The anti-war protests led to temporary polarisation of the New Zealand public. As opposition to the Vietnam War increased society was temporality split, Historian Michael King described the movement as a “civil war” which was “to divide New Zealand as never before.” New Zealand was divided between those who had supported Nationals decision on the involvement in the Vietnam war, mainly the older conservative generation and those who pushed for National to withdraw troops, mainly the radical youth who became known as the ‘Vietnam generation’. The older generation tended to be anti-communist and believed that it was important for New Zealand to aid America in helping South Vietnam fight against communism. Historian Ian Mcgibbon states that for a time Nationals decision to send troops was supported “ It is difficult to asses which side had the better of this debate during the Vietnam War. The decision to send combat forces to Vietnam initially appeared to enjoy high levels of public support. ” It was not until later as the casualties rose and footage was seen throughout the world that many protest against Vietnam begun. Although once the troops were withdrawn the protest action slowed down the issue of Vietnam remains highly controversial. Mcgibbon touches on the controversy in the Oxford Companion to New Zealand Military History “Forty years on the Vietnam war still conjures up negative images, of controversy, debate and rage. Some believe that New Zealanders fought well in a wrong cause other remain convinced that New Zealand’s response was a justified response to outside aggression.” [1] this shows that while protest action on Vietnam and the Vietnam war itself slowly dissolved out of focus for society, the war and the protests continue to be a significant event for New Zealand, and many remain divided in their opinions on Vietnam and the protests that were carried out.
[1] McGibbon Ian (ed), The Oxford Companion to New Zealand Military History, , pages 560,561,564-567
"From now on, when we have to deal with a new situation, we will not say, what do the British think about it [or] what would the Americans want us to do? Our starting point will be, what do we think about it?"
- Prime Minister Norman Kirk 1973
- Prime Minister Norman Kirk 1973
Strong protest action saw Political change in New Zealand and a redirection in foreign policy. Protest against Vietnam saw long-term political change as Labour’s opposing stance on National’s Vietnam policy signaled the end of the bipartisan era. Initially Labour had been cautious in publicly opposing the government’s decision on Vietnam. However as the anti war movement grew and more people began to question the legitimacy of the war, Labour took a stronger stance on opposition to the governments policy. In 1969 the continued strong public opposition to Vietnam saw Labour promise that if elected it would withdraw all New Zealand troops. The protest movement was also significant in that for the first time it criticised New Zealand’s foreign policy, they pushed for an independent policy that was not subservient to foreign superpowers such as America and England. “They called for a more independent policy which was not submissive to that of the United States, their self-consciously nationalistic critique challenged the most basic principals under-pinning the country’s post war security policies.[1]” Labour supported the call made by protestors for a more modern independent foreign policy whilst National remained in support of the more traditional alliance based policy. In the New Oxford History of New Zealand ed by Giselle Byrnes the significance of the protests to political and foreign policy change is examined “It also stimulated the collapse of a bipartisan cold war consensus on foreign policy because of Labour’s opposition to combat involvement...Anti war activists successfully depicted the global projection of American power as a negative benchmark against which to asses national identity and autonomy in international affairs, a proclivity that would persist thereafter.[2]” The consequences of the Vietnam War coupled with the strong protest movement saw people begin to change the way they viewed America leading to a change in foreign relations. The election of Labour in 1969 saw New Zealand redirect its foreign policy. After the Vietnam War people no longer viewed communism as a significant threat and the New Zealand government began to decrease military defense spending. New Zealand military forces focused on international peacekeeping roles such as in Bosnia and Solomon Islands. Foreign relations were shifted to focus more on trade, regional security within the Pacific and environmental concerns.
[1] McGibbon Ian (ed), The Oxford Companion to New Zealand Military History. Pg 561
[2] Byrnes, Giselle (ed), The New Oxford History of New Zealand. Pg 265
Anti-Vietnam Protest action paved the way for protest on a wide range of issues throughout New Zealand society. As the Vietnam War came to a close the anti-war protest movements began to decline. From the 1970’s onwards other grievances felt throughout New Zealand society began to emerge. The withdrawal of New Zealand troops by 1972 saw the newly elected Labour party turn to address other issues such as cancelling the 1972 Springbok tour and sending the New Zealand Navy Ship to Mururoa to protest against nuclear activity in the pacific. Other protests spawned from the anti-war protests as People sought to find their own identity and solve other issues. These included the Save Manapouri campaign and the call for a firm nuclear free stance. Those who were marginalised by society also began protesting for equal rights thus forming the beginnings of campaigns for Womens rights and Maori activism. Many of these protest were headed by those who had been involved in the anti-war groups including Sue Bradford (a member of the PYM) and Tim Shadbolt. Historian Roberto Rabel examines the significance that the anti-war groups had on other later protest movements in his book New Zealand Policies and diplomats.. “Such was the success of the model for protest pioneered by the Vietnam anti-war movement that both its structure and its methods of protest profoundly influenced how other movements for change such as the antiapartheid and anti-nuclear movements, went about moving their own cause from the fringes of political life to the main-stream.[1]”
[1] Rabel,Roberto, New Zealand and the Vietnam War politics and Diplomacy, Auckland, N.Z : Auckland University Press, |
The hostile reception for those who fought in Vietnam left a strong legacy of injustice in New Zealand. Returning troops were greeted with hostility and largely ignored by the government. The anti-war movement led to the abolishment of compulsory military training law under the Labour party and 40% of the soldiers withdrew from the army. Many men suffered from sever post war trauma being labeled as baby killers and murderers by the New Zealand public who strongly opposed the Vietnam War. Recognition for the Troops efforts did not come until 1998 when a Vietnam parade in Wellington was held. In 2005 a government trust fund of $250,000 was opened for veterans and their families. In 2006 the government signed the Memorandum of Understanding, which promised a public apology that was issued in the Tribute 08 celebration (in 2008), nearly 40 years after the troops had been withdrawn from Vietnam. The health affects from ‘agent orange’ also remain a significant issue, many Veterans developed cancer and over 600 died from cancer diseases related to agent orange. A high number of veteran’s families were also affected by genetic disorders due to mutations in Veterans DNA caused by excessive use of toxic gas during the fighting with the effects of Agent Orange still being felt today.
|
|