commit such crimes, in military contexts outside of immediate peril.

In 1998, UNCHR resolution 1998/77 recognized that "persons [already] performing military service may develop conscientious objections" while performing military service. This opens the possibility of desertion as a response to cases in which the soldier is required to perform crimes against humanity as part of his mandatory military duty.

The principle was tested unsuccessfully in the case of U.S. Army deserter Jeremy Hinzman, which resulted in a Canadian federal immigration board rejecting refugee status to a deserter invoking Nuremberg Article IV.

A Matter of Conscience

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
A Matter of Conscience: GI Resistance During the Vietnam War
A Matter of Conscience book cover.jpg
AuthorsOral histories by Willa Seidenberg and William Short, Photographs by William Short
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
SubjectHistory, Opposition to United States involvement in the Vietnam War, Anti-war, Vietnam War
PublishedOctober 1992 (Addison Gallery of American Art)
Media typePrint (Paperback)
Pages83 pages, 10.5 x 0.2 x 10.5 in, black and white photos and oral histories
ISBN1879886324
Websitehttps://amatterofconscience.com/A-Matter-of-Conscience/1

A Matter of Conscience: GI Resistance During the Vietnam War is an artist book published in 1992 at the time of the Addison Gallery of American Art exhibition, “A Matter of Conscience” and “Vietnam Revisited.” It contains oral histories of Vietnam era GIs gathered and edited by Willa Seidenberg and William Short and 58 photographs by William Short. Each oral history is complemented by a portrait in which the Vietnam veteran holds an object of some significance such as a newspaper clipping, a legal document, a book, or photograph. The large black and white photographs allow readers to see the veteran while reading the brief but moving oral histories to learn why they turned against the Vietnam War. The veterans' stories and portraits were collected over a five-year period and have been exhibited throughout the United States, Vietnam, Japan and Australia. A number of them were also included in the book Waging Peace in Vietnam: U.S. Soldiers and Veterans Who Opposed the War edited by Ron Carver, David Cortright, and Barbara Doherty. It was published in September 2019 by New Village Press.

Contents

A Matter of Conscience Installation at the Addison Gallery of American Art 1992

The book contains 27 interviews collected from 1987 to 1992 with accompanying black and white photographs of each Vietnam veteran. A number of the subjects in the book were well known GI resisters during the war, including Carl Dix, one of six GIs who in June 1970 refused orders to Vietnam in the largest mass refusal of direct orders to Southeast Asia who became known as the Fort Lewis Six; Donald W. Duncan, a U.S. Army Special Forces (Green Beret) Master Sergeant who became one of the earliest opponents of the war and one of the antiwar movement leading public figures; Captain Howard Levy, an Army doctor who was court-martialed for refusing an order to train Green Beret medics on their way to Vietnam; Susan Schnall who in 1968, while a U.S. Navy Lieutenant, dropped antiwar leaflets over military bases and an aircraft carrier from a small plane and then, while in uniform, held a press conference and lead a mass peace march; Andy Stapp, known for organizing the American Servicemen's Union, an unofficial union for the U.S. military, in opposition to the Vietnam War; Keith Mather and Randy Rowland, two of the GIs involved in the Presidio mutiny, and Roger Broomfield, one of Presidio mutineers' guards in the military stockade. While many of the others in the book are lesser known, all together — the well known and those known mainly by their friends and family — represent a much larger demographic of GIs in the Vietnam era who resisted the war. The authors say they "represent only a fraction of the stories of GI resistance that might be told" and quote Defense Department figures that "as many as 503,926 incidents of desertion occurred between July 1, 1966 and December 31, 1973; compared with 191,840 reported cases of men refusing draft induction between 1963 and 1973."

The stories and images come from every branch of the U.S. military, most during the Vietnam era and a few from the Gulf War era.

Marines

We hear from Marines like Paul Atwood who expressed a deep fear of where he saw patriotism lead — "into mindless, unquestioning, uncritical acceptance of policy by governmental leaders". He bluntly concluded, "A more fucked up war couldn't be imagined." Atwood's photo shows him holding his ribbons and dog tags which he once felt stood for something good and now were "a symbol of its opposite."

Howard Levy photo by William Short from A Matter of Conscience

And Steve Fournier who witnessed "Marines cutting ears and penises off enemy bodies and displaying them proudly." He "saw an eight-year-old boy shot in the leg for saying, 'Fuck you Marine,' and an 80-year-old woman beaten by a marine with his rifle butt." He describes coming home and going to his first antiwar demonstration where he apologized to the crowd for previously disparaging them. He told them he thought they were doing "something wonderful" and said he was proud to be with them. He received a "wonderful ovation" and felt "God, I'm home, I'm finally home."

Clarence Fitch recalled being influenced by the black "consciousness" and "black power movement" of the times. He said the black Marines segregated themselves in Vietnam, "we didn't want to integrate into what we considered the white man's war." He started looking at the enemy, "not so much as the enemy, but as another minority, brown people." In his photo he is wearing his Vietnam Veterans Against the War t-shirt.

