There's an odd sort of understanding silence between combat veterans. There are reasons you don't talk about certain things you've seen, and certain things you've done. As with any system, there will be aberrations- those who revel in how many 'hadjis' they've dropped, and those who immediately and loudly proclaim that what they've just gone through will scar them for life. For most, though, any decision to actually talk about what goes on in combat comes with a very heavy price. First, you have to admit that something bothers you about it. You have to admit that something didn't feel right, and you need to get it off your chest. That's a big can of worms to open up, because combat veterans are universally afraid of one thing - the realization that what we just did might have been the wrong thing to do, and that "following orders" wasn't a good enough reason to do it. That's the bogeyman lurking under the bed, and that's one reason among many that we usually don't encourage a big touchy-feely heart-to-heart about that mission we all know went too far. That's why there are no Oprah or Dr. Phil moments in the military.
When you hear civilians talking about people in uniform, you often hear language designed to incite emotion of one kind or another. Words like "coward", "hero" and "monster" fly about like bullets in a firefight. I'd wager a full nine times out of ten, those sorts of words are coming out of the mouth of someone who has never logged a day in a uniform. At the risk of sounding condescending: if you've been there, you know that the lines between cowardice and heroism blur fast and often in the "line of duty". I'm always amused when someone who's never aimed a weapon at another human being tells me I'm a coward for refusing to do it again. They simply don't understand how silly they look leveling such empty accusations. When it comes down to it, even if you did know every thing that I did every day I was in the military, you still can't know if I'm a coward or a hero unless you know what's in my heart, too. It's not enough to know what I did- you need to know why as well. Unfortunately, "coward" is a word the public responds to, and so it gets dragged out often by those who have the least business getting their fingerprints all over it. Other veterans seem to steer clear of such absolute judgments, even if they vehemently disagree with the choice I've made. They know how close you tread to that line every day you're on duty. I suspect a good number wonder if they shouldn't have made the same decision. Combat veterans avoid such polarizing words because they should be left for those whose actions truly are extraordinarily unusual. During the Iraq War, desertion rates in the US military have spiked to a record high since the days of the Vietnam War. It seems throwing down the rifle and walking away in disgust isn't as unusual as it might appear.
Of course, the same logic holds for words you might not expect me to object to. Words like "hero", for instance. At least once, whenever I talk to a group of people about the path that led me here, someone utters the word "hero" as if it were a compliment. I cringe every time I hear it. Just as I'm no coward, I'm no hero, either. Deciding to shed my uniform and walk away from the military wasn't a heroic act. It was an enormously painful experience for me, and I agonized about it for - literally - months. For those months, I continued to execute my orders and support my unit. I continued to give orders that would result in the deaths of innocent civilians in numbers that still keep me awake at night. The thought that truly hurts me is that, for all that time, I knew better. I knew what I should do months before I actually did it. And I was never even remotely concerned about it until it was staring me in the face. Only through being present during the actual commission of war crimes was I able to realize what was wrong in my military service. I still feel like I was forced into taking action, and really had no other choice than to refuse further service. I simply couldn't live with myself anymore. I can honestly tell you if there had been any other way to not participate in that anymore, I'd have taken it. If there had been any easier way to stop it, I'd have done it. I was no hero, I just ran out of options.
Who, then, in this vast web of political intrigue that war resisters seeking refuge in Canada has become, are the heroes? Who are the truly unusual, who are spurred to action not because they have no other way out, but simply because they are aware of an injustice? In my mind, it's the people that have put in nearly inhuman hours trying to help us win our bid to stay here. Nobody forced you people to help, and it would have been easy for you (far easier than it would have been for me) to simply turn and walk the other direction, pretending you'd seen and heard nothing. But you didn't. When the government of Canada elected the route of political expediency over principle, you took our hands, called up your friends, and put the word out: "Let Them Stay."
I'm no hero. You are.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Let's be honest about something
In my brief time on this planet, I've discovered a lot of what (I like to think) are basic truths about people and how they function. I see a lot of parallels is the way people and other social animals behave, even as we often point to their behaviour (<--Canadian spelling creeping into my vocabulary) as a reason they are "worth less" than us. One trait gets a lot of finger pointing, and I felt motivated to write on it a bit: self-interest.
