Canada\'s Involvement in the Vietnam

Canada's Involvement In The Vietnam War

It is generally believed that Canada's only involvement in the Vietnam War was allowing asylum for draft dodgers and conscientious objectors. While it is true at that Ottawa did not send soldiers to Vietnam, the country took part in the conflict in other ways. The direct and indirect commitment of troops and personnel as well as the history surrounding Canada's involvement in the war will be the topic of this paper.

Historical Perspective

Prior to World War II, Vietnam had been a French colony, although the country was occupied by the Japanese during the war. The Japanese occupation resulted in a strong anti-Japanese sentiments led by Ho Chi Minh. Ho had been a leading member of the Communist party in France. In 1941, Ho led the Vietminh independence faction who, with the support of the United States Office of Strategic Services, worked against the Japanese as well as the French when they attempted to re-occupy Vietnam in 1946. When the war ended, the Vietminh controlled the north of the country and desired the country to be free and independent.

Ho Chi Minh was named Chairman of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam in 1945 when the Vietminh organized the abdication of the puppet emperor Boa Dai. Ho looked to the United States for support for the new independent government, but American President Harry Truman was unwilling to provide support, partially due to pressure from France and partly due to Ho's Communist leanings.

The French and the Vietminh went to war with the support of China. The support of the Chinese led to American concern regarding the spread of Communism into Asia. With American support, the French set up government in South Vietnam. The government of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam in the North was recognized by China and the Soviet Union. United States president Harry Truman provided support to the French puppet government in the South. America feared the expansion of communist power as had been seen in the Korean War. The United States developed the Military Assistance and Advisory Group (MAAG) was deployed to Vietnam in 1950 to advise and train soldiers1. The Viet Minh received support from the Soviet Union and the Chinese.

French forces in Vietnam surrendered after the battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954.

Ho Chi Minh became president of North Vietnam (Still known as the Democratic Republic of Vietnam) in 1955. The North was a Communist single party state. The 1954 Geneva Accords mandated that a national election be held in 1956 to reunite the country under one government. South Vietnam and the United States had failed to ratify the Geneva Accords, mostly for fear the country would be united under the popular Communist rule. The United States then elected to support the South Vietnamese government in "nation building," ostensibly to stem the tide of communism.

The United States committed large numbers of troops to the skirmishes that continued between the North and South factions between 1954 and 1973.

American President John F. Kennedy increased troop numbers to 16,000, and more troops were deployed under President Lyndon Johnson. In 1963, the President of the Republic of Vietnam, Ngo Dinh Diem was killed in a coup carried out by the Republican Army, but initiated with the support of the Central Intelligence Agency. As a result, the presidency of the country fell to a series of poorly qualified generals. The United States became primary mover in the war against the North. Ultimately, the Army of the Republic was entirely funded and directed by American military advisors.

Canada in the milieu

The signing of the Paris Peace Accords in 1973 brought an end to American involvement in Vietnam. By that time, 1.7 million people had died, 2.7 million were wounded and 13 million Vietnamese men, women and children were left as refugees. Canada provided $2.47 million in Defense Products to the United States over the years between 1968 and 1973, products to include aircraft parts, bombs, ammunition and defoliant. Canada attempted to assuage any guilt or complicity associated with this contribution to the American War effort and its resulting carnage by shipping the goods to the United States who would from there send the products on to Vietnam. Canadian Prime Minister Lester Pearson defended the stated role of Canada as an impartial observer in the conflict by stating "...equipment goes into the general inventory of the United States Armed Forces and may be used....as the U.S. Government may see fit."2

With the advent of the Cold War, Canada self identified as a non-aligned state. After the development of NATO, Canadian foreign policy shifted to multilateralism. This policy put Canada in the position of disagreement with strong doctrines put forth by both the Truman and Eisenhower administrations advocating the active opposition of Communism in any form. Canada felt that while aggression must be stopped, as was demonstrated in the Korean Conflict, there was no precedent for the commitment of troops to a conflict limited to two factions of the same nation. Canada was a signatory on the Geneva Accords and attempted to dissuade France and the United States from escalation of hostilities in Vietnam. Canada had specific guidelines for the commitment of Canadian troops to any war alliance. These guidelines were:

The alliance must involve cultural and trade ties in addition to a military alliance.