Army

Donald Duncan photo by William Short from A Matter of Conscience

Captain Howard Levy became one of the most well known GI resisters during the Vietnam War when he refused to train combat medics. His photo radiates this defiance as we see him, arms crossed with a determined look on his face. During his court-martial he recalls trying "to put the war on trial, but the military court said the truth is no defense."

John Tuma was assigned to military intelligence and soon realized he was expected to participate in torturing the prisoners. When he refused and reported the use of a torture device he was transferred and then almost killed twice by his own side. His photo reveals a wiser and sadder man.

Andy Stapp, who burned his draft card while a student at Penn State, may seem like an unlikely Army enlistee. And he was — he agreed to be drafted in order to organize soldiers against the war. He gave the Army so much trouble they tried court-martialing and transferring him numerous times. In late 1967, he met with dissident GIs from nine different bases and started the American Servicemen's Union, which had ten demands, including an end to racism in the Army and the right to refuse illegal orders. His portrait shows him holding his autobiography Up Against the Brass and an Esquire magazine cover story about the Union.

Carl Dix photo by William Short from A Matter of Conscience

Carl Dix, a black man from Baltimore, recalls arriving at Fort Bragg in North Carolina and seeing a big sign outside the base — "Welcome to KKK Country". He was influenced by the "developing black consciousness" and especially Malcolm X who spoke against black Americans going to oppress the Vietnamese when they were being oppressed at home. He also read about police murdering Black Panther members in Chicago and Los Angeles and realized there was a war in the U.S. too. He knew he had to decide what side he was on. "I decided I couldn't be a part of the war in Vietnam. I couldn't go fight for America." In his photo he holds The Autobiography of Malcolm X in one hand and Mao Zedong's Little Red Book in the other while he wears a t-shirt with a large image of Mao on the front.

Green Beret Master Sergeant Donald Duncan spent 10 1/2 years in the U.S. Army before publicly announcing "I quit" on the cover of Ramparts Magazine. "The administration and the Generals were deceiving the American people and betraying its troops." His photo shows him holding that fateful issue of Ramparts along with his autobiography The New Legions.

Dave Cline recalls reading Donald Duncan autobiography The New Legions while recovering from an NVA bullet through his knee. Duncan "basically wrote we're fighting on the wrong side" — "it made a lot of sense to me". He returned home to organize other GIs against the war and join Vietnam Veterans Against the War. He is pictured holding the Fort Hood GI underground newspaper Fatigue Press.

Returning from Vietnam, Skip Delano was "very committed to fighting this whole machine that sent us there". He co-founded Left Face, the GI underground newspaper at Fort McClellan in Alabama and was one of 1,366 active-duty servicemen who signed an antiwar petition printed in The New York Times on November 9, 1969. In his photo he wears a button saying "To Hell with Rambo and all He Represents" and holds copies of Left Face.

Dave Blalock's photo shows him holding the full page in NY Times petition which Skip Delano had signed. He tells how seeing this led him, with several other guys in the 1st Cav, to organize the other GIs in their unit in Vietnam to wear black armbands. At the next morning's formation all the enlisted men and some of the doctors and helicopter pilots were wearing armbands - the commanding officer was so shocked he gave the whole unit the day off.

The picture of Terry Irvin shows him holding a GI underground newspaper called Free Press and a copy of the U.S. Declaration of Independence. And therein lies his story. He and other GIs had been trying unsuccessfully to get approval to distribute Free Press on Fort Lewis and McChord Air Base. In protest, about a dozen soldiers and some civilian supporters went to the base on the Forth of July 1971 and distributed copies of the Declaration of Independence. Soon the military police showed up and arrested all the GIs. When it made national news that soldiers had been arrested for passing out he Declaration on the Fourth, all their charges were quietly dropped.

Navy and Air Force

Susan Schnall photo by William Short from A Matter of Conscience

Susan Schnall signed on as a Navy nurse to provide good care for the young kids being "sent overseas and shot". She soon realized she was no longer just "patching up people" she was "promoting the war machine." She had read about B-52 bombers dropping leaflets on the Vietnamese and decided to do the same at home. Her portrait shows her holding some of the leaflets she dropped over San Francisco military bases from an airplane. She knew Navy regulations prohibited speaking politically while in uniform, but reasoned, "if General Westmoreland can wear his uniform before Congress asking for money for Vietnam, I can wear mine...speaking out against the war. I had as much right to freedom of speech as he does."

Charlie Clements graduated 2nd in his class in 1967 at the Air Force Academy. He flew more than 50 C-130 missions over Southeast Asia until the U.S. began covert military operations in Cambodia. While on a secret mission over Cambodia he looked out his plane and saw "vast areas that looked like the moon." He realized the U.S. was "conducting massive bombing operations there" and refused to fly anymore.