Everyone has heard the old adage, "the love of money is the root of all evil." I happen to disagree with it, if only because I regard the love of money as one specific instance of a broader problem, which is love of self above all else. Certainly, loving and looking out for yourself are natural enough traits and one could hardly expect natural selection to function without them. But isn't being able to put someone else's interests ahead of your own the mark of a mind that can truly function in the abstract? I'm not talking about simple biological family connections, either. I'm talking about being able to extend the social group you provide this "them first" altruism for- extending it as far as you consciously want it to go. I think that is one of the fundamental traits of an intelligent mind. So why do we consistently fail at it?
I was able to watch the CPAC footage of the vote in Ottawa on the C440 bill to allow war resisters to apply for permanent residence in Canada. It was very narrowly defeated, but watching the vote was very educational for me. Several votes happened that night, and only one party on the floor behaved the same way every time. Every vote, the Conservatives were like a machine. If the rules of the House allowed it, I have no doubt they would rise and sit to cast their votes in perfect synch with the Prime Minister. I hesitate to attribute this to pure altruistic behaviour, and the larger issue of the importance of obedience in the conservative mindset is something that deserves more than the passing mention I can afford in this post, but the result is the same. There is certainly a measure of putting someone else first in their lock-step mentality. I won't pretend to know the precise mix of obedience to the party and its leader versus an unselfish desire to truly do something for someone else at cost to self, but the result of that equation is a real and palpable thing when you watch voting take place on the floor of the House of Commons. To lesser degrees, both the NDP and le Bloc Québécois seem to be able to muster a similar sentiment, being parties more or less united behind a common cause.
Then we look to the Liberal Party, and what begins to happen? On the outside, we see lots of things and people we can point fingers at, such as Michael Ignatieff's last minute reversal in his support for war resisters at the C440 vote, or Maurizio Bevilacqua basically selling his MP seat to the Conservatives to get himself a mayoral posting. If you take each issue and strip it down to its nuts and bolts, the thing you find underneath is always the same: self interest. I'm looking out for me and mine. And we blame them, don't we? We get angry, call them wishy-washy, and pretend the Liberal Party has no moral compass or backbone. In fact, even if such a generalization could be fairly applied to every Liberal, it would ignore the truth- there is a moral compass there in the ones we take issue with, but it seems to point at "me and mine" for each of them, instead of "the right thing to do". Why? Because they are no different than we are.
Let me emphasize that last point: They are no different than we are. By "they", I mean "most Liberals", and by "we", I mean "most politically-active leftists". Let me paint a picture for you. If you happen to be active in social justice issues, this will be something you've seen all too much of. Something Important is coming up. The folks who attend every meeting for our little organization (whichever it might be) realize that they will need a mountain of support for Something Important, and so the call goes out across email and phone lists. We get to our first meeting, and get excited to see all the extra faces ready to help out the cause. Then, as the meeting progresses, someone interjects about how their input isn't being fairly considered in light of how they went out of their way to come to this stupid meeting. We make it a little further, and someone else wants to derail the proceedings for a bit and wax poetic about how Unrelated Issue is actually at the center of Something Important, and should be given centre stage. After a few events like this, a meeting can feel like it's devolving into chaos quickly. But again, let's take a step back and look at the big picture. Whether it's someone using a lot of unnecessary words to say "look at me," or someone saying "this is important to everyone because it's important to me," that treacherous word always sneaks in there: me. Let's give that a second to sink in. If you're an activist, compare the last public meeting you held about any given issue to the scenario above, and then imagine everyone is in their best business attire and has a vote to cast. Are you starting to look like the Liberal caucus? I think so. We allow petty self-interest to fracture us, just as they allow it to fracture them. The only difference is in scale. They are no different than we are.