The alliance must meet the will of the people in the country involved.

Other states (in this case, Asian states) had to support the alliance, either directly or in principle.

The conflict must be referred to the United Nations (in this case, by France).

Any multilateral action must conform to the United Nations charter.

Any action taken had to be divorced from all elements of colonialism.

Canada was a member of the United Nations element responsible for oversight of the Geneva Accords. This position necessitated Canada's neutrality. When the United States reported on infiltration of spies and terrorists from the North into the South, the Canadian delegation to the United Nations wrote a report to the Co-Chairman of the Geneva Convention Conference on the Indo-China (ICC) meant to support the U.S. allegations of aggressive tactics by North Vietnam. This support is viewed with a jaundiced eye by historians. Broad application of technical jargon was used to make the case for retaliatory aggression on the part of the United States. Essentially, this report supported the claim by the United States that Vietnam was divided into to sovereign states, a statement which is not supported by the Geneva Accords. This assertion was helpful for the American's case, however, because it allowed the Americans call action in Vietnam police action, rather than civil action. A civil action would have been thought better managed via internal rather than external means.

What was Canada's motivation for this action? Information contained in the Pentagon Papers3 reports the ICC special report stated rural insurrections by the National Liberation front within South Vietnam were caused by North Vietnamese actors. The National Liberation Front grew out of the Vietminh organization, but had been in control of many "liberated zones" within Vietnam even before the start of the war. One failure of the American response to this "insurgency" was that heavy bombardment and counter-insurgency tactics were relatively ineffective in an area in which the insurgency had been in place for up to 20 years. Later data on this campaign made available through the Pentagon Papers showed the evidence used for this report to the United Nations was unsubstantiated. Later analysis showed the North Vietnamese leaders were not the organizers of the insurgent rebellion taking place within South Vietnam. It was more likely that the North Vietnamese gave unwilling assent to the insurgency, attempting to prevent a revolt against Hanoi's tenuous hold on the hearts and minds of the people.

As war continued, and as the body counts continued to rise, the Americans found themselves in an unfamiliar situation. Vietnam was a war with unclear objectives fought on several fronts and with a significant insurgency within the "friendly" territory. American soldiers were unfamiliar with this type of guerilla warfare and unsure how to deal with a conflict lacking an obvious endpoint and a nebulous enemy. Canada continued to take on new and greater responsibilities for the United States, but in a more clandestine manner.

In 1964, Blair Seaborn was on an international commission tasked with ending the Vietnam conflict. Seaborn, a lifelong diplomat, was asked to act as intermediary between United States President Lyndon Johnson and Hanoi. Seaborn was to deliver a message in which the Americans asked Hanoi to consider allowing South Vietnam to develop as an independent state, pledging the American support in nation building.

Unfortunately, Seaborn's mission failed. As a result, American President Johnson began a massive bombing campaign against North Vietnam in January of 1964 3, 4. Canada initially claimed there was no advance notice for the Canadians regarding this bombing campaign. The Pentagon Papers showed differently. Prime Minister Lester Pearson and President Johnson met in New York in May 1964. According to the papers, Pearson indicated concern about the nature of the bombing and questioned Johnson about the potential use of nuclear weapons. While Pearson appeared willing to acknowledge that conventional bombing raids would be used against the North, he was clear that the deployment of nuclear weapons would be considered entirely unacceptable by both the Canadian government and people.