Gulf War

The portraits of three GI resisters from the Gulf War are included in the book. There stories are not told in detail but are described as similar to "those given by veterans who opposed the Vietnam War."

Companion Book From Vietnamese Side

The book's editors also edited and took photographs for a companion book from the side of the Vietnamese called Memories of the American War: Stories From Vietnam. Published on the Matter of Conscious website, it has also been exhibited at several galleries. They interviewed 90 Vietnamese from all parts of the country over a three year period on three extended trips to Viet Nam. The Los Angeles Times commented about Short's process with the Vietnamese people, "By photographing his subjects just after they were interviewed, he caught faces living the agony of survival; faces so haunted by painful memories that sorrow has become a permanent feature."

Reception

The American Book Review described the photos as having "a powerful cumulative effect", one that emphasizes "the vulnerability and dignity of a class of people who are often stereotyped as mere servants of our nation's war machine." The University of Washington Press commented that dissent "within the military's own ranks is a powerful chapter in the history of war" and felt the book, "by examining it may help us better understand why the Vietnam War continues to haunt our nation." The On Guard reviewer says the book is "a spare but amazingly complete 'look' at the GI resistance movement, presented in a beautiful, dignified way." In 1992 the book was awarded First Place in the American Association of Museums annual Publications Design Competition. The touring exhibit of the photos and histories has also garnered positive reviews. A reviewer for The Boston Globe noted the "haunting atmosphere of the work" and said it was "almost palpable." The Boston Globe also selected the exhibit for its "Critic's Tip" and called it "remarkable". Z Magazine said, "The black-and-white portraits stare unflinchingly out at the viewer...the viewer is being interrogated by the power of the witnesses' gaze — the notorious thousand-mile stare."

Waging Peace in Vietnam

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Waging Peace In Vietnam: U.S. Soldiers and Veterans Who Opposed the War
WagingPeaceInVietnamBookCover.jpg
Cover of the first edition
EditorsRon Carver, David Cortright and Barbara Doherty
CountryUnited States
LanguageEnglish
SubjectHistory, Opposition to United States involvement in the Vietnam War, Anti-war, Vietnam War
PublishedSeptember 2019 (New Village Press) (distributed by New York University Press)
Media typePrint (hardcover and paperback)
Pages320 pages, 8.50 x 11.00 in, 200 black and white illustrations (1st edition, hardcover)
ISBN978-1-61332-107-2 (1st edition, hardcover)
Websitehttps://wagingpeaceinvietnam.com
Includes oral histories and photographs by Willa Seidenberg and William Short from A Matter of Conscience

Waging Peace in Vietnam: U.S. Soldiers and Veterans Who Opposed the War is a non-fiction book edited by Ron Carver, David Cortright, and Barbara Doherty. It was published in September 2019 by New Village Press and is distributed by New York University Press.

The book documents the movement by U.S. GIs and veterans in opposition to the Vietnam War, and asserts that this resistance has "become an almost secret history." Through essays, oral histories, photographs, documents, poems, and pages of the GI underground press, the book refutes what it calls the "post-Vietnam myth" of antiwar protesters spitting on returning Vietnam GIs, and instead shows GIs to have been an integral part of the antiwar movement.

In an introductory essay, David Cortright, Director of Policy Studies at the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies at the University of Notre Dame, counters the claim that the U.S. military could have won the Vietnam War had it not been undermined by politicians and the media, and he writes: "The dissent and defiance of troops played a decisive role in limiting the U.S. ability to continue the war." He adds: "It is arguable that by 1970 U.S. ground troops in Vietnam had ceased to function as an effective fighting force." The book presents evidence for this conclusion.

Synopsis

The book covers the GI and veteran resistance to the Vietnam War from the very early stages of the war until the signing of the Paris Peace Accords in 1973. It has essays and contributions from members of every branch of the U.S. military, from enlisted and officer, from women and men, from those of many skin colors and walks of life, from the famous and the unknown, from highly decorated combat troops and deserters, from front line grunts and jet pilots. It includes chapters on the behind the scenes civilian supporters and on the next generation of resisters to the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars.

The book was inspired by and draws content from the Waging Peace In Vietnam exhibit which opened in the Spring of 2018 at the University of Notre Dame's Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, in South Bend, Indiana and at the War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City, in Vietnam. The exhibit and the book draw from many sources including oral histories and photos from the book A Matter of Conscience by Willa Seidenberg and William Short, the GI Press Collection archive at the Wisconsin Historical Society, and the U.S. National Archives. They document that thousands of soldiers, sailors and pilots refused to fight, sail and fly bombing missions in Vietnam, having a profound effect on the antiwar movement, and on the war itself. The exhibit is currently touring the United States.