I hope you're not coming into this paragraph looking for some sort of sage advice on how to fix this. I don't have it. I worry that this is simply the curse that goes along with a political group that's made up principally of those that are willing to ask hard questions of authority figures, where the inclination to "go along to get along" is of intrinsically less value. Maybe the best first step in dealing with self-interest is simply to realize how pervasive it is, and call it out when you see it- even if you see it in yourself. Putting the group or another individual before yourself is hard work, especially when they aren't standing right in front of you. It takes practice. To be perfectly honest, this post started out about something far more specific, but related. As I thought about it, I realized a broader message that I wanted to communicate first. Something a little less about what bothers "me", and a little more about what I see as a problem for "us".
I know lots of people will read this and think to themselves, "that's not me." I know, I know. You're not the problem. You don't act that way. You always put the needs of the group ahead of yourself, and never let your ego or vanity get in the way of something important. I'm not that easy to convince, though, and you shouldn't be, either. Go out and prove it. Today.
And then do it again tomorrow.
Everyone has heard the old adage, "the love of money is the root of all evil." I happen to disagree with it, if only because I regard the love of money as one specific instance of a broader problem, which is love of self above all else. Certainly, loving and looking out for yourself are natural enough traits and one could hardly expect natural selection to function without them. But isn't being able to put someone else's interests ahead of your own the mark of a mind that can truly function in the abstract? I'm not talking about simple biological family connections, either. I'm talking about being able to extend the social group you provide this "them first" altruism for- extending it as far as you consciously want it to go. I think that is one of the fundamental traits of an intelligent mind. So why do we consistently fail at it?
I was able to watch the CPAC footage of the vote in Ottawa on the C440 bill to allow war resisters to apply for permanent residence in Canada. It was very narrowly defeated, but watching the vote was very educational for me. Several votes happened that night, and only one party on the floor behaved the same way every time. Every vote, the Conservatives were like a machine. If the rules of the House allowed it, I have no doubt they would rise and sit to cast their votes in perfect synch with the Prime Minister. I hesitate to attribute this to pure altruistic behaviour, and the larger issue of the importance of obedience in the conservative mindset is something that deserves more than the passing mention I can afford in this post, but the result is the same. There is certainly a measure of putting someone else first in their lock-step mentality. I won't pretend to know the precise mix of obedience to the party and its leader versus an unselfish desire to truly do something for someone else at cost to self, but the result of that equation is a real and palpable thing when you watch voting take place on the floor of the House of Commons. To lesser degrees, both the NDP and le Bloc Québécois seem to be able to muster a similar sentiment, being parties more or less united behind a common cause.
Then we look to the Liberal Party, and what begins to happen? On the outside, we see lots of things and people we can point fingers at, such as Michael Ignatieff's last minute reversal in his support for war resisters at the C440 vote, or Maurizio Bevilacqua basically selling his MP seat to the Conservatives to get himself a mayoral posting. If you take each issue and strip it down to its nuts and bolts, the thing you find underneath is always the same: self interest. I'm looking out for me and mine. And we blame them, don't we? We get angry, call them wishy-washy, and pretend the Liberal Party has no moral compass or backbone. In fact, even if such a generalization could be fairly applied to every Liberal, it would ignore the truth- there is a moral compass there in the ones we take issue with, but it seems to point at "me and mine" for each of them, instead of "the right thing to do". Why? Because they are no different than we are.
Let me emphasize that last point: They are no different than we are. By "they", I mean "most Liberals", and by "we", I mean "most politically-active leftists". Let me paint a picture for you. If you happen to be active in social justice issues, this will be something you've seen all too much of. Something Important is coming up. The folks who attend every meeting for our little organization (whichever it might be) realize that they will need a mountain of support for Something Important, and so the call goes out across email and phone lists. We get to our first meeting, and get excited to see all the extra faces ready to help out the cause. Then, as the meeting progresses, someone interjects about how their input isn't being fairly considered in light of how they went out of their way to come to this stupid meeting. We make it a little further, and someone else wants to derail the proceedings for a bit and wax poetic about how Unrelated Issue is actually at the center of Something Important, and should be given centre stage. After a few events like this, a meeting can feel like it's devolving into chaos quickly. But again, let's take a step back and look at the big picture. Whether it's someone using a lot of unnecessary words to say "look at me," or someone saying "this is important to everyone because it's important to me," that treacherous word always sneaks in there: me. Let's give that a second to sink in. If you're an activist, compare the last public meeting you held about any given issue to the scenario above, and then imagine everyone is in their best business attire and has a vote to cast. Are you starting to look like the Liberal caucus? I think so. We allow petty self-interest to fracture us, just as they allow it to fracture them. The only difference is in scale. They are no different than we are.
