Melbourne Unitarian Peace Memorial Church

Dr. Val Noone is the author of Disturbing the War: Melbourne Catholics and Vietnam, Melbourne, Spectrum, 1993. Address given at the Melbourne Unitarian Church, Sunday 10 August 2003

It is good to be here, and on the day after Nagasaki day. Last time I spoke here was for the funeral service for Dorothy Dalton, a tireless worker for peace and beauty, when I was honoured to be able to add my tribute to those of family and other friends. It is always an honour to be invited to the Unitarian Church. Thank you.

Paul Strangio: "not much effect"

On 18 February this year, just four days after the huge peace rallies against the war on Iraq, Paul Strangio, author of the recent major biography of Jim Cairns, wrote an article in the Melbourne Age in which he said that peace movement against the Vietnam War had "probably not much" effect on the government.

And he said that, although US and British protests against the Iraq war might make an impact the Australian movement against the war on Iraq could not expect to have much effect.

Indeed, on Vietnam, he said "the verdict of historians has been that the Gorton and McMahon governments' overwhelming reason for withdrawing Australia's combat forces from Vietnam in 1970-71 was not the growing tide of domestic anti-war protest, but that they were mimicking Washington's policy."

He quoted Donald Horne to that effect. Moreover, he could have quoted Gough Whitlam too. Gough said that McMahon only withdrew the soldiers because America did.

So, there are a few people telling us that our peace work does not make much difference.

Impact of Australian anti-Vietnam-war movement

The anti-Vietnam-war movement had a major impact on Australian government policy. A variety of people came to that conclusion. Tom Hughes, who took to demonstrating conscientious objectors with a cricket bat on one famous occasion, attorney-general in the Gorton government, said that the peace movement weakened and limited the government's position. Bob Santamaria, leader of the indiscriminately anti-communist National Civic Council, blamed the peace movement for the failures of the Australian Vietnam policy.

Leaders of the Vietnamese resistance have expressed gratitude for the work done by the peace movement. That stands even though many in the peace movement did not explicitly support the politics of the Vietnamese leadership.

At a minimum, the peace movement and the accompanying disruption set what Gabriel Kolko called "an unprecedented social price" for continuing conscription and the war.

The hysterical attacks on the moratoriums, such as Billy Snedden's ones about pack-raping bikies, and Bob Santamaria's television harangues, and newspaper and radio editorial warnings, suggest that the Moratorium movement made a big impression.

The timing of McMahon's announcements about troop withdrawals in 1971 were made precisely to try to head off the demands of the peace movement. Gorton's refusal to send extra troops in 1968 was directly related to the strength of Australian opposition.

We know from internal US government documents that one of the major reasons for the withdrawal of American troops was the US army was becoming increasingly unreliable with refusals to take part in combat, killing of officers, drug use, desertions and so on.

I have not seen comparable documents on the Australian Army, but Louise McKay, of the Australian branch of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, whom some of you may remember, collected a series of cuttings which I have, and which I have summarised in my book on the Vietnam war, which show that there was a surprisingly high level of lack of cohesion in the Australian Army.

There were well publicised reports of several killings. Other indications of opposition to the war among the Australian armed forces were significant resignations among younger servicemen, unusual dissatisfaction over wages and conditions, as well as falling recruitment rates. Opposition to the war caused morale and cohesion problems for the Australian armed forces the extent of which is yet to be documented

Apropos of Paul Strangio's claim that the Australian Vietnam peace movement did not have much effect on government, let us try a test recommended by the famous German sociologist, Max Weber. He said if you want to know the effect of a particular event, then try imagining the particular chain of events but excluding the event you are studying.

So, following Weber, let us ask: if there had been no mass movement opposed to conscription and Australian military intervention in Vietnam, would the Australian Government have withdrawn troops and ended conscription? Could Richard Nixon have received as enthusiastic a welcome in Australia in 1971 as Lyndon Johnson got in 1966? I suggest that the answer to both those questions is No. When vice-president Spiro Agnew came to Australia in January 1970, his meetings with government ministers and officials were kept secret and highly guarded.