Early Resisters

The first chapter on early resisters tells of some of the first GIs to publicly oppose the war and lets some of them tell their own stories. One essay was written by Donald W. Duncan, a highly decorated Master Sergeant in the U.S. Army Special Forces ("Green Berets") who resigned in September 1965 just a little over a year after the Gulf of Tonkin incident which led the U.S. to engage more directly in the war. Duncan, a specialist in unconventional warfare, came to recognize through his experiences in battle against Viet Cong guerrillas that they had "the support of the people" - in fact, he said, they had "an overwhelming mandate". In February 1966, Duncan appeared on the cover of Ramparts Magazine in uniform saying "The whole thing was a lie!" and "I Quit!" It mentions the Fort Hood Three, Private First Class James Johnson, Private David Samas, and Private Dennis Mora, who in 1966 became the first three soldiers to publicly refuse to go to Vietnam. They were arrested and their case became a rallying cry for a small but growing antiwar movement. And it has an essay by Howard Levy, an Army Captain and physician assigned to train Green Berets in dermatology treatments until it became clear to him that "the Army was developing ploys like this to 'win hearts and minds' in Vietnamese villages - while still burning them to the ground in search-and-destroy missions." In May 1967 he was court-martialed and spent twenty-six months in prison for refusing to carry out his assignment.

The GI Press

Chapter 2 documents the history of the GI underground press. An introductory essay explains how these papers "were filled with critical news about the war, cartoons that lampooned the military leadership, updates about soldier protest, and information on where GIs could find legal help." They "criticized racism in the military and U.S. society, and analyzed the racist and imperialist nature of the Vietnam War." A recurring feature of many were contests for "Pig of the Month" or "Lifer of the Month". While conceding the actual number of GI antiwar newspapers can never be known it argues "credible estimates range from 144 to nearly 300." Many of them carried irreverent titles mocking war and the military, including A Four Year Bummer, Kill for Peace and Fun Travel Adventure (FTA) which most GIs understood to mean "Fuck the Army". It documents how the troops who created and circulated these newspapers took serious risks. Army Sergeant Skip Delano, who was stationed at Fort McClellan, Alabama after returning from Vietnam, writes about hiding from the Military Police (MP) in the trunk of a car to avoid six months in the stockade for distributing their paper Left Face. Army soldier Terry Irvin recounts how after they "tried and tried" to get approval to distribute their underground GI newspaper, the Lewis-McCord Free Press on the Fort Lewis and McChord Air Bases in Washington, they decided to circulate the U.S. Declaration of Independence on the Fourth of July. They were surrounded by MPs, arrested and "charged with distributing unauthorized literature on base." Irvin describes being up for general court-martial and facing three years in Leavenworth until the press got wind of what happened. The charges were quickly dropped. These newspapers often received letters from GIs. One of these is reproduced telling of a soldier organized antiwar parade on Memorial Day at Long Binh Army Base in Vietnam; the result was eight Article 15s (a military administrative hearing) for disturbing the peace. The soldier ended his story saying, "Can You Dig That? We had a parade in Vietnam and got busted for disturbing the peace. What can I say — FTA." A black veteran writes about the impact of Muhammad Ali's "No Vietcong ever called me nigger", and says he realized he was "living this contradiction of being a black soldier in the land of another man of color and terrorizing him." He started writing to turn from the violence of the war.

GI Coffeehouses

This chapter explores the history of GI Coffeehouses, which were small cafes and political centers created mainly by civilian antiwar activists near military bases as a method of supporting antiwar and anti-military sentiment among GIs. The first one was established in January 1968 outside Fort Jackson in Columbia, South Carolina and the last closed in 1974. Fort Jackson was one of the Army's central training centers for soldiers heading to Vietnam and the UFO coffeehouse there is described as "an instant hit" by David Parsons in an introductory essay. Parsons, the author of a book on the GI Coffeehouse movement, goes on to say the UFO was "[d]ecorated with rock-and-roll posters" and "quickly became a popular gathering spot for local GIs — and a target of significant hostility from military officials, city authorities, and outraged citizens". Hostility was visited on all these centers, many of which were in pro-military towns adjacent to military bases. "Without exception," the introduction continues, "every GI coffeehouse in the network was subjected to attacks from a variety of sources — investigated by the FBI and congressional committees, infiltrated by law enforcement, harassed by military authorities, and, in a number of startling cases, violently terrorized by local vigilantes." Several civilian organizers tell their stories here including Jane Fonda who describes being smuggled into Fort Carson by active duty servicemen in the trunk of a car. Overall, a picture is painted of a GI coffeehouse network that "played a central role in some of the GI movement's most significant actions".