I hope you're not coming into this paragraph looking for some sort of sage advice on how to fix this. I don't have it. I worry that this is simply the curse that goes along with a political group that's made up principally of those that are willing to ask hard questions of authority figures, where the inclination to "go along to get along" is of intrinsically less value. Maybe the best first step in dealing with self-interest is simply to realize how pervasive it is, and call it out when you see it- even if you see it in yourself. Putting the group or another individual before yourself is hard work, especially when they aren't standing right in front of you. It takes practice. To be perfectly honest, this post started out about something far more specific, but related. As I thought about it, I realized a broader message that I wanted to communicate first. Something a little less about what bothers "me", and a little more about what I see as a problem for "us".
I know lots of people will read this and think to themselves, "that's not me." I know, I know. You're not the problem. You don't act that way. You always put the needs of the group ahead of yourself, and never let your ego or vanity get in the way of something important. I'm not that easy to convince, though, and you shouldn't be, either. Go out and prove it. Today.
And then do it again tomorrow.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Take a deep breath
To their credit, I find Canadians every day that are intensely interested in the story of US war resisters. I've told my story, I'd suppose, at least a thousand times since coming to Canada. Everyone that listens does so intently. Most thank me for telling them what brought me to their doorstep, then depart with a few kind words and go about their lives. Some are motivated to tell others about what they've heard, and write letters to their Members of Parliament. A precious few are driven to do more, and become key players in this struggle that dominates my life. Coming home from work yesterday, it occurred to me that in all those times of telling the story of my life to others, there are things I skip over. I don't find them interesting, because I do them every day- they are simply a fact of life for me. But as I went through the motions yesterday, the realization struck me that this, in fact, is not normal.
I share a house with some housemates who also happen to be the landlords. I rent part of the place from them. They leave mail for me in a common area near the door. Every day, as I come up the walkway to the door, I slow down a little bit. Part of me doesn't want to go through that door, and see what might be waiting on the other side. Every day, I slow down a little and hold my breath- I suppose in some vain effort to get the world to slow and stop along with me for a few seconds. Today might be the day. What the hell am I going to do if it's there?
I've been through most of my immigration processing since coming to Canada. I applied for refugee protection, went to my 34-minute Immigration and Refugee Board hearing, and got my denial based on evidence provided in another person's case. I tried to appeal the decision, and was denied leave to do so by the court. Now I'm waiting on decisions for a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment and my application to remain in Canada on Humanitarian and Compassionate Grounds. Both were filed as Minister Kenney began telling all his immigration officers that I am a criminal, and a "bogus refugee claimant".
One day, perhaps today, I will get an envelope in the mail. If you've not gotten a lot of mail from the federal government, you may not know that they favor these official-looking beige envelopes, and they use the same one for everything. It will be waiting for me just on the far side of that front door. It will look like the dozens of others I've gotten before, filled with things my attorney had told me to expect. But this one will be different. It will have a date to report to Canada Border Services Agency, to begin the process of deporting me. Most days, you'd have to be looking very closely to spot the break in my stride. Some days, just thinking about that envelope knots up my stomach bad enough that I stop with my hand on the doorknob - key in the lock. I get caught in freeze-frame at that threshold for what feels like forever. On those days, I have to shame myself into opening the door. A combat veteran is stopped in his tracks by a lousy envelope. I take a deep breath to get my arms and legs under control again, and tell them to keep moving.
So far, it's worked out in my favor every day. I've never opened the door to find my arch-nemesis, The Envelope, waiting for me. But time is on his side. Unless something changes soon, that day is coming. It occurred to me yesterday that this one moment of terror per day really isn't normal at all, but I'd never actually given voice to that.
And now you know.