McMahon only withdrew the troops, and Gough ended conscription, only after a mass movement developed. The Whitlam government's first actions reflect the power of the mass movement.

Whitlam's smart remark about McMahon only withdrawing troops because Nixon did begs the question. Nixon's withdrawal was in its turn influenced by the mass protests. Indeed the bankers and intelligence officers and military advisers who urged him to withdraw troops were also influenced by the protests.

Daniel Ellsberg has explained that his decision to reveal the Pentagon Papers was directly influenced by the pull he felt from the moral demands of the peace movement.

Earlier peace movement achievements

Let's remember too the achievements of earlier days. One of the outstanding actions in the twentieth century history of war and peace was the success of Australian citizens in twice defeating conscription. However narrow the margin, and however many volunteered anyway, the point is that the Australian voters rejected two referenda, both backed by quite modern propaganda methods, by the government of Billy Hughes.

Let's remember the 22,000 young boys who were prosecuted for refusing to comply with the boy conscription of 1910.
During World War I, 2000 applied to be conscientious objectors. During World War II, at least 2800, but probably more, made the same stand. And they were treated harshly by officialdom and sometimes by the community. Eric Scott was one who paid a price. During World War II, he was director of a museum in Launceston and refused to fight on pacifist grounds. He was twice jailed, lost his job and lived the rest of his life in poverty.

In Bobby Oliver's book on the Australian conscientious objectors, she found that the COs managed to get publicity for their causes, raised civil liberties issues and evoked admiration even from supporters of the wars. Their integrity in the face of derision, fines and prison convinced many of their sincerity. Bobby found no CO who changed his mind because of prison or punishment.

Another criterion: giving witness

There used to be a poster around which said, "There is no way to peace, Peace is the way". Perhaps it was a quotation from Martin Luther King, I'm not sure. Well, that is relevant to our discussion today.

Even if our work for peace had no perceivable effect, and I say it did have effect, it is our duty and our privilege to do it. For in working for peace, we are doing that which we believe is of the essence of the good life.

Another Martin Luther, the original one in fifteenth century Germany, said, "Here I stand, I can do no other". Jesus said, "For this came I into the world, the bear witness to the truth." The Quakers teach that it is our duty "to speak truth to power".

So, even if we fail to change government policy we want to be able to say that we took a stand, we spoke up. And on that criterion we can succeed even in defeat by being true to our convictions.

Still, my point today, is that in a number of cases, the peace movement has influenced government policy.

Those comments you hear such as "You cant' beat the system" and "Don't rock the boat" miss the point. When the first Australian soldiers were sent in 1962 only a handful protested. Within five years, one hundred thousand people filled Bourke Street and the prime minister withdrew Australian troops with the Vietnamese revolutionaries in charge of the contested territory.

Monument to conscientious objectors

Australia has a neglected and hidden history of peacemaking. Paul Strangio is wrong. Let's make our history of peace work more visible, and let's be proud of it. Proud of the mass movement, the draft resisters, the waterside workers, Jim Cairns, Jean Maclean and the Save Our Sons group, the ones who went to jail such as John Zarb, Bill White, Denis O'Donnell, Simon Townsend, and so on.

A couple of years ago I had occasion to write a review of Bobbie Oliver's fine book about conscientious objectors in Australia. At the end of that review I found myself thinking how good it would be if there was a monument to the conscientious objectors and draft resisters in Canberra right beside, or inside, the Australia War Memorial. Maybe it is time to start collecting funds and organising public pressure for just that.

Disturbing the war

Peace workers are often derided, outcast and in some cases jailed. Indeed in Canada during World War I conscientious objectors were executed. Nonetheless, they made a difference and deserve to be honoured.

Ammon Hennacy of the American Catholic Worker movement summed up their story when he told a policeman who came to arrest him for picketing: "I'm not disturbing the peace, I'm disturbing the war".