Petitioning and Marching

The next two chapters include essays, photos and stories about many of the protest methods used by antiwar GIs. There was the November 9, 1969 full page ad in The New York Times calling for a large mobilization against the war on November 15, 1969, in Washington, DC. It was signed by 1,365 active-duty military personnel, including 142 from Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas a generally pro-war town where there was a particularly active chapter of GIs for Peace. A copy of this petition made its way to the troops in Vietnam and Dave Blalock writes about its impact on his Army unit where they decided to wear black armbands on the 15th. He says, "we're all wearing black armbands. It was like 100 percent of the enlisted men, everybody's wearing a black armband, including some of the war doctors and the helicopter pilots." In 1970 the Reservists Committee to Stop the War collected "more than 2,200 signatures of Reservists and National Guardsmen" on a petition calling for the immediate U.S. withdrawal from the war. And on October 9, 1971, when six men from the Army's Firebase Pace in Vietnam refused to go out on patrol and were threatened with court-martial, "[s]ixty-five out of one hundred men in B Company signed a petition in a show of solidarity."

Navy Nurse Susan Schnall tells of her creative method for distributing antiwar material: "A pilot friend and I rented a single-engine plane, filled it with thousands of leaflets, and dropped them over Bay Area military bases: Treasure Island, Yerba Buena Island, Oak Knoll, the Presidio, and the deck of the USS Ranger at Alameda Naval Air Station." They were organizing for a GI and Veterans March for Peace on October 12, 1968, and when the day arrived she marched in her uniform along with five hundred other active duty military personnel (a two-page photo captures this event). David Cline was a combat infantryman in Vietnam who was wounded twice and awarded Purple Hearts and a Bronze Star. He writes about being wounded and finding a book in the hospital called The New Legions where Donald Duncan (see above) talked about his experience in Vietnam and why he resigned from the military. Cline felt Duncan was basically saying "we're fighting on the wrong side" and said "it made a lot of sense to me because that's what I saw." Cline went on to join the GI movement, smuggle underground newspapers onto Fort Hood, become a national coordinator of Vietnam Veterans Against the War and president of Veterans For Peace. Several photos highlight actions by Vietnam Veterans Against the War. In the fall of 1970 "they marched through New Jersey in a mock 'search-and-destroy' exercise called Operation RAW (Rapid American Withdrawal) to show Americans the terror inflicted on civilians in Vietnam by U.S. troops." And on April 23, 1971 "[e]ight hundred U.S. veterans individually tossed their medals and ribbons onto the steps of the [U.S.] Capitol [in Washington, DC] to denounce the war and proclaim their shame at having been decorated for serving in a war they believed was unjust."

Exposing War Crimes

Chapter 6 opens with an essay by Michael Uhl who led a combat intelligence team in Vietnam as a First Lieutenant with the 11th Infantry Brigade. He argues that My Lai, the mass murder of unarmed South Vietnamese civilians by U.S. troops, was just the tip of the iceberg; "Many returning veterans were intimately aware from their own combat tours that U.S. forces were routinely committing atrocities, aimed mostly at civilians." He describes the National Veterans Inquiry and the Winter Soldier Investigation, which both occurred in 1970 and gave a platform to dozens of veterans who testified to America's atrocities in the war, "from unprovoked mass murder, to the poisoning of Vietnam's crops and forests with tons of chemical herbicide, to the widespread use of torture during interrogations." Paul Cox, a Marine squad leader, writes of witnessing the murder of several women, children and an old man and declares it "turned me into an antiwar activist." Ron Haeberle, an Army photographer, describes taking photographs of the My Lai Massacre and the difficulties he had in getting them made public, while Ron Ridenhour, a helicopter gunner in Vietnam, describes his role in exposing the massacre. Ridenhour gathered eyewitness accounts from other soldiers, and after being ignored by 30 members of Congress and Pentagon officials, took his story to Seymour Hersh who won a Pulitzer Prize for his reporting on My Lai. Additional contributions are from Dennis Stout who tried to report fourteen war crimes and received a personal threats against his life and from John Kerry, the 68th U.S. Secretary of State, who represented Vietnam Veterans Against the War testifying against the war before the U.S. Senate in 1971.

Other Forms of Resistance

The forms of protest against the war were as varied as the individuals involved. One extremely common form was unauthorized absence, including desertion. Citing congressional testimony, an essay by Ron Carver one of the book's editors, argues that by 1971 "desertion and AWOL rates had reached the highest levels in modern U.S. history." He cites research that estimated "absenteeism deprived the military of about one million man-years of service" He also points out that as ground troops became increasingly unreliable in Vietnam, the U.S. turned to an air war but soon found "desertion rates explod[ing] in the Navy and Air Force."(p. 87) Essays from draft resisters and deserters discuss why they made their decisions and how they feel about it now.