I share a house with some housemates who also happen to be the landlords. I rent part of the place from them. They leave mail for me in a common area near the door. Every day, as I come up the walkway to the door, I slow down a little bit. Part of me doesn't want to go through that door, and see what might be waiting on the other side. Every day, I slow down a little and hold my breath- I suppose in some vain effort to get the world to slow and stop along with me for a few seconds. Today might be the day. What the hell am I going to do if it's there?
I've been through most of my immigration processing since coming to Canada. I applied for refugee protection, went to my 34-minute Immigration and Refugee Board hearing, and got my denial based on evidence provided in another person's case. I tried to appeal the decision, and was denied leave to do so by the court. Now I'm waiting on decisions for a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment and my application to remain in Canada on Humanitarian and Compassionate Grounds. Both were filed as Minister Kenney began telling all his immigration officers that I am a criminal, and a "bogus refugee claimant".
One day, perhaps today, I will get an envelope in the mail. If you've not gotten a lot of mail from the federal government, you may not know that they favor these official-looking beige envelopes, and they use the same one for everything. It will be waiting for me just on the far side of that front door. It will look like the dozens of others I've gotten before, filled with things my attorney had told me to expect. But this one will be different. It will have a date to report to Canada Border Services Agency, to begin the process of deporting me. Most days, you'd have to be looking very closely to spot the break in my stride. Some days, just thinking about that envelope knots up my stomach bad enough that I stop with my hand on the doorknob - key in the lock. I get caught in freeze-frame at that threshold for what feels like forever. On those days, I have to shame myself into opening the door. A combat veteran is stopped in his tracks by a lousy envelope. I take a deep breath to get my arms and legs under control again, and tell them to keep moving.
So far, it's worked out in my favor every day. I've never opened the door to find my arch-nemesis, The Envelope, waiting for me. But time is on his side. Unless something changes soon, that day is coming. It occurred to me yesterday that this one moment of terror per day really isn't normal at all, but I'd never actually given voice to that.
And now you know.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Here he goes again...
For those living under a rock: Wikileaks released nearly 400,000 documents this past weekend pertaining to the behaviour of US forces in Iraq of the past several years. Much of it paints a fairly bleak picture of (as war resisters have already been saying) poor or non-existent practices concerning the safety of civilians, excessive unnecessary civilian deaths, and outright lying by the US military to cover these statistics up.
Of course, Minister Kenney cannot pass up an opportunity to publicly impugn Iraq war resisters. As quoted from the Ottawa Citizen:
Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, who was in Toronto to announce an extension of an Iraqi refugee program, said Saturday that the document leak was not likely to have a significant impact on how this country deals with U.S. soldiers who are seeking refuge in Canada after deserting U.S. military service.
"With respect to the American military deserters, our position is clear that Canadian law proposes stiff penal sanctions on those who desert from their voluntary commitment to the Canadian Forces. It would be fundamentally unfair to create a double standard whereby deserters from Canadian voluntary service are imprisoned, whereas Americans would be treated as heroes," he said.
-Ottawa Citizen, pg A3, 24 Oct 2010
Really? Let's ignore for a minute that this man is supposed to be a Minister of the Crown, and as such, should be seeking to ensure the balance and impartiality of Canada's immigration system instead of making public statements to bias cases currently under review by the same officers he hires and fires every year. Let's ignore that this is only one of several such comments he's made in the public eye, and has hopelessly contaminated his own immigration review systems with statements like this one, along with Operational Bulletin 202, which essentially tells case officers to forward all war resister cases to his office, rather than simply follow impartial reviewing procedures in the field. Let's put all that aside for a second.
Out of one side of his mouth, Minister Kenney espouses a special immigration measure needed for refugees from a nation torn apart by a war the US started. His own Prime Minister has called this war, "...absolutely an error." The government of Canada seems to recognize that what has happened there is wrong, and shameful. But in the next sentence, Minister Kenney denounces soldiers who came to the very same conclusion, and declares that it is a criminal act to refuse to kill and maim the same Iraqis that need Canada's salvation. Minister Kenney, I do not understand your line of thinking, and I don't believe you do, either.