History has been critical for Pearson's handling of the situation. Canadians were in a potentially powerful position as partners in the ICC. Additionally, Pearson did not apprise Canadian citizens of the findings. Pearson's supporters point to the fact that should Pearson have chosen to release negative information to the Canadian public, it would have done little to dissuade the Americans from their plans. It would also have been likely that any information released to the public would have angered Lyndon Johnson resulting in economic sanctions against the Canadians. In a 1965 speech to Temple University students, Pearson suggested that a pause in the bombing may have been helpful in allowing Hanoi time to consider entering into negotiations. This alone set Johnson into a furor, so it is likely that a statement regarding bombing campaigns to the Canadian populace at large would only serve to hurt Canadian-American relations and nothing to reduce the bombing campaigns against the North Vietnamese. Pearson did send another emissary to Hanoi in an attempt to broker a peace deal in 1966. The outcome was negligible, since the Americans were not receptive to peace negotiations at the time.

Canada played its part in the chaotic final days of Saigon before the fall of the country to Northern and Nationalist forces5. The decision to close the embassy in Saigon and evacuate all personnel sparked a significant outcry from Canadians, especially when it was disclosed that Vietnamese Embassy staff would not be evacuated with the Canadians. Exit visas were issued to as many South Vietnamese as possible; Canadian embassy staff could do nothing to assist asylum seekers in obtaining transport from the country. Allied forces organized a program called "Operation Baby lift," in an attempt to evacuate as many orphaned babies from Vietnam as possible. The attempt ended in tragedy. While a jumbo jet had been promised to transport the babies, the United States only ever gave a C-5 cargo plane. On the first evacuation attempt, a sudden drop in pressure occurred when the plane reached 18,000 feet. Three nurses and several babies were ejected out in mid-air and the plane crashed.

At Home and Abroad

The Vietnam War was unpopular in the United States, Canada and abroad. In 1968, Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau remarked that the Vietnam War was of no moral consequence to the Canadians, and remarked to a CBC reporter "If it were a question of morality and if I felt that it were bad to sell arms to the United States in a moral sense then I would have to feel that it's bad also to sell them nickel and asbestos and airplane components."6 but as popular sentiment surrounding the war grew in Canada, politicians realized that simply distancing themselves from the problem would no longer suffice. Eventually even Trudeau would reverse his laissez faire attitude towards the War, publicly condemning American action in Indo-China and allowing asylum seekers into Canada

Canada and Agent Orange

The Uniroyal plant in Elmira, Ontario was one of the seven supplies who produced Agent Orange for the United States7. According to the United States Veteran's administration, approximately 20 million gallons of herbicides were used in Vietnam between 1962 and 1971. The primary objective was to remove plant life which provided cover for enemy forces. A scientific report released in 1970 indicated that one of the primary components of Agent Orange, 2, 4, 5-T could cause birth defects in lab animals. More than that, the herbicide contained dioxins, which are also deadly to human beings. The use of Agent Orange in Vietnam was suspended, but veterans returning from the war reported much illness and there was concern that the soldier's exposure to Agent Orange may have been a causative factor. After years of denial, Canadian government admitted in 1980 that testing of Agent Orange was conducted at a Canadian military base called Gagetown in the 1960. Initially, the government reported the tests were only done to evaluate the effect of Agent Orange on vegetation. Before the use of Agent Orange was stopped, eleven million gallons had been spread over South Vietnam.

Half of the forests which were defoliated in the Vietnam War are unrestored as of 2002. A Canadian team has studied the levels of dioxin still present in Vietnam, and found that the Dioxins sprayed over 30 years ago are still entering the food chain.

Additionally, studies show that children in the most heavily sprayed areas are more than three times as likely to have cleft palates, be mentally retarded, have polydactyly and nearly eight times as likely to be born with hernias8. In 1979, a class action suit was filed against the manufacturers of Agent Orange, and remuneration was paid to victims of exposure in Canada and the United States. The chemical companies paid $180 million into a fund to pay those who claimed serious disease or disability from Agent Orange exposure. None of that money has been made available to the people of Vietnam.

Canadian Asylum Seekers

When Pierre Trudeau agreed to accept "draft dodgers" for emigration into Canada, more than 400,000 Americans applied took Canadian residency between 1968 and 1979. Of those, approximately 50,000 were males of draft age and fled to Canada rather than be forcibly inducted into the American armed forces. Americans immigrated to Canada as a response to military and foreign policy at the time. Several Canadian based anti-war organizations, like the Student union for Peace Actions made it easier for these individuals to immigrate, and the Manual for Draft Age Immigrants to Canada9 was a popular primer on avoiding the draft. Deserters from the American forces fled to Canada rather than risk service in Vietnam. The Americans urged Canadians to arrest deserters, but in May 1969, the Canadian government ceased all attempts to track down draft dodgers and deserters. This resulted in criticism from the American government.

Some of the men who sought asylum in Canada from the Vietnam War returned to the United States in 1977. Changing political and popular views of the war led President Jimmy Carter to grant pardon to American expatriates in Canada. Despite the pardon, it is estimated that over half chose to stay in Canada.

Canadian Change of Heart

By the late 1960s, Canada could no longer support the American war in Vietnam on an economic level while turning a blind eye to the escalating casualty counts. The war lacked clear objectives. There appeared to be no end in sight. Canadian politicians became more aware of declining public opinion, but feared economic retaliation on the part of the U.S. It was not enough to keep supporting such an unpopular and evidently pointless war.

In the interval since the Second World War, Canada had changed its foreign policy to one of multilateralism. Canada would have been unable to mount an intervention in Vietnam. This is not to say that Canadians did not fight in the Vietnam War. Many Canadians joined the United States military to serve in Vietnam, and at least 110 Canadians died in service during the Vietnam conflict.

Canada, like many other Western countries, has forfeited extensive military capability in favor of social services. Canada does not have the ability to intervene on the scale of the United States, nor would the populace likely support the degree of intervention provided by countries like the United States and Britain. Canadian foreign policy has matured to the point where she no longer simply the shoulders on which American can place her foreign policy and expect unquestioning support and participation. Canada continues to be an active member of the United Nations, NATO, plays a pivotal role in global political action. Canada is a high profile contributor to UN peacekeeping efforts and has sent more troops to more countries than any of its allies. Canadian foreign policy is based upon the purposes of the United Nations, which are 1) to maintain peace and security; 2) to develop friendly relations among nations; and 3) to cooperate internationally in solving economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems.

Canada has been a participant in almost every UN sanctioned peacekeeping operation. As a participant in Desert Storm in the early 1990s, Canada supported coalition troops from Britain, France, Germany and the United States. Canadian Armed Forces are also participating in nation building and peacekeeping efforts underway in Afghanistan. Under the Afghanistan Compact, Canada has promised full support and monitors program while supporting obligations to the Afghan government and the international community.

Former Prime Minister Jean Chretien agrees that the United States is likely Canada's most important foreign ally. But Chretien and his successors have cultivated a slightly more distant relationship with the United States than in the past. Canada will no longer blindly support United States intervention and "nation building." The lesson of Vietnam was that the United States will be willing to use its relationship with Canada to fulfill domestic objectives.

Relations across the border continue to be friendly but definitely guarded. Canada has learned to protect her interests exactly as the United States will always protect her own. A recent bone of contention between the United States and Canada as of this writing is their disagreement over the Kyoto Protocol10. Canada ratified this agreement calling for the reduction of greenhouse gasses to 94% of its 1990 levels by 2012. To date, the United States continues to assert the Kyoto protocol would be too damaging to American manufacturing interests and elects to work on global warming on its own.

As previously noted, the Canadians did support the war in Afghanistan by sending troops but has been less willing in the commitment of troops to the war in Iraq. While Canada was willing to support the United States in Operation Desert Storm, its commitment was small, consisting only of two destroyers and a supply ship; a CF-18 squadron with 450 personnel; and a Canadian field hospital with 530 personnel. Canada agreed to commit to Desert Storm because of the United Nations resolution, but during the war many Canadians the conflict more likely represented American oil interests than freedom in Kuwait. Canada was unwilling to support the American lead invasion of Iraq in 2003 for many of the same reasons, and did not commit due to the lack of a United Nations resolution authorizing military action against Iraq. Many Canadians also felt the Americans the disarmament process enough time before the deployment of troops to Iraq.