Other more militant methods have been little discussed prior to this. Editor David Cortright argues African Americans "were among the most defiant troops in fighting against racism and the war and posed a significant challenge to the military's mostly white power structure." All of the military branches experienced major racial rebellions whose roots "lay in patterns of racial discrimination, growing militancy among African American troops, and a general crisis of morale". In August 1968, a prison rebellion erupted at Long Binh Jail at Bien Hoa, northeast of Saigon "in which hundreds of prisoners fought with military police". In the summer of 1969, fighting over an incident of racial discrimination at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina "left fourteen Marines injured and one dead". A Marine internal investigation revealed that "many white officers and NCOs retain prejudices and deliberately practice them." At Travis Air Force Base in northern California in May 1971, the perceived unjust arrest of several black airmen led "more than two hundred enlisted members, including some whites, marched in several groups to free the arrested troops." When they were met by more than three hundred military police backed by civilian police from neighboring communities, more than "six hundred airmen were drawn into the resulting brawl. An officers' club was burned to the ground and dozens of troops were injured. One hundred and thirty-five service members were arrested, most of them black; ten people were injured, and a civilian firefighter died." In late 1972, the Navy experienced its most serious racial uprising aboard the USS Kitty Hawk and the "first mass mutiny in the history of the U.S. Navy" on the USS Constellation. Cortright argues "The resistance of African American members of the military against racism and war was a major factor in the collapse of discipline, morale, and combat effectiveness during the Vietnam War." Essays from black veterans of rebellions and resistance discuss their growing awareness of the connection between racism and the war. Keith Mather, writes about his role in the October 1968 Presidio mutiny at the Presidio stockade in San Francisco, California which was sparked when a prisoner was murdered by a military guard and grew into 27 prisoners sitting down in protest against conditions in the stockade and against the war.

Another little discussed aspect of the war is fragging, the deliberate killing or attempted killing by a soldier of a fellow soldier, usually a superior officer or non-commissioned officer (NCO), which Cortright calls the "most horrific indication of the breakdown of the armed forces". He says exact numbers of fraggings are not known but recent studies estimate "600 to 850 or possibly more." He states, "The threat of fragging became a pervasive presence that loomed over many units in Vietnam and fundamentally altered the relationship between commanders and their troops." A witness to one of these fraggings writes, "I asked, 'What's going on?' This fellow answered, 'They have fragged the "lifer hooch" as a warning because they were getting too gung ho.'"

Redefining Patriotism

Chapter 10 contains essays from a POWs, the son of a POW, GI and civilian resisters, and an Army Major who helped end the My Lai Massacre. They each describe how and/or why they (or their father) turned against the war. Bob Chenoweth was a helicopter pilot shot down in Vietnam and captured by the Viet Cong. In the "Hanoi Hilton" POW camp he "learned about Vietnam's history, culture, and people." He saw films of "the Winter Soldier Investigation held in the U.S. by Vietnam Veterans Against the War" and recognized that "GI activists and veterans" were providing "an undeniable voice about what was being done in our name." He spoke out against the war and said of his captors, "These are people from whom I learned a new way of looking at the world, who protected me and sent me home a better person than when I left." Tom Wilber writes about his POW father Gene, a "religious, conservative, right-leaning, career military officer", who came to realize the war was wrong. While in captivity he made statements against the war and defended them upon his return home. He "announced publicly that the statements he made while in captivity were voluntary" and insisted that during his entire "time in prison, he "received shelter, clothing, hygiene, and medical care", "never went a day without food", and "was not tortured." Carl Dix, a black Army enlisted man from Baltimore, describes showing up at Fort Bragg only to see a large sign outside the base, "WELCOME TO KKK COUNTRY". He discusses how this and other things impacted his "developing black consciousness." He read Malcolm X and followed news of the Black Panther Party and heard about the December 1969 murders of Fred Hampton and Mark Clark by the Chicago police. Then he found out about the police attack on the Los Angeles Black Panther headquarters "where tanks and mortars were set up in the streets of L.A." He writes, "This war isn't just something over there, it's here, too, and I have to decide what side I'm on. I decided I couldn't be a part of the war in Vietnam; I couldn't go fight for America." He and five other soldiers at Fort Lewis refused to go to the war and became the "Fort Lewis Six". Dix spent eighteen months in Leavenworth military prison. John Tuma, was assigned to an Army intelligence unit and soon realized he was expected to participate in and supervise the torture of prisoners for information. After refusing he was threatened with court-martial and barely survived two attempts on his life. Hugh Thompson was an Army helicopter pilot in Vietnam and took heroic action to stop a number of killings at My Lai by threatening and blocking U.S. soldiers and preventing them from murdering unarmed civilians. He evacuated a number of civilians by air and reported the atrocities by radio several times. He writes, "I set my aircraft down between the civilians and the GIs, and I told my crew, 'Y'all cover me. If these bastards open up on me or these people, you open up on them.' They said, 'Yes, sir, we're with you.'"

Navy and Air Force Resisters

This chapter contains essays covering the resistance within the U.S. Navy and Air Force. The lead essay, written by ex-Navy fighter pilot John Kent, is about the Stop Our Ship (SOS) movement which mobilized thousands of sailors and civilians to stop, disrupt and frustrate the U.S. Navy's ability to conduct the war. The war is described as "a bully's war, a war of domination and conquest, an imperial war." Examples are given of sailors refusing to sail, taking sanctuary in churches and marching in demonstrations; antiwar petitions and underground newspapers onboard Navy ships, civilians attempting to blockade ships, sailors jumping overboard to join blockading civilians, and crew members forming the letters SOS on a flight deck. An ex-Navy flight instructor flew multiple times over San Diego dragging a banner encouraging sailors aboard the USS Constellation to stay home. Pictures of underground newspapers and flyers are shown with headlines like "Military Revolting" and "A Warship Can Be Stopped." Naval sabotage also increased in tandem with the SOS movement. "The Navy reported seventy-four instances of sabotage during 1972, most on aircraft carriers."

In the Air Force, resistance among airmen increased as the military shifted more and more to the air war. One well known resister was Captain Michael Heck an American B-52 pilot who refused to continue flying bombing missions over North Vietnamese targets in late 1972. He explained, "I'm just a tiny cog in a big wheel.... but a man has to answer to himself first." An Air Force staff sergeant wrote to his Senator, "The obviously insane slaughter of innocent people is not at all conducive to restful nights. The flight crews are simply 'fed up' with the 'useless killing.' Aborted takeoffs are becoming increasingly common." Charlie Clements, a graduate of the Air Force Academy who flew more than 50 missions in Vietnam, was flying his C-130 on "a secret mission to Cambodia, and I remember looking out of the plane and seeing vast areas that looked like the moon. Only one thing did that: B-52s. I realized we were conducting massive bombing operations there." He decided the war was immoral and refused to fly. The Air Force responded by committing him to a psychiatric hospital.

The Next Generation Resists

Chapter 12 contains essays from and about veterans and GIs of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars who followed in the footsteps of their Vietnam War forebearers. Editor David Cortright describes the antiwar movement against the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars as "smaller than the Vietnam-era resistance" both inside and outside the military. He says the "Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW), patterned after its Vietnam-era namesake, Vietnam Veterans Against the War" was "never a large organization, with less than a thousand members and eight chapters at its peak in early 2008", but argues "it became the public face of dissent within a military increasingly plagued by poor morale." According to Cortright, "The most significant action organized by IVAW was the Winter Soldier hearing. The goal was to create a kind of truth commission that would cut through the propaganda of military and political leaders to tell Americans what was actually happening in Iraq and Afghanistan." About two hundred veterans and a few active-duty soldiers participated in these hearings in March 2008, with approximately fifty giving testimony. "Over three days of often emotional, poignant testimony at a labor center near Washington, D.C., the veterans told stories of their deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, addressing themes such as disregard for the rules of engagement, dehumanization of the enemy, the breakdown of the military, sexual abuse, and profiteering by military contractors." Kelly Dougherty, an Army MP (Military Police), writes about the pervasive "culture of chauvinism and dehumanization" and said "we displayed a disturbing level of contempt towards the Iraqi people." She also speaks of the "stress of living within the military's abusive and misogynistic culture." She felt she "could never feel safe, even when I returned to my base." Jonathan Hutto, a black Navy sailor aboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt, was drawn into resistance by the racism he felt and observed in the Navy. "In February 2006," he writes, "some white petty officers displayed a hangman's noose in my face." He knew he was "ideologically opposed" to the war and in June 2006 joined with eleven other active-duty troops to launch the Appeal for Redress to end the war in Iraq. Camilo Mejia, a Nicaraguan U.S. Army infantryman, writes of his decision to refuse to return to the Iraq War. While stationed in Ar Ramadi, he was shocked to see the mistreatment of Iraqis, including "arbitrary detentions, torture, and shootings of unarmed civilians." While on furlough back in the U.S. he decided to take a public stance against the war and refused to go back. "My decision landed me in a military prison for nine months and prompted Amnesty International to declare me a prisoner of conscience."

Confronting the Legacies of War

In this chapter, we hear from the Vietnamese, from veterans who feel a responsibility for what they did, and from the daughter of a veteran poisoned by Agent Orange. Madame Binh, Nguyễn Thị Bình, represented the National Liberation Front (NLF) during peace negotiations and played a major role in the Paris Peace Accords. She addresses American veterans and thanks those who opposed the war and joined organization like Vietnam Veterans Against the War and Veterans for Peace. She goes on to thank those who have moved beyond the past "to reconcile our two nations, to normalize relations and build friendly and cooperative relationships between our two peoples." And she expresses her appreciation for those "American veteran organizations [who] have also extended material support through humanitarian projects for Vietnam such as building schools and clinics." Tran Xuan Thao recalls as a child being implored by her mother "to grab hold of a tree" to protect herself as American warplanes flew overhead. But her message is one of friendship as she explains, "We know that for many years, so many Americans defied and resisted their government's war. And for all these years we have been able to differentiate the actions of your government from the love and solidarity of your people." Chuck Searcy was in Army Intelligence in Vietnam and turned against the war as he discovered it was based on lies. He returned to Vietnam in 1992 and made up his mind to help the Vietnamese recover from the war. He helped found an orthopedic workshop at a children's hospital in Hanoi and "learned that more than 100,000 children and adults had been killed or injured by unexploded ordnance" in the years between 1975 and 1995. "Every week", he writes, "there was a new report in the newspaper or on TV of a farmer or another child being killed or injured." He is still helping the Vietnamese recover and says he feels a "responsibility as an American, as a Vietnam vet, for what we did". Fredy Champagne was an infantry rifleman in Vietnam in 1965. Years later he felt he "had unfinished business with the Vietnamese people", and in 1988 he launched an organization which returned to Vietnam to help Vietnamese workers construct a Friendship Medical Clinic. Heather Bowser was about five years old when she went to her first Agent Orange awareness rally. She was born in 1972, "two months premature, missing several of my fingers, my big toe on my left foot, and my right leg below the knee." Her parents had no idea why until 1978 when they saw a Vietnam veteran named Paul Reutershan on The Today Show saying "I got killed in Vietnam and didn't know it." It turned out her father, who was stationed at Long Binh Army base in Vietnam, was sprayed daily with the dioxin-tainted herbicide called Agent Orange, which in addition to causing enormous environmental damage creates major health problems and birth defects in those exposed and their children. She writes about having "traveled to Vietnam four times to meet children who are still being born like me, due to residual dioxin in their environment." She continues, "My activism has taken me around the world, but it hasn't yet persuaded the U.S. government to take responsibility for what it did to those affected by Agent Orange."

Supporting, Recording and Recovering the Legacy of GI Dissent

As the book concludes we learn about organizations and individuals who supported the GI and veterans anti-Vietnam War movement and who have worked to preserve and foster its history and legacy. One of the most important was the United States Servicemen's Fund (USSF). USSF helped to support GI Coffeehouses, antiwar entertainment and GI underground newspapers. While working with USSF, Howard Levy suggested an "antiwar, pro-GI, Bob Hope–style spectacle, which would come to be called the FTA Show." Involving Jane Fonda, Donald Sutherland, Len Chandler, Holly Near, and others, it "became one of USSF's main attractions, and drew enormous audiences of GIs, both within the United States, and in Asia." Alan Pogue, an award-winning photojournalist, was a combat medic in Chu Lai, Vietnam in 1967. He writes about how he "became an atheist in a foxhole" and a photographer by using his Kodak Instamatic in Vietnam. One of the most remarkable repositories of documents and information on the GI and veterans resistance to the Vietnam War is located in the GI Press Collection of the Wisconsin Historical Society. This collection "contains over 88,000 page images with searchable text taken from more than 2,400 periodicals and other items such as pamphlets and posters created by or for U.S. military personnel during the Vietnam War era." Here we learn of the tireless efforts of James Lewes, who spent years, much of it single-handedly, compiling and digitizing this collection. William Short and Willa Seidenberg, many of whose photographs and oral histories are contained in the book, write about their five-year project document the resistance to the war.

An Afterword asks why "this important story become an almost secret history?" Answering that it has been erased by a "rightward shift in U.S politics" which has worked to turn the "most vibrant and diverse antiwar movement in U.S. history" into "a band of craven, self-righteous, draft-dodging campus hippies". Waging Peace, it argues, "gives us back an important piece" of our history.

Reception

Waging Peace in Vietnam has received positive reviews. Seymour Hersh, the Pulitzer Prize recipient for his disclosure of the My Lai Massacre, says of the book, "To be in a military unit and oppose a war that had the blessing of one American president after another took extraordinary courage — the kind that was displayed by only a few in the Congress and, sad to say, by not many more in the media. The men and women who spoke out, often at great cost, during the immoral and unnecessary war in Vietnam are voices that need to be heard again and again, as they are in Waging Peace in Vietnam." The Public Historian called it "an important book" that explores "an important but still little-known social movement" and shows how the "most consistently rebellious troops in Vietnam and throughout the military were African Americans." The Progressive magazine called it "a new and fiercely compelling anthology about a wide swath of U.S. troops that were crucial to opposing the Vietnam War. The volume offers 'an almost-secret history' of a vast movement that ground down the high-powered U.S. war machine in Vietnam to a barely-functioning crawl." A Daily Collegian review quoted Christian Appy, a history professor at the University of Massachusetts, "There is really nothing like it in this vast literature of more than 40,000 books regarding the Vietnam War.... Waging Peace in Vietnam [is] the foremost catalogue of firsthand accounts of G.I. resistance in Vietnam in existence." Writing about the Waging Peace in Vietnam exhibit, Thomas Maresca of USA Today says "Hippies made the history books, but servicemembers risked prison". Hans Johnson, a contributing writer for HuffPost commented: "As the authors document — with a splendid compilation of essays & primary source material — rank-&-file, officer, & civilian opposition to the carnage changed the ground tactics & aerial bombardment strategy of the brutal 15-year war & hastened its end."

Algorithmic information theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algorithmic_information_theory ...