Of course, Minister Kenney cannot pass up an opportunity to publicly impugn Iraq war resisters. As quoted from the Ottawa Citizen:
Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, who was in Toronto to announce an extension of an Iraqi refugee program, said Saturday that the document leak was not likely to have a significant impact on how this country deals with U.S. soldiers who are seeking refuge in Canada after deserting U.S. military service.
"With respect to the American military deserters, our position is clear that Canadian law proposes stiff penal sanctions on those who desert from their voluntary commitment to the Canadian Forces. It would be fundamentally unfair to create a double standard whereby deserters from Canadian voluntary service are imprisoned, whereas Americans would be treated as heroes," he said.
-Ottawa Citizen, pg A3, 24 Oct 2010
Really? Let's ignore for a minute that this man is supposed to be a Minister of the Crown, and as such, should be seeking to ensure the balance and impartiality of Canada's immigration system instead of making public statements to bias cases currently under review by the same officers he hires and fires every year. Let's ignore that this is only one of several such comments he's made in the public eye, and has hopelessly contaminated his own immigration review systems with statements like this one, along with Operational Bulletin 202, which essentially tells case officers to forward all war resister cases to his office, rather than simply follow impartial reviewing procedures in the field. Let's put all that aside for a second.
Out of one side of his mouth, Minister Kenney espouses a special immigration measure needed for refugees from a nation torn apart by a war the US started. His own Prime Minister has called this war, "...absolutely an error." The government of Canada seems to recognize that what has happened there is wrong, and shameful. But in the next sentence, Minister Kenney denounces soldiers who came to the very same conclusion, and declares that it is a criminal act to refuse to kill and maim the same Iraqis that need Canada's salvation. Minister Kenney, I do not understand your line of thinking, and I don't believe you do, either.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
What's this all about?
So, I decided to start a blog. I have a story to tell, but I'm too disorganized to tell it in something like a book. I need a way to reach an audience in bits and pieces, as ideas occur to me, and as my life unfolds around me. You see, I'm a war resister living in Canada. I used to be a member of the US military. I'm not anymore- that's no longer a part of my identity. A few years ago, I came to the realization that there was simply no way forward anymore with the military. I won't bore you with the details of exactly what I saw and participated in that led me to that decision. There are plenty of websites where you can read bios that are quite similar to my own, and you'd learn enough of that from any one of those. That's not the point of this particular blog. My intention here is to help others understand what things in Canada look like from the point of view of an expatriated war resister, fighting for a chance to live normally again.
A few years have passed since I made my way to Canada and asked for refugee protection from the US government (to more than a few incredulous looks from Canadian immigration officials). Since then, my life has been in suspended animation. I knew there was not an easy road ahead when I made this decision, but I never expected this. There is a wall of ideological resistance between me and a normal, healthy life. I'm not trying to paint myself as some sort of victim, mind you. I don't want your pity. I just want your attention for a little while. Being a war resister has become my new identity, whether I like it or not. Politics doesn't end for me when I flip the radio or television off. The lives of me and others like me hinge on the actions of an Immigration Minister that seems bent on a scorched-earth approach to immigration reform. Political resistance isn't a weekend engagement for us, it's day-to-day life. If you're interested in what the view looks like from the back of that particular horse, or simply want to know how this all turns out, I invite you to follow along.
A few years have passed since I made my way to Canada and asked for refugee protection from the US government (to more than a few incredulous looks from Canadian immigration officials). Since then, my life has been in suspended animation. I knew there was not an easy road ahead when I made this decision, but I never expected this. There is a wall of ideological resistance between me and a normal, healthy life. I'm not trying to paint myself as some sort of victim, mind you. I don't want your pity. I just want your attention for a little while. Being a war resister has become my new identity, whether I like it or not. Politics doesn't end for me when I flip the radio or television off. The lives of me and others like me hinge on the actions of an Immigration Minister that seems bent on a scorched-earth approach to immigration reform. Political resistance isn't a weekend engagement for us, it's day-to-day life. If you're interested in what the view looks like from the back of that particular horse, or simply want to know how this all turns out, I invite you to follow along